314 réponses à ce sujet

[nightscrawl]

David Gaider wrote...

All I remember is the dwarf origins: 3% for the dwarven nobles, 2% for the dwarf commoner.

Oh wow... that is staggeringly small. I expected a lower number than elves certainly, but not a total of 5%. Do you differentiate from completed plays, rather than those who only played through the origin to test it out? I'm not asking for that data directly, I was just wondering whether it was something taken into account.

[Adanu]

staindgrey wrote...

In all honesty... and I know I'm in the minority here... I see and like the positives of having a single race. With Hawke, I had a more involved family history, which was a driving focus for the character. We watched family die, had multiple conversations regarding our family history, and could even be locked in battle against our own sibling. DAII was a far more compelling character driven piece, while DAO was world-driven. Two different goals.

The history my Wardens had were cool, no doubt. Going back to the Circle with my mage was much more involved than when I went with my warrior. Etc. So there are certainly positives to go with that route, along with the idea of customization, variances, all that. But if I can get a deeper character experience at the expense of choosing my race, I'll take it. The people from my origins never had that big of an impact on me. My city elf's family? I almost totally forgot about them until they came up again. My dwarf's beloved? Him too. But Hawke's family was always present in some way, and I liked that better.

It's just my opinion, though. No need to go spreading it around.

A lot of people want 'their' story and damn the narrative. I'm with you when I want a character that actually feels like they've been around. Hawke feels real. Not like the Warden. The Warden is only a title that anyone(any of the origins) can pick up. I can get the appeal of it... but I play games to roleplay, not invent my own role. I have DnD for that.

[RosaAquafire]

Again, qualifying my statements by saying that I absolutely adored DA2 and my canon Hawke is my favourite DA character I've played:

The problem with Hawke is that it is really really hard to make your Hawke feel unique and special. A lot of this is because there are very few story branches in DA2. Most "paths" are just friendship/rivalry with party members, and there are very few alternative outcomes to situations. The only real big one is Isabela in Act 2 and the fate of your siblings (one of which is tied to class and not choice.) You don't notice it on your first playthrough so much, but as you start talking to people and when you try playing the game again, you realize that your Hawke was, with some minor differences, pretty much the same Hawke as everybody else's game.

This is my biggest problem with DA2.

Even though the Warden had the same basic arc in every playthrough, even though you always end up on top of Fort Drakon killing an archdemon, every single Warden feels unique. And a LOT of this is race-related. A Cousland CANNOT be the same character a Surana. A Mahariel CANNOT be the same character as an Aeducan. Your race informs the world around you, it informs how you look at characters and how they look at you. DA:O did remarkably little with the race flag in dialogue, but honestly? Aside from a few spots here and there, it wasn't noticeable. *I* knew I was an elf and that affected the way *I* looked at the world around me.

Even though most people picked Human Noble or Human Mage, they knew that their Warden was different from someone who picked Dalish Elf or Casteless Dwarf. Like Mr. Gaider has said in this post, choice is important and meaningful even when you're only choosing the most popular thing. Feeling as though you have a choice is huge.

And for those of us who'd rather take an "alternative" perspective on Thedas, and find the position of elves and dwarves more interesting than that of humans, it's a huge sticking point. There isn't much DA3 could do that would outright disappoint me, but not including racial selection would be one of them.

Please find some way to make this work. It is a hugely important issue. It's one of the simplest and most effective ways of making your character feel UNIQUE. The Origins in DA:O made it one of the most replayable games I've ever touched, and replayability is a huge reason why people buy RPGs. I preferred DA2 -- but I've logged a lot more hours in DA:O. And you know what? I bought a LOT more DLC for the game I liked less, just because it was so much more "sticky."

Please, please, please find some way to include different races. You guys on the writing team have done such an amazing job making every race feel unique and INTERESTING and so much different from fantasy standard. It's SUCH a waste to do that and then not allow us to take on the role of these fascinating perspectives you've written into your game.

Isn't that what role-playing is all about?

[Wulfram]

I didn't feel DA2 was particularly more character driven than DA:O. Most of the family events were rather disconnected from the plot, and I can't say I ever felt like Hawke's background had a big effect in shaping them - as best I could tell from the limited info we had, their childhood was more or less generically happy farm living, with little to suggest what might have turned them into the "Champion".

