Aller au contenu

Photo

No (bad) fanservice for DA3's story.


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
9 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Sylvianus

Sylvianus
  • Members
  • 7 776 messages
Bioware must avoid the trap of fanservice for the story of DA3.  Bioware should not worry about the sensibilities of fans on the central elements, it is absurd and staple substance. Threaten the integrity of a good story. Take for example, Mass Effect. The writers of Bioware decided that Cerberus would be also the bad guys in M3 when  in M2 they did something fantastic, ambiguous. Seeing that the alliance, the government that won the battle of the Citadel, organization defending humanity did nothing, but one extremist group did something instead, was really a good thing. But people have complained about being forced to work with a terrorist and racist organization, their precious honor had been violated, they wanted to see Cerberus destroyed, shepard back with the Gentiles. Seeing this rage on its forum, ( 70 % parangon in the same time.... ) Bioware has obviously destroyed the potential of Cerberus, as an alternative force, potential for the story. Seriously seeing all patriots or nationalists all transformed into evil creatures, or become wicked stabbing their own homeland, their own species is just laughable... The other folks at cerberus were just bunch of refugees, small black sheep lost the alliance borrows so nicely.

 They could have reduced this phenomenon difficult to swallow, at least. Miranda Lawson, etc. etc., there were good people at Cerberus, people who were idealistic or pragmatic, ready to protect humanity. No, Cerberus is bad, leave it and that's it...  They could at least consider the idea of a dissident faction within the organization. . Now, Cerberus is the evil and everyone is happy, the fans are happy, but otherwise the story has suffered. Seriously, the story would have gained in substance escaping from the separation of good and bad guys.

I get the impression that the idea was to show that nationalism was not something good or something very dangerous.. Same with the conflict Geth / quarians. But this is not the objective, the interest must be primarily to show us the profile of a living universe, to make we feel how it is real, make us excited about its geopolitical, to address complex issues and this means the desire to create a story without making value judgments that have nothing to do there.

This is partly why I loved DAO when it was created. Its world, I felt it as visceral and alive. The chantry, the situation of the Mages, the Templars, Loghain, the situation of elves, hate between Orlesians and Fereldan. I felt the will of the writers to create a story, a world for the sake of it.

Alo, I've seen too many people that said they would not bear to see the faction of mages destroyed, or losing the war, or they would not bear to see the Templar winning, or see a peace, because this is not their beliefs and convictions. Be careful, i'm not talking about choices, here. You can have many choices, but the universe evolves at the same time, not everything would be like we want, nothing remains as always it was.

Those people have completely forgotten that the interest was the story, its substance, its complexity, its intelligence, its direction. Bioware in trying to satisfy these sensitivities, these queries, could provide a story diminished. Let's take this story about Orsino or the Templars. They tried to change a bit the minds because too many people chose to be with the mages in DAO. What people decide in their story do not concern them, their feelings should not be considered based on certain events. Their goal to them is the creation, enrichment of their world. They should have think about the Civil War without the metrics. This is why often the first episode are better than sequels. Because they can work without interference.

 Now, I have nothing against mages, I like them to be honest. But excuse me, it really bothers me if they can't be killed in the main plot because it would look like a genocide. Yes and ? So what ?

 Does victims must be spared because their cause is supposedly fair ? This is not the issue, the continent's story must moves forward, we learn, we feel how the situation evolves. People fought for beautiful causes and they were swept in history; this isn't new.

It's a story, the principle is to make its world alive.

And dragon age origins in a small country, was a really good game I think. That is why many many people preordered Dragon age II. Because the introduction in Thedas 's univers was really good. I don't remember that many people so concerned by the lore in any other game at that time. ( maybe that was already the case with former Bioware's games, i don't know )

Bioware should also not claim to provide moral lessons as if they produced a holliwood film or anime tv despite their kinematic model. They didn't do that with DAo, they need to continue. They should focus on how to give the best possible story without spoiling the essence because some fans would not be happy or because it does not respect the conventions. More about the story and less about emotion for the priorities. the better is the story, the better you'll have emotion.

A story experienced as real. And that means they are ready to address all issues without any fear of offending. I find this story of " it's a fantasy game ", so we do not need to see some things, ridiculous. It's like this story with the child at the beginning of Mass effect 3 and some people raged, because it's not nice. If the goal is only to show how the situation is bad in a story, or to point out something else, yes they can do that. We must not show children killed, we must show no racism, no sexism, everyone in their world should be equal, there shouldn't be this or that, because it is a fantasy game. Blah blah. Yeah, and you know what ? This is why their story would become uninteresting. To begin to confuse social conventions and artistic creation.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 23 avril 2012 - 06:01 .


#2
MichaelStuart

MichaelStuart
  • Members
  • 2 251 messages
I'm not a real believer in ambiguous mortality. I don't believe when evil people do good things that makes them less evil. To me Cerberus was evil because they killed people for there own gain even if they believed it was for the greater good. The Templar's are evil because they oppress people needlessly to make themselves seam more important than they need to be. So when the games make them the enemy, to me it the logical next step.

Of course a good game will let you decide who the evil people are.

