Aller au contenu

Attn Bioware: My DA3 Suggestions

Débuté par Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_* , avril 30 2012 08:51

  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
22 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 30 avril 2012 - 08:51

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
I thought I'd take up Bioware's query for fans to offer feedback on idea development of DA3. As a disclaimer, this feedback is based on my personal opinion. I realize there will be fans reading this thread who will disagree with some of my suggestions. Please take the info in stride. And Bioware folks - I hope you're reading.

There are elements of Dragon Age: Origins that I found good and bad. There are elements of Dragon Age 2 that I also found good and bad. I think the general consensus among fans is that the third installment should heavily consider blending the more positive elements while weeding out the unsatisfactory ones. Pinpointing which element is most unsatisfactory over another will take some time, but allow me to express the pros and cons for the sake of giving feedback.

Note: In addition, I want to offer some suggestions that step a bit outside of the Dragon Age gameplay. Again, those suggestions are based on my personal gameplay preferences. Please take in stride.

Companions/Interaction: The companion interaction in DA:O was more intricate than in DA2. Conversations weren't as linear or limited, and the player had the freedom to initiate them at any given time. Whether you wanted to "ask something personal" at the party camp or do just the same while questing in the Brecilian Forest, both environments gave the player the option to do so. This was a good thing. However, in DA2, companion interaction wasn't limited to text. Your character was able to verbalize the sentence selected. That feature was preferable over text. In addition, I enjoyed the romancing process better in DA:O than in DA2. I felt it was more involved, and the player had more freedom/opportunities to romantically interact with his/her companions.

Gifts: DA:O had gift giving which I felt trumped DA2's gift giving. Companions enjoyed certain gifts over others - sure - but you could give them most anything and get a little +1 here and there. Also you had the option to sell gifts and bank the money. DA2 gift giving was more controlled and limited. The gifts were specific, in specific locations. There are specific gifts in addition to casual ones (in DA:O) and I liked that feature the best.

Combat: DA:O's combat lacked, mostly because it's an older game. In DA2 the combat greatly improved. I was especially elated when I played a rogue and saw some faster/more acrobatic moves put in there. Since DA isn't a turn-based fighting game, I think smoother/more fluid fighting is crucial. I may even go so far as to suggest combo moves like in Kingdoms of Amalur, and finishing moves like in Skyrim. If you're a fan of real time fighting, like me, those are the icing on the cake. Also keep in mind - I play from the 360. I know combat is a bit of a difference experience on the PC. There could be a choice for combo/finish moves - to satisfy 360/ps3 gamers. (But PC players could opt out, depending on their gameplay preferences.)

In addition to combat, I liked DA2's - what would you call them? ability tree layout? - much better. They were easier to navigate, in my opinion. I think in DA:O just having a straight list of talents, then a straight list of abilities felt a bit overwhelming when trying to sift through it all.

Maps: I'd like to see DA3 become more explorable. Honestly, DA:O was more explorable than DA2 and I found that to my liking. DA:O was also a longer gameplay experience. DA2 was too brief, especially the 3rd Act. I'd like to see more exploration in the third installment, preferably with a not-so-linear map. Like you can jump around a bit more, and provide more towns/dungeons/forests to crawl around in with your friends. Also - a party camp on the map (DA:O) was a great idea. I liked having all my companions together in one place. That was what made the interaction much easier and intricate. I wasn't so keen on having to travel to the Hanged Man (DA2) every time Varric requested my presence. And it could only happen at certain plot points throughout the game. Basically I didn't have as much freedom with my companions. Also - and I know Bioware is painfully aware of this - please don't reuse mini-maps for caves/dungeons/wooded paths/mansions.

Armour/Fashion/Appearance: This is where my estrogen kicks in, but Bioware will want to listen - given that a lot of their DA fans are ladies. Let's see some non DLC armour (meaning what comes with the 60 dollar game you pick up at the store) that comes in a creative variety. Maybe players can customize the armour, whether it be the color of the leather or the length of a robe/skirt. Hairstyles too. I think when customizing one's character at the beginning, there should be a few extra (or different) hairstyle options. Maybe retire a couple and put some new ones in there, unique to the character that no other NPC in the game will have. Also, when playing Kingdoms of Amalur, halfway through the game they allow the player to sit at a vanity and change their hairstyle and face paint. That would be an interesting feature. (What if you just get bored with your hero's look?)