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

I think this is one of those places where the telemetry doesn't lie. Race options are very popular with a smaller group of players-- to them, the expense is totally worth it. But the vast majority of players will only pick humans, even when options are offered.

Out of curiosity, Mr. Gaider, would you happen to remember percentages of people who'd choose male and female protagonist? Either for DAO or DA2 really, just wondering if it was similar to ME in that regard.

[TMJfin]

Sometimes I don't understand people. BioWare gave us many playable races and what most of us (I don't necesary mean people here at BSN) do? They choose human. Dalish elf was by far my favourite origin, followed by dwarf noble, dwarf commoner, human noble, elf mage, city elf and human mage. If there is a posibility to play as anything else than human, I always take that route first. Of course, there are gamers that play games just once and human is the "safest" race to play. But still, humans? Would like to see what people would say if there was no human pc option in DA3

This may seem like I hate people that use human character, but I don't. It's just that I'm not very good at english and strugling to find right words and it seems that I always sound angry

[WardenWade]

nightscrawl wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

All I remember is the dwarf origins: 3% for the dwarven nobles, 2% for the dwarf commoner.

Oh wow... that is staggeringly small. I expected a lower number than elves certainly, but not a total of 5%. Do you differentiate from completed plays, rather than those who only played through the origin to test it out? I'm not asking for that data directly, I was just wondering whether it was something taken into account.

As has been mentioned previously on this thread, I played DA:O originally on a console that isn't connected to the network.  Others may not have had their data--which in my case which would have been completed playthroughs all for non-human Wardens--added to the statistics because of this, as well. 

I do worry that, should the story for DA3 and beyond suggest a non-human only PC, these percentages for elf and dwarf playthroughs could be brought up once again as an easy way for Bioware to simply say there's not enough of a market for such a game, and return to human-only. 

Mr. Gaider has suggested that ignoring the demographic that supports racial options (and I include mages as well as essentially a separate race) is unwise, however, and has shared thoughts on greater customization for DA3, but I fear it would be all to easy to do so.  I look forward to seeing, as the devs have all indicated, that what they have to show us in time will give us all hope for a return of these racial options we value.

Modifié par WardenWade, 27 mars 2012 - 01:13 .

[jmd4]

WardenWade wrote...

Yalision wrote...

I do hope players will be able to choose their respective race this time around, unless Dragon Age moving forward means to focus on human exploits. I know Mike Laidlaw said they would have full transparency through development of this next product. I wonder where we should set our expectations on this?

I absolutely agree with this.  IMO we need races back in DA3, for several reasons.  Please forgive the large post...for my part this is an extremely important concern for DA3.

(1) As others on this thread have mentioned, the different perspectives the races would have are essential to understanding the "history/story of Thedas" that Bioware wants to explore.  The many peoples of Dragon Age are Thedas.  I recall feeling so incredibly, depressingly on the outside of things on Sundermount in DA2, for example.  Hawke was there, but it was very clear he/she would never fully be able to participate what the Dalish were going through, Merrill or no Merrill, and many of the elves made it very clear he/she was an outsider (particularly sad if you import a Mahariel). 

Same with the dwarves, as the Deep Roads for Hawke were IMO mainly a source of treasure at the expense of dwarven culture.  We would have had little perspective on the dwarves at all if not for Varric, and that isn't the same thing by any means.  How much more impactful would the Deep Roads and Sundermount portions have been if you could have played as a dwarf or elf?  How much more poignant would the repercussions of Act 2's events in DA3 be (should there be immediate repercussions) if you could play as a kossith?

(2) I'm not so fond of the one race per game idea myself, as I believe it would essentially repeat the same problem (IMO) with "human-only" that we had in DA2.  Locking us into one race is bound to upset some people...so instead return to players the freedom to choose any race.  And as others have pointed out on this thread, I'm just afraid that despite the popularity of characters like Link, Legolas, Gimli and so on, when the time comes where a DA title could dictate a non-human only PC, as Mark Darrah suggested, it will be easy for Bioware to step back and simply say they didn't believe there was a market for such a game, and return to human-only.  Sacrificing race choice for basically, as has been hinted, a greater "dress up" option for the protagonist is not, to me, a fair trade...especially when--as others have pointed out--body models/outfits for the other races will already exist with NPCs and could be used for the non-human PC.