Modifié par MichaelStuart, 23 avril 2012 - 03:27 .


#3
Sacred_Fantasy

Sacred_Fantasy
  • Members
  • 2 311 messages
I don't play Mass Effect 1 to know much about Shepard connection with the Gentiles. I started with Cerberus in ME 2. As much as I disliked being forced to work with ANYONE, I think it's reasonable to ignore everything in order to save the galaxy or Thedas from the blight. I don't care whether the Wardens are popular good guys or Cerberus is evil organization. If Orlesian wardens or the Gentiles couldn't take any measure to prevent such catastrophe, then they are useless bunch of organizations. And I'm not interested with useless guys whether they're good or evil.

As for Mage-Templar conflict, I never like each sides. I don't like free roaming mages carrying potential abomination with them and I don't like how the templars treated those mages in the Circle either. There is no good solution to this. As long as the mages can't learn the discipline to restrain themselves from burning people with their fireball and protect themselves from becoming abomination, they can never be free. Normal people can choose not to carry conventional weapon/weapon of mass destruction or the law can force to ban weapon in public area.. But the mages can't do that. So until magic can be practiced safely, I will not side the mages or the templars.

Therefore, I hope I don't have to choose side in DA 3 like I was forced to do so in DA 2. Whatever "saving the world from itself" is about,I hope the ending perfectly mirror what I stand and fight for. A peaceful world where everyone and creatures can coexist with each other under one heaven ( law and order ). .

#4
Sylvianus

Sylvianus
  • Members
  • 7 776 messages

MichaelStuart wrote...

I'm not a real believer in ambiguous mortality. I don't believe when evil people do good things that makes them less evil. To me Cerberus was evil because they killed people for there own gain even if they believed it was for the greater good. The Templar's are evil because they oppress people needlessly to make themselves seam more important than they need to be. So when the games make them the enemy, to me it the logical next step.

Of course a good game will let you decide who the evil people are.

M2 showed you that not everyone was like TIM.  There were also good people who joined Cerberus because they believed in its cause. If they were so evil, Bioware wouldn't have chosen the solution of turning them all indoctrinated.  :lol:

They could be " evil " because they were ready to do many things at many costs, for humanity, but not " evil " to the point " that they kill finally thousand of their people without emotion, turn them into zombies, burn their  planets, attack their colonies, their fleet, weakens the chance of their species to win against the reapers, do not care about the war while in M2 they were the only one to act against the collectors to defend humanity. That does not make any sense for me.

They shouldn't have been our ennemies if you think about it. The reapers are those who threat them, their species, not the alliance. Or at least there should have been a dissident faction, those who couldn't understand to kill humans and who weren't indoctrinated.. Still " evil " at your eyes, but still less evil than the reapers.

No, Bioware has just decided, that cerberus was something the fans didn't want and they gave them what they wanted. To destroy Cerberus, terrorists are bad guys and it should be like that. An d that's it.

What bothers me is actually the reflection behind that. I doubt they thought Cerberus would be like that, otherwise the point about keeping the collector's base for Cerberus would be useless. No, they saw the reactions and changed their mind. And now, we have something less good for the story, and a bit strange. ( the collector' base ? What is its prupose in M3, nothing )

I wouldn't have any issue if since the beginning they were only evil and did nothing else than killing people without cause, if I didn't see some interesting points about how they weren't only murderers among them. That would have been consistent. We have something changed because of fanrage.

To be honest, i don't care about Cerberus, but this is the result given, potential wasted for the story and this is what we should avoid for DA3. Considerations of people shouldn't be taken into account on crucial elements of the story. Not popular, but better.

Of course a good game will let you decide who the evil people are.

Well I don't define good game compared to that, but it is definitely better in rpgs, where we have choices and a focus on the story. A story should simply tell a story and to the others to form their own opinion. Even if 90 % of this forum think the chantry is evil, I'm happy to see that I can think otherwise, without any input from the writers or metrics that decide..

Modifié par Sylvianus, 23 avril 2012 - 05:30 .


#5
Dormiglione

Dormiglione
  • Members
  • 780 messages
When you write a story, you write it for a certain audience of people. When you write a sequel its normal that you look back at what the audience liked and what not.
So a fanbase has always some influence for the story. I wouldnt say a major one, but there is an influence. If the writer wants to admit it or not, the writer tries to reach his audience.

Then you have some limits, like the world an lore that was created. Thedas, the mages, the races, the conflict between chantry - templars - mages - elves - dwarfes. So you pick some portion of that and build a story.

I love DAO, it made so much things right. And i found the idea of ME2 very good, i didnt felt forced to join Cerberus, i had enough freedom to chose how i solved the missions. I could chose to be for or against the cerberus way of solving missions.

A good story for a RPG should always have some space that allows you to make some decisions that have a story impact.

DA2 showed how it should not be done. In my opinion DA2 showed the worst case of a RPG, so much railroaded that i felt it was an interactive movie and not a RPG.

Just my opinion.

#6
Sylvianus

Sylvianus
  • Members
  • 7 776 messages

Dormiglione wrote...