Also, as far as female armour, I understand Bioware doesn't want to offend some ladies, but some of us would really like to look a little sexier. In DA2 the sultryness of Hawke's armour was lacking. Come on! It's fantasy after all. Maybe mix some femme outfits in there with the butch ones.

Houses: I've always liked the option of being able to own a house. In DA:O you don't buy a house, you have a party camp. In DA2 you inherit a house but no companions are there. Blend the two? Maybe, in DA3, a house shouldn't be mandatory, but it's an optional thing you can buy. And maybe you can move companions from a camp to the house, based on your gameplay interaction with them. 

Extras: I remember when doing the quest in DA:O I earned a brief, but amazing, shapeshifting ability at the Circle Tower (the one from inside the Fade). I have to admit, those abilities were pretty amazing. I wouldn't say give the player the ability to do those things right away, but what if it were a hard-to-get unlockable ability - no matter what your class? Something to drive player motivation. I know I'd be motivated to get those back, and actually use them in the game. For example, in Skyrim, if you complete the entire main quest, you basically get your own "pet" dragon that will swoop down and attack vast groups of enemies when you call out to it. That's a pretty big perk to completing the entire main quest. If Bioware is interested in making DA3 less linear with its quests, let's see a quest that could lead to some kind of unique/amazing ability that kind of lets the player bully his/her way through the game thereafter.

Pets: I loved my mabari dog in DA:O. Pets are great options for rogues. Or maybe any class. 

Finally, I assume the game will be made for 1 player. Hopefully Bioware doesn't go the route of trying to make it be online - or if they do, they would maintain the 1 player option. 

 Ok, that's all I have.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 30 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

#2
Eternal Phoenix
Posté 01 mai 2012 - 09:10

Eternal Phoenix
  • Members
  • 8 471 messages
I agree about the gifts. I thought they were a nice touch in Origins but they should certainly bring in more meaningful gifts as well and perhaps other "gifts" which have a negative effect on the companion. I remember the feastday pack for Origins included gifts which gave you disapproval with a companion. So imagine if such gifts were in Dragon Age 2 and you could give Anders a book saying that mages should be behind bars, the following conversation would surely be eventful to say the least. However I think gifts need to have more meaning which is something that Dragon Age 2 tried to establish. I mean giving gifts could open up new conversations and shouldn't just be there only for approval or the opposite.

As for the combat: Dragon Age: Origins was meant to be the spiritual successor to the Baldur's Gate series and as such it was meant to have tactics, strategy and preparation having a huge emphasis for combat and like Baldur's Gate, it was meant to have emphasis on statistics too and team-work too. I think it did everything right. Dragon Age 2 on the other-hand was a try at pleasing the action crowd and the crowd who enjoyed the less-action combat of Origins and the result was that DA2 combat didn't feel right. I don't really support a direction where it's more about action as the game is party-based and as such, the combat should be more about strategic preparation, tactics and companions complementing each other with their classes. The combat needs more realistic animation and I do agree that finishing moves need to return. I wouldn't mind if they include more basic moves in combat like the ability to block and use heavy or light attacks but emphasis on abilities need to be made as well.

I hope they bring back a mabari for Dragon Age 3 but I hope they include it as a companion akin to Origins or at the very least they could make it act like a summon - in that it's not controllable - but instead of vanishing after combat, it stays with you and follows you unless you dismiss it home. On another note a mabari as a companion shouldn't be hard to achieve again and it should be up to the player if they want it in their party as a companion or not. I mean the marbari has some very useful skills and abilities which make it a good fighter and one I would rather control.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 01 mai 2012 - 09:15 .

#3
keesio74
Posté 01 mai 2012 - 11:16

keesio74
  • Members
  • 931 messages
Good comments. My 2 cents on your ideas:
-Companions: I actually liked DA2 better. I liked that you have to build your relationship over the course of the whole game and you can't accelerate this like DA:O. For example, if I pick the right conversation options and get enough gifts, I can fully romance (+100) Leliana very early into the game and pretty much be done with all the major interactions with her before I even get one of the treaties committed. In DA2 I cannot fully romance someone until act 3. I even have to wait until act 2 before I can get anywhere. Because of the pursuit of the romance over the whole 3 acts, it felt more meaningful

Gifts: I didn't like all the gifts in DA:O and liked that they minimized it in DA2. The whole buying of approval seemed cheap and makes losing approval not as big a deal.