There is a market for multiple races, and it's a disservice to the robust tradition Bioware has of providing such options to abandon it forever.  As I and others have said before, I am human every day.  When I play an RPG I want to be something else.  Not to mention, as others have said previously, racial options should impact the story, but if it is a huge hurdle to storytelling they need not impact it to the point such options are untenable in a single game.  Origins balanced delving into cultural lore and ingrained prejudices with the ability of all races to get things done and earn respect, and it worked well, IMO.  To suggest otherwise seems to me to undermine a non-human Warden's work in changing opinions...and a reappearance of the Warden in DA3, incidentally, given the proper resources to do it (especially in a significant manner), is something else I hope to see

(3)  A fundamental issue I see is that making all races playable (including kossith) in DA3 is not the gamers asking for something new and burdensome in itself; it is returning something we already had in Origins.  I personally enjoyed playing a non-human Warden--I prefer it over human--and it was a bitter disappointment to realize DA2 would be, in terms of player freedom and my personal definition of customization, a huge step back.  The sense that we must beg for races to return when they were freely offered before is a shame, in my opinion. 

I hope Bioware will realize whatever lies in store for Thedas involves all races, and that all should have an equal share of "the driver's seat."  To do otherwise belittles their importance in "the world of man," which is particularly unfortunate for Bioware's original race, the kossith.

(4)   It is doable.   I can only speak for myself and I know others may have strong feelings on this, but I am perfectly willing to accept a single voice for them if it means I can have races back.  City elves, dwarves, some humans and in general qunari all share a similar "accent," for example.  I realize I don't know the ins and outs of organizing something like this, but to me it seems a single voice actor and actress for male and female characters, respectively, could simply adjust tone and pitch as needed to accommodate racial variations.  It wouldn't affect gameplay any more than Hawke's voice did, as you could only play one character/race at a time, same as in DA2.  After all, the VAs for Hawke essentially recorded each conversation three times for the different personalities...why not for the different races?

Failing that, as many have mentioned in regard to a silent protagonist, Bioware could simply give us the option to mute the voice if it must lean more heavily to one race or another.   I personally do not care what my non-human protagonist might sound like fully voiced.  I'm willing to accept whatever option is most likely for the devs, to be able to play this way again.  And I personally think it could be done.  I think a single voice actor could conceivably adjust to convincingly portray multiple races.

(5) Lastly, nothing is certain.  Bioware has not, as far as I'm aware, hinted one way or another who the protagonist of DA3 will be.  It isn't like DA2 where we knew more or less immediately we would be Hawke, the refugee from Lothering.  As such, it seems valid in my mind at this fluid, embryonic and even pivotal development stage to ask for this.  If the PC isn't defined, why not make it available for any race after all? 

If we play a Seeker, for example, as many suspect, the events of Asunder have sparked hope in some that mages as well as other races might be allowed to join under the more lenient reign of Justinia V.  I know the devs are listening, and that listening and being able to act on feedback aren't the same things, but I respectfully ask that we don't get locked in again.  Bioware, please don't take the "easy" or mainstream route.  Exceed expectations!  You will be rewarded by a fanbase out there for greater freedom. 

Thanks for reading through all that.  It's my own opinion, of course, but seems clearly to be shared by many on the BSN.  There is a market for this, and I feel it is worth the time to pursue.  Thank you

Hear, hear! Seconded, WardenWade. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[nightscrawl]

TMJfin wrote...

Sometimes I don't understand people. BioWare gave us many playable races and what most of us (I don't necesary mean people here at BSN) do? They choose human. Dalish elf was by far my favourite origin, followed by dwarf noble, dwarf commoner, human noble, elf mage, city elf and human mage. If there is a posibility to play as anything else than human, I always take that route first. Of course, there are gamers that play games just once and human is the "safest" race to play. But still, humans? Would like to see what people would say if there was no human pc option in DA3

This may seem like I hate people that use human character, but I don't. It's just that I'm not very good at english and strugling to find right words and it seems that I always sound angry

I can understand your desire to play something that is not your own race. We are all human, we see humans every day, how boring that is, right? If this weren't some human desire to experience an "other," there wouldn't be fantasies with other sentient creatures, or even sci-fi with alien beings.