When you write a story, you write it for a certain audience of people. When you write a sequel its normal that you look back at what the audience liked and what not.
So a fanbase has always some influence for the story. I wouldnt say a major one, but there is an influence. If the writer wants to admit it or not, the writer tries to reach his audience.

Then you have some limits, like the world an lore that was created. Thedas, the mages, the races, the conflict between chantry - templars - mages - elves - dwarfes. So you pick some portion of that and build a story.

Just my opinion.

I agree. But not to the detriment of the coherence of the story, and the primary interest of the creator for his world. This is why I'm talking about bad fanservice. The fanbase will always have an influence. But the goal is to make people love your story through your leadership and means that you put.

Not the way to make anything they want without thinking about what you want to do yourself for your story. And if it is coherent, if it's interesting and solid. Otherwise that could lead to something confused, less passionate, uninteresting, rushed and perhaps even contradictory.

For example the requirement  to see Morrigan in DAIII ? It would be a shame to include her without that there was actually a goal, an idea, a story about her. ( i'm not saying they do that, it is just an example ) Of course, the fan will be happy, Oh look, Morrigan is back, but I'm not sure that the story will be strengthened if she seems just to be a vulgar character out of place in Orlais put in the game because the fanbase required her.

Dao's story, you loved it ? They needed help to make you enjoy the story ? No, they had a clear idea about what they wanted to do and you have adhered to what they did. So for me, they can listen to the fanbase about what they like, but they do not need their help for what they want to tell themself.

The aim is that people adhere to their projects and not that writers adhere to people's projects, at least unintentionally and also with specific ideas of how to do it without the consistency of what they do want to tell is threatened.

A good story for a RPG should always have some space that allows you to make some decisions that have a story impact.

I agree on this one.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 23 avril 2012 - 07:12 .


#7
Luckywallace

Luckywallace
  • Members
  • 181 messages
I agree fully, I thought Cerberus and TIM were awesome, complicated characters in ME2 and just turned into cartoon "Bwa-hahaha, we're Eeeeeeeeeevvviiillllll" villains for ME3. Terrible writing for ME3 - but it was unfortunately not the biggest problem with that game.

I'd hate to see something similar happen in DA3 with one of the excellent morally-murky factions in Dragon Age (such as Templars, they seem nasty and cruel but they are not all bad - they're a shade of grey, not black).

#8
Dormiglione

Dormiglione
  • Members
  • 780 messages

Sylvianus wrote...

For example the requirement  to see Morrigan in DAIII ? It would be a shame to include her without that there was actually a goal, an idea, a story about her. ( i'm not saying they do that, it is just an example ) Of course, the fan will be happy, Oh look, Morrigan is back, but I'm not sure that the story will be strengthened if she seems just to be a vulgar character out of place in Orlais put in the game because the fanbase required her.



A very interesting Example. Morrigan back, yes i would be also happy because she was my prefered love interest, but if im not the warden anymore, where is the sense to bring Morrigan back?
To finish or continue her story? Yes, but then they had to define what is canon, for example that my warden accepted to have a child with morrigan.

I remember many complaints about the appearance of Leliana in DA2. It was not the problem that she appeared, for many player the problem was to see her LI and not beeing able to speak to her like the warden would. Because they were now Hawke and not the Warden.

I said that in many other threads, Mass Effect has a bigger fanbase because Shepards Story continued, you had the possibility to "live" your character through 3 games.

DAO is still one of my prefered RPG's, i made more than 10+ playthrough, even after DA2 i made two more playthroughs. In my opinion it was the wrong decision to stop the Warden's story.

People will always compare Mass Effect and Dragon Age, even if its clear that this are two absolute different games. But they are from Bioware, in DAO you got the same immersion with the Warden like you had with Shepard. I expected that a sequel of Dragon Age would continue the story of the warden. I know, its my fault, they never said that the story of the warden was continued and still i miss it.

#9
Reznore57

Reznore57
  • Members
  • 6 150 messages
It depends , "fan service " can be a nice touch.Bodhan and Sandal are quite popular , and it's nice having them around.Flemeth cameo is good too.
It works great for minor character ...but thing like the god baby makes me grind my teeth.
People want to see their kids around , I don't ,it needs a really good reason to be shown and some player haven't got him/her ,so i think it's a tricky thing.I don't want to play as the god baby neither.

I have faith in Dragon Age writers because they can pull out something like Leandra death.But i'm sure people who complains aganst fanservice will complain about that too.
They can't please everyone obviously but story wise , I don't think they will take the easy road.
Look at the chantry , a lot of fan hate it , still the writer gives us the possibility to look at the good side of it.
Same with the Qunari ,etc...
IMHO the writer of DA are better than the ME one , but gameplay /cinematic wise Me is better than DA.
Besides , David Gaider wrote a lot of time that he kind of like to make the player "suffer" ...

#10
Sharn01

Sharn01
  • Members
  • 1 881 messages
Cerberus was portrayed as bwaahaahaa evil villains prior to ME2, where they where portrayed as a morally corrupt organization doing what they thought was necessary. ME3 was simply a return to their original ways.