Combat: Mostly agree. Though the acrobatics was too much to the point where it defied any sort of realism. The waves and spawns out of thin air was annoying also. I did like the new ability tree layouts though.

Maps: agree, except for the part about the game being too short. My average playthrough of DA2 is not that much less than DA:O.

Armour: well I thought it was ok. My only beef was the lack of descriptions and details.

Houses: Both DA:O and DA2 were fine. DA:O party camp made sense because you were always on the run/move where as in DA2, you were a resident of the city. I actually liked DA2 and how everyone had their own little house/area that was theirs. Like if I was going to pay Merrill a visit, I actually was going to her place. It also made sense that people had their own lives and did other stuff instead of just hanging around at your place all day waiting to talk to you.

#4
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 03 mai 2012 - 06:37

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
I have to disagree with you both regarding combat. You can still have combo/finishing moves and keep the game tactics-based. They don't compromise the tactics setup with your NPC's. Being that the fighting is done in real time, vs. turn based, there should be more action. That's the attraction to real time fighting. Otherwise it's just monotonous hack n' slash. My opinion, of course, but I just get bored with hack n' slash. More variety/eye candy, please!   

Also, IGN described it as the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" but I find that statement to be irrelevant at this point in the franchise. DA is evolving. Let it evolve. Just because a gaming company made one game (Baldur's Gate) doesn't mean that playing a different game (DA) should force the experience to be synonymous. I bought Dragon Age to play, not Baldur's Gate. (It's like expecting Super Mario Bros to be just like Zelda.) 

I agree about the spawns from thin air, however. But at the same time, it was a minor issue and non too foreign in the world of gaming. Enemies did the same in Kingdom Hearts, another real-time fighting, though tactics-based, game (that I thoroughly loved). The spawning never bothered me.

And I wouldn't play a fantasy game to seek realism. I want games that are fantastic, not realistic. If I wanted a realistic game, I would just walk away from the console. haha.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 03 mai 2012 - 06:57 .

#5
Chaoz1994
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 05:46

Chaoz1994
  • Members
  • 86 messages

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

I have to disagree with you both regarding combat. You can still have combo/finishing moves and keep the game tactics-based. They don't compromise the tactics setup with your NPC's. Being that the fighting is done in real time, vs. turn based, there should be more action. That's the attraction to real time fighting. Otherwise it's just monotonous hack n' slash. My opinion, of course, but I just get bored with hack n' slash. More variety/eye candy, please!   



That's why I hated DA:2. Dragon Age is Real Time With Pause. Most fights on Nightmare in Origins required me to pause every few seconds to get a tactical idea of the battlefield, and set up what my party was doing. On DA2 it was a hack-n-slash fest. I found myself spamming abilities on cooldown on my warrior, which I would never do on Origins. Yes, I loved the finishing moves from Origin, but that does not make it an action game. It was all about party composition and strategy, which is why so many people hated DA2's combat, it just wasn't strategic enough. What strategy there WAS, was akin to WoW raiding type strategy, telegraphed moves by bosses that you had to dodge... In Origins you had well thought out fights that you could only beat by using your party to the max - crowd control was everything in Origin, and if you could keep the enemies locked down, you won. In DA2 they remove that complexity. It's not meant to be twitchy, action combat, it's meant to be deep strategic combat. They put pause in for a reason, but maybe people didn't realise that, which could be why people hated Origin's combat.  :)

#6
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 06:05

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
I think the bottom line is that the combat needs improvement. In a perfect world, I'd have my tactics all worked out beautifully beforehand and then lay out some badass moves in real time fighting. Some pauses would be an added bonus, yes. Getting swarmed is boring and frustrating.

#7
Chaoz1994
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 06:15

Chaoz1994
  • Members
  • 86 messages

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

I think the bottom line is that the combat needs improvement. In a perfect world, I'd have my tactics all worked out beautifully beforehand and then lay out some badass moves in real time fighting. Some pauses would be an added bonus, yes. Getting swarmed is boring and frustrating.

Origin combat was the best combat I've ever played in a videogame, period. I love changing tactics on the fly and pause every few seconds to check that my nefarious plan is working out. I understand that some people want action, but I want a tactical squad based RPG like origin. Hopefully they can work out a system to allow people to play more tactically, or more actiony. (forcing you to choose ACTION or RPG at the start, rather than making a 'best of both worlds' option, which would suck.) And yes, parachuting reinforcements are boring.