You might consider though, than in an RPG where such emphasis is placed on becoming the character, or identifying as the character, that being human would be the logical choice. We know how to be a human. On the other hand, we don't know how to be a dwarf or an elf, we can only imagine such.

My first DAO play was a dwarven noble. I'm not sure why I picked it, but a change of pace seemed fun. Then I wanted to make a mage on my second play. I considered elf, but they just seemed too skinny. Overall, I like the human appearance better. I then went on to make several humans in DAO. I later on made a dwarf commoner to play the origin. I still haven't played the city elf origin, and the Dalish elf play I did was so long ago that I barely remember (which I should replay because of the DA2 story impact with the mirror). To be honest, I'm not really that interested in elves in Dragon Age (Fenris aside, and I liked him for himself.)

In Neverwinter Nights I made humans because I liked their appearance better, and with the DnD rules they were the best overall in terms of stats and abilities, and since I primarily played a fighter in that game.

In other games I will go primarily on how the race looks, or the popularity of the race/class combo. In World of Warcraft, I find it amusing to play something that might be uncommon, like a female orc, but I also have a pretty elf, and an undead with empty eye sockets and rotting jaw. Human females in WoW are OK looking. Unfortunately, almost all of the male races in WoW, particularly male humans, look horrendous, so I will never make one.

I have weird quirks when it comes to Dragon Age though... I make my Wardens and Hawkes all look exactly the same, with slight variations on hair and eye color (mages always have blue eyes, and rogue/warriors have green). Amusingly, this resulted in a male Hawke that looked even more like my girl's own brother than Carver did.

[realguile]

Rojahar wrote...

It's unfortunate that so few people played dwarf noble. IMO it was the best written origin, by far. I think when it comes down to it, people just didn't/don't give non-humans (especially dwarves) a shot because there's a stigma that the protagonist has to be a human along with players also wanting to play something aesthetically pleasing.

Just look around the BSN, and it seems like when it comes to DAO nobody ever shuts up about their human noble. How much Cousland fanfiction is floating around out there? I wonder if it really would have been the most popular origin though if there were several alternatives for human warrior/rogue origins.

While a bit off topic, I also wonder if we'll see origins return even without the option to player other races.

lol@your avatar...

Too good.

[David Gaider]

Imrahil_ wrote...
You're right about that, but I believe it's one of those places where it's horribly misinterpreted.

I haven't offered any interpretation of that data other than in response to the person who said that the new look for DA's elves could make them less popular as a player race-- to which I said that elves weren't a popular player choice to begin with. And they're not. I'd hesitate to interpret one line of data beyond that. I've no more idea than any of you how the people who did pick elven PC's felt about it (though I do know how many went on to use the characters they created), and like I said before there's value to choices even when they're not taken.

We don't eliminate minority content just for the sake of it being minority-- if so, then we wouldn't have female PC's or gay romances either. So please don't assume we're interpreting or using the data in a certain way. This kind of info begs the question of how much effort/resources should be spent on something that few people use, yes, but the answer does not generally translate into "none" unless there are other issues at play.

Modifié par David Gaider, 27 mars 2012 - 01:52 .

[LPPrince]

David Gaider wrote...

Imrahil_ wrote...
You're right about that, but I believe it's one of those places where it's horribly misinterpreted.

I haven't offered any interpretation of that data other than in response to the person who said that the new look for DA's elves could make them less popular as a player race-- to which I said that elves weren't a popular player choice to begin with. And they're not. I'd hesitate to interpret one line of data beyond that. I've no more idea than any of you how the people who did pick elven PC's felt about it (though I do know how many went on to use the characters they created), and like I said before there's value to choices even when they're not taken.

We don't eliminate minority content just for the sake of it being minority-- if so, then we wouldn't have female PC's or gay romances either. So please don't assume we're interpreting or using the data in a certain way. This kind of info begs the question of how much effort/resources should be spent on something that few people use, yes, but the answer does not generally translate into "none" unless there are other issues at play.

I don't know why, but this reminds me how there was not a single female dwarf in DA2.

[David Gaider]

adlocutio wrote...
You seem to have drawn a general conclusion that because most people didn't play these races in Origins that means they wouldn't in any DA game, correct?

Why would I seem to have drawn such a conclusion? I've said nothing of the kind.

Do you have any way of knowing how these trends might be different if the races themselves were presented differently?

It's possible. It's also possible that many people picked human noble simply because that was the default in Origins, or because they didn't really know what the difference would be with the other races... or because they "looked weird". Or because people like the familiar. There could be many reasons.

Isn't this the way Bioware games are trending, though, because of the expense of cinematic storytelling? I thought I read on these forums that so-called "duplicate" content was to be avoided because of development costs.

It depends on the resources we have available. When we have an acute shortage of time to spend, it only makes time to spend the majority of it on content that more people will see. That doesn't mean not spending any elsewhere-- it's not something that is done by design, no. I know it's difficult from your side to draw a line between things that were done because we had little choice (vis a vis the resources on hand) and things that were done because we intended to do them (regardless of how well they were or weren't executed, relatively speaking), but it'd be advisable that you maintain the idea that such a distinction does exist.

Modifié par David Gaider, 27 mars 2012 - 02:05 .

[Dutchess]

David Gaider wrote...

Imrahil_ wrote...
You're right about that, but I believe it's one of those places where it's horribly misinterpreted.

I haven't offered any interpretation of that data other than in response to the person who said that the new look for DA's elves could make them less popular as a player race-- to which I said that elves weren't a popular player choice to begin with. And they're not. I'd hesitate to interpret one line of data beyond that. I've no more idea than any of you how the people who did pick elven PC's felt about it (though I do know how many went on to use the characters they created), and like I said before there's value to choices even when they're not taken.

We don't eliminate minority content just for the sake of it being minority-- if so, then we wouldn't have female PC's or gay romances either. So please don't assume we're interpreting or using the data in a certain way. This kind of info begs the question of how much effort/resources should be spent on something that few people use, yes, but the answer does not generally translate into "none" unless there are other issues at play.

But doesn't 15% of your millions of player data translate into a fair amount of players who have chosen to play as an elf?

[David Gaider]

renjility wrote...
But doesn't 15% of your millions of player data translate into a fair amount of players who have chosen to play as an elf?

It means 15% at least tried making an elven PC at some point, yes. 15% is still a pretty significant chunk, but it's a far cry from the 80% who played human. Without trying to discern the reasons behind such disparity, it's still worthy of note.

Hm. Perhaps it's best if I don't repeat any more of these numbers, if people are going to start second-guessing how we're interpreting them. Nobody has said that the players who made elven PC's are insignificant in number, or that those numbers are a reason to have or not have them.

[Lucy Glitter]

Only 15%?

Jesus Christ on Jam.

[WardenWade]

David Gaider wrote...

Imrahil_ wrote...
You're right about that, but I believe it's one of those places where it's horribly misinterpreted.

[...]

We don't eliminate minority content just for the sake of it being minority-- if so, then we wouldn't have female PC's or gay romances either. So please don't assume we're interpreting or using the data in a certain way. This kind of info begs the question of how much effort/resources should be spent on something that few people use, yes, but the answer does not generally translate into "none" unless there are other issues at play.

What other issues would you see factoring in?

And, would you be able to clarify at this point the nature of the sorts of (bolded) options you suggested previously/below, if it is not too soon to ask?


"The difference here is that the fans see that they had three race options in DAO and only one in DA2... and thus that's less, and thus inferior, with the trade-off being not in evidence or simply not being worth it in their eyes. Which is a fair comparison, it being a sequel and all. There's no inherent benefit to race selection itself insofar as it being an RPG goes, so long as there are customization options (either in the story or in chargen)-- whether there's enough such options is really the trick, and on that front we'll be talking more once we have stuff to show."

Thank you!

Modifié par WardenWade, 27 mars 2012 - 02:25 .

[Dutchess]

David Gaider wrote...

renjility wrote...
But doesn't 15% of your millions of player data translate into a fair amount of players who have chosen to play as an elf?

It means 15% at least tried making an elven PC at some point, yes. 15% is still a pretty significant chunk, but it's a far cry from the 80% who played human. Without trying to discern the reasons behind such disparity, it's still worthy of note.