#8
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 06:23

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
I'm more keen on action because I have little patience to mess with tactics every five seconds. On the occasions that I'd try it - the fight was almost over anyway.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 06 mai 2012 - 06:24 .

#9
deathadder99
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 06:31

deathadder99
  • Members
  • 37 messages

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

I'm more keen on action because I have little patience to mess with tactics every five seconds. On the occasions that I'd try it - the fight was almost over anyway.


Dragon Age 2 was not good for tactics I agree. What difficulty did you play on? I'd be impressed if you could do Origins Nightmare no-pause, but the higher difficulties were always designed to be for the strategic players, and the lower ones for the action players who don't want to micromanage. Unfortunately dragon age 2 just left it all to the action players, and we got nothing.:(

#10
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 06:49

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
Oh that's stupid. Didn't know they did that. Yeah I just played on normal for most. Casual for some replays so I could blow through to see alternate story lines.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 06 mai 2012 - 06:50 .

#11
Reznore57
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 07:52

Reznore57
  • Members
  • 6 150 messages
Companions/Interaction
I like the voice protagonist too .In da O ,though, some interaction were a bit pointless.Going a hundred time under the tent with your Li , or french kissing them everytime you killed a thing didn't add anything to the story or the romance.
What it did well is it gives the feeling that you were in a romance throught the whole game.And it's something that was not very well done in DA2 , most of the time you didn't really know what what's going on with your LI.
My advice , show a little bit of romance throught the whole game , little thing in quest cinematic for example that hints that there's an actual romance going on.


Gifts:
I prefer DA2 , gifts that meant something and were a way to know a bit more about the character or lore.
Back in DA:0 i gave some bones to Alistair so he would sleep with me , that was pretty stupid but it did work.
Giving stupid thing to people so you gain their affection is a way to not bother with game approuval mechanic.


Combat:

I liked DA2 combat too .I tried to replay DA0 and it was painful.I did play a rogue in DA2 recently and i liked the jumps and rolls on sides ...People say they want realism?
Just watch some medieval fighting on youtube ,the fight is mostly about who will make the guy in heavy armor fall flat first.Oh and sometimes you try to put your blade in hole in the armour ,next the armpit ...
Every 20 min or so when the guy is tired moving his heavy blade or shield.

Maps : Da2 lack a lot of diversity in this area.And I remember the wounded coast to be boring .
So no more stuck in a small city with the occasional trip to the same old caves or sewer..I liked Kirkwall but for a big city it was lacking of scope and animation.
As for traveling ,Da:0 was obviously better.
The developper said we were going to see a lot of country in DA3 (It was not a promise but it was said at a panel few months ago) ...
And i'm not sure i want that...I played Me3 and you're supposed to go to a lot of different planet.
It turns out you bash a few mob in a scenary that look like a corridor.
So i don't want to travel to different countries if it turns out i spent 20 min in there in a boring decor without interesting quest.
Put some effort in Orlais , made us visit some countryside , maybe another country but don't give us a world trip that ain't worth of Thedas!
And yeah , party camp are nice .I want one , not all the time like in DA:o but it was a nice touch.

Armour/Fashion/Appearance:I don't care much about customazing armour.I'm happy we can hide those mages hat at last!I thought the champion armour (mage version) was really great .The robes were meh.I don't really want my character to be "sexy" but i can undersatnd we need more diversity in armour.
As for the companion , I liked that they have their own armor , it gave them a visual identity.
I don't care much about crafting /weapon/armour so i didn't care we couldn't change their outfit , plus i remember putting Morrigan in chantry like robes+ stupid hat , and wonder why she hadn't cut my pc throat for the outrage.

Houses:I think in DA2 the hanged man was a missed opportunity.Thinking of all thoses nights my companions were there playing cards, joking , drinking....
So i'd like to have that , a bar/inn , where you live with your companion .With some animations,bar brawl whatever.
And party camp could be an alternative when you go out of cities.

#12
deathadder99
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 09:48

deathadder99
  • Members
  • 37 messages

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

Oh that's stupid. Didn't know they did that. Yeah I just played on normal for most. Casual for some replays so I could blow through to see alternate story lines.