Hm. Perhaps it's best if I don't repeat any more of these numbers, if people are going to start second-guessing how we're interpreting them. Nobody has said that the players who made elven PC's are insignificant in number, or that those numbers are a reason to have or not have them.

I did not mean to imply you suggested the 15% as insignificant. I understand what you are saying. Personally I do find it interesting to hear information like this. 

It is disappointing that relatively few people have chosen to play a different race. I can only speak for myself when I say that I really enjoyed all the different origins. I have only to complete DAO with a dwarven commoner yet. For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

[AkiKishi]

renjility wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

renjility wrote...
But doesn't 15% of your millions of player data translate into a fair amount of players who have chosen to play as an elf?

It means 15% at least tried making an elven PC at some point, yes. 15% is still a pretty significant chunk, but it's a far cry from the 80% who played human. Without trying to discern the reasons behind such disparity, it's still worthy of note.

Hm. Perhaps it's best if I don't repeat any more of these numbers, if people are going to start second-guessing how we're interpreting them. Nobody has said that the players who made elven PC's are insignificant in number, or that those numbers are a reason to have or not have them.

I did not mean to imply you suggested the 15% as insignificant. I understand what you are saying. Personally I do find it interesting to hear information like this. 

It is disappointing that relatively few people have chosen to play a different race. I can only speak for myself when I say that I really enjoyed all the different origins. I have only to complete DAO with a dwarven commoner yet. For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

It's not really a great suprise. X % never finish the game of that % most will "quickstart" which is why you get very large numbers of humans. I'd really like to see a game put the non human races at the top of the list just to see if this is indeed the case.

As things are it's more like you are opting out of being human, rather than choosing to be a human.

[Mr Fixit]

renjility wrote...

For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

There's also, as David said, familiarity. When you choose humans, you more or less know what you're choosing. Other races, especially if you haven't played the game before, are unknown to a large extent. You essentially don't know what you're picking. Many players therefore stick with the tried and true. And Origins is such an enormous game that not many replay it afterwards with another race for lack of time.

I suspect that's one of the reasons DA2 begins in the middle of action, even before you get to character creation screen. BioWare probably wanted the players to taste the classes before you have to fully commit to a choice.

Something similar with regards to race choice would have been preferable.

[Wulfram]

David Gaider wrote...

It means 15% at least tried making an elven PC at some point, yes. 15% is still a pretty significant chunk, but it's a far cry from the 80% who played human. Without trying to discern the reasons behind such disparity, it's still worthy of note.

Hm. Perhaps it's best if I don't repeat any more of these numbers, if people are going to start second-guessing how we're interpreting them. Nobody has said that the players who made elven PC's are insignificant in number, or that those numbers are a reason to have or not have them.

Well, apologies for this piece of maths pedantry, but I do think you must have misunderstood the data a little, or perhaps it's got a little muddled in transmission to us.

From what you've said, 80% human + 15% Elven + 5% Dwarf = 100%.  But if your statistics are measuring whether someone has played the character at any point, those numbers really shouldn't add up to 100%, because they're not exclusive - anyone who tried more than one race would be counted twice or three times.

So I think the numbers you're quoting might in fact be representing the percentage who played the various races on their first game, or the proportion of games started with a particular race, or maybe the proportion who played a particular race more than the others.

Modifié par Wulfram, 27 mars 2012 - 03:17 .

[Maria Caliban]

I think you'd see a different skew if humans weren't the tallest race. Demographics for World of Warcraft and other MMOS suggest that people like to play races that are taller and/or more attractive.

nightscrawl wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

All I remember is the dwarf origins: 3% for the dwarven nobles, 2% for the dwarf commoner.

Oh wow... that is staggeringly small. I expected a lower number than elves certainly, but not a total of 5%. Do you differentiate from completed plays, rather than those who only played through the origin to test it out? I'm not asking for that data directly, I was just wondering whether it was something taken into account.

It was included in the gathered information.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 27 mars 2012 - 03:30 .

[Giltspur]

renjility wrote...

For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

It's probably wealth, power and beauty.  