The thing is the fights were poorly designed IMO. Not that they weren't fun. It just felt like MMO dungeon bosses, or action game bosses. The ancient rock golem was the same on easy and nightmare, just had more HP and did more damage. The tactics (hide behind pillar, dodge the rolling ball) STAYED EXACTLY THE SAME. You can maybe think of some party composition that has an advantage against him, but the core boss mechanic will stay the same. You don't have to think about strategies, you just need to micromanage dodging and 'not standing in the bad stuff'.

The normal fights all blend into one, they all followed the same formula, with parachuting reinforcements. Once you killed one group of 'trash', you killed them all. The trash in DA:O wasn't all that interesting either tbh, but at least if you had a good strategy it showed on these guys. The harder difficulties were less forgiving if you were unable to control the battlefield. In DA:2, crowd control isn't used much at all, and all that changes from easy to nightmare is that the enemies have more HP and do more damage. I have to admit I DID enjoy the demonic tome quests, the fights there were very difficult, and genuinely rewarded strategy, something I felt the rest of the game didn't do. 

The first time I beat Ser Cauthrin was amazing. You're stuck with a hard boss, and a room full of archers. It's not obvious what you have to do, and there's no set way of going about it. You could do difficult fights almost any way you could think of in DA:O, which added to the replayability. It's not "oh here's this boss again, I just need to run behind pillars", it's "I have 2 mages, an archer and a warrior, how do I deal with this situation."

Bioware is known for this kind of deep squad based combat, and games such as KoToR, NWN, Baldur's Gate and the like are some of my favourite games of all time. I don't like the direction that Bioware are going in. I don't know if it's EA, but they are making everything more actiony. I don't feel like they are making games for my demographic any more. And that's a mistake. BioWare risks losing loyal fans such as myself, who have bought every single BioWare game in the last 12+ years on release. You've always been in my heart better than Bethesda and CD Projekt Red, beause you have such great and meaningful interactions with your companions, and such great squad based gameplay. I love bringing my companions along for the party chatter, and what they add to conversations. I have amazing memories of your games. Dragon Age: Origins did so well because it was marketed as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

Baldur's Gate is being re-released this year. Baldur's Gate 3 might even come out. Games like that have lost none of their appeal. Yes, you can certainly modernise them, but you don't need to change their core. Look at a game like Legend Of Grimrock. That's as oldschool as it gets, and it's done very well financially. You make great RPGs. You don't need to pander to the CoD market by making all your games action RPGs. Yes, by all means make them action packed, but don't leave out the strategic element, or at the very least give us the option to play strategically rather than just as an action game. The CoD market will leave as soon as the newest shiny thing comes along. Fans who have been loyal to your company and respect your work are the real people you should be catering for.

Modifié par deathadder99, 06 mai 2012 - 10:42 .

#13
deathadder99
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 10:08

deathadder99
  • Members
  • 37 messages
Or to put it this way. Even though Star Wars episodes IV-VI are dated, they are still regarded as superior to the prequels (with some fans going as far to deny the prequels even existed).

#14
Reznore57
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 10:33

Reznore57
  • Members
  • 6 150 messages
Well maybe it will cheer you up , deathadder99, but they did say at some panel that they were looking to make the combat more strategic , they mentionned positionning , preparation and teamplay.
(again it's no promise but at least they're thinking about it)
Now i don't see why strategy wouldn't work with more action oriented visual

And i don't think there is such thing as "real fan agreement" that settle on what's good and what's not.
I like dragon age mostly for the story , as long as i enjoy the story i tend to overlook combat , does that makes me a lesser fan?

#15
deathadder99
Posté 06 mai 2012 - 10:40

deathadder99
  • Members
  • 37 messages

Reznore57 wrote...

Well maybe it will cheer you up , deathadder99, but they did say at some panel that they were looking to make the combat more strategic , they mentionned positionning , preparation and teamplay.
(again it's no promise but at least they're thinking about it)
Now i don't see why strategy wouldn't work with more action oriented visual

I loved the finishing moves in DA:O, and I love them in skyrim :P. Of course it works. Hopefully they fulfil their promises. :-)

Reznore57 wrote...
And i don't think there is such thing as "real fan agreement" that settle on what's good and what's not.
I like dragon age mostly for the story , as long as i enjoy the story i tend to overlook combat , does that makes me a lesser fan?