Consider Elven males.  People like it when males are strong.  Elven males look weaker than human males.  It's not like humans are the "bulky soldier" and elves are the "lean martial artist".  At least there you'd have two kinds of power.  But it's not like that.  Elven males have nothing to offer that human males don't. Elves are just lesser humans here.

Now that may all be kind of depressing.  But I think it's normal.  It's certainly normal in MMO's.  You might counter "But Night Elves, especially females, are popular in WoW."  Indeed.  But they're taller than humans, have a distinctive and attractive look, ride white tigers, have curvy swords and attack with the freaking moon.  Elven women in DAO scrub floors.  Granted, players may not know that at character creation for elves in DAO (the scrubbing floors part).  But they probably do sense a power and magnetism from Night Elves in WoW that they don't sense from elves in DAO.  (I don't want the WoW comparsion to mislend.  I don't think ooking all high fantasy is not what's going to make elves popular.  It's looking competent in comparison to humans that's going to make them popular.)

Also, elves don't have a noble equivalent (which probably hurts elven females in comparsion to human females).   They don't come from castles or status.  A way to be powerful in status is to either wealthy and born to power (Alexander the Great) or have the power to stand up to wealth (Robin Hood).  You could see how Dalish could turn into that (the rebels).  But it probably didn't come across visually or in the description.

Dwarves of course will be played less even if they have nobles. After all, humans have nobles too and are taller and more attractive.  So what does the dwarf offer?  Answer: a totally sweet beard.  That's enough for me.  Heck, turnip stories are enough to get me to use a gnome for a forum avatar.  But I doubt I'm normal in this regard.

Depressing or not, I think these are the resaons human noble got so many selections.

Modifié par Giltspur, 27 mars 2012 - 03:32 .

[Sylvianus]

Giltspur wrote...

renjility wrote...

For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

It's probably wealth, power and beauty.  

Consider Elven males.  People like it when males are strong.  Elven males look weaker than human males.  It's not like humans are the "bulky soldier" and elves are the "lean martial artist".  At least there you'd have two kinds of power.  But it's not like that.  Elven males have nothing to offer that human males don't. Elves are just lesser humans here.

Exactly.

[Dutchess]

Giltspur wrote...

renjility wrote...

For me it is hard to grasp why so many people just go for the human noble. I cannot guess their reasons for that.

It's probably wealth, power and beauty.  

Consider Elven males.  People like it when males are strong.  Elven males look weaker than human males.  It's not like humans are the "bulky soldier" and elves are the "lean martial artist".  At least there you'd have two kinds of power.  But it's not like that.  Elven males have nothing to offer that human males don't. Elves are just lesser humans here.

Now that may all be kind of depressing.  But I think it's normal.  It's certainly normal in MMO's.  You might counter "But Night Elves, especially females, are popular in WoW."  Indeed.  But they're taller than humans, have a distinctive and attractive look, ride white tigers, have curvy swords and attack with the freaking moon.  Elven women in DAO scrub floors.  Granted, players may not know that at character creation for elves in DAO (the scrubbing floors part).  But they probably do sense a power and magnetism from Night Elves in WoW that they don't sense from elves in DAO.

Also, elves don't have a noble equivalent (which probably hurts elven females in comparsion to human females).   They don't come from castles or status.  A way to be powerful in status is to either wealthy and born to power (Alexander the Great) or have the power to stand up to wealth (Robin Hood).  You could see how Dalish could turn into that (the rebels).  But it probably didn't come across visually or in the description.

Dwarves of course will be played less even if they have nobles. After all, humans have nobles too and are taller and more attractive.  So what does the dwarf offer?  Answer: a totally sweet beard.  That's enough for me.  Heck, turnip stories are enough to get me to use a gnome for a forum avatar.  But I doubt I'm normal in this regard.

Depressing or not, I think these are the resaons human noble got so many selections.

I agree with the attractiveness part. Especially when it comes to dwarves, I understand many people will favor a human character. I admit I am guilty of that myself, although I have seen pretty dwarven women. And the beards of the males are cool.
I am less certain about the wealth, though. According to your theory fewer people would play a human had it been a human commoner, but I think looks are most important for most people. Of course you want to play a pretty/handsome/cool person. And unfortunately the elves in DA don't really look better than the humans.