I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that what they are doing is moving away from what they usually do. Mass Effect was their first game AFAIK that wasn't pretty much based off turn based D&D combat. Yes, that did well, and it's a great game, but the fantasy RPGs we know and love weren't actiony at all, and I feel they are doing that just to appeal more to console players etc. (I'm pretty sure somewhere I read that they were trying to appeal to CoD players). They need to stay close to their roots, as they have always had a reputation for good RPGs (that has been somewhat lost in the past few years). We don't want Dragon Effect. We want Dragon Age, an epic, dark RPG.

#16
Agent_Dark_
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 12:55

Agent_Dark_
  • Members
  • 417 messages

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

I think the bottom line is that the combat needs improvement. In a perfect world, I'd have my tactics all worked out beautifully beforehand and then lay out some badass moves in real time fighting. Some pauses would be an added bonus, yes. Getting swarmed is boring and frustrating.

Dragon Age crossed with old school Rainbow Six.  Now that would be awesome.  Before you launch a mission, you sit in the tactical map planning your route, entry points, hold points, egress points etc.  Then you launch the mission and let the AI companions follow your plan while you control the PC lol.

The party crouches down next to a window, while the mage prepares an AOE crowd control spell.  The rogue sets some Lyrium charges on the windows.  You give the 'GO' command, the rogue detonates the lyrium to create the entry point, the mage launches the AOE CC through the window and everyone storms the room.  TANGO DOWN.

#17
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 02:24

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
Another thing I'd like to see in DA3 - sorry jumping off topic from the combat stuff - is half-half race options. In the first DA, you could be a human, elf, or dwarf. You could pick from various storylines too, which was awesome. In DA2, the Hawke option wasn't as fun. You could only be human, and your story was essentially the same - it just changed if whether or not you got Bethany or Carver. Meh.

But honestly? I say bring back the three race options, but also throw in a half elf option. (Also, what about half dwarves? Possible? Hawke was able to flirt with Varric, so... I assume humans and dwarves can get together. Also what about elves and dwarves? An unlikely pairing would make for a very interesting race option.)

Either way, they should throw out a plethora of storylines/starting points. I'd love to play a half elf, starting out in a society that hates me because I'm mixed. It'd make for an interesting plot.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 07 mai 2012 - 02:26 .

#18
Guest_Faerunner_*
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 04:01

Guest_Faerunner_*
  • Guests

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

But honestly? I say bring back the three race options, but also throw in a half elf option. (Also, what about half dwarves? Possible? Hawke was able to flirt with Varric, so... I assume humans and dwarves can get together. Also what about elves and dwarves? An unlikely pairing would make for a very interesting race option.) 


I agree, but don't half-elves look completely human? You'd basically be playing a human but just have an elven parent instead of an all human family. (Granted, if Bioware isn't planning on giving race options back, a half-elf would be the tiniest scrap of a compromise because at least you could walk in elven shoes instead of just another human noble/mage.)

I agree though that Bioware hasn't really explored what happens when dwarves get together with humans or elves, let alone produce offspring together. It's probably exceedingly rare since most dwarves live underground and the few that go to the surface seem to prefer being with each other, but it would still be interesting to explore none the less.

P.S. Please bring race options back!

Modifié par Faerunner, 07 mai 2012 - 04:09 .

#19
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 08:14

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests

Faerunner wrote...

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

But honestly? I say bring back the three race options, but also throw in a half elf option. (Also, what about half dwarves? Possible? Hawke was able to flirt with Varric, so... I assume humans and dwarves can get together. Also what about elves and dwarves? An unlikely pairing would make for a very interesting race option.) 


I agree, but don't half-elves look completely human? You'd basically be playing a human but just have an elven parent instead of an all human family. (Granted, if Bioware isn't planning on giving race options back, a half-elf would be the tiniest scrap of a compromise because at least you could walk in elven shoes instead of just another human noble/mage.)

I agree though that Bioware hasn't really explored what happens when dwarves get together with humans or elves, let alone produce offspring together. It's probably exceedingly rare since most dwarves live underground and the few that go to the surface seem to prefer being with each other, but it would still be interesting to explore none the less.

P.S. Please bring race options back!


Yeah the half elves look a bit human. They look like smaller, "pretty" humans in a way. Though I think my full elf from Origins looks like a human (that's her in the avatar). I mean, with the right hairdo, you don't even see the ears.

I think if you played a half elf, the physical appearance would be subtle, but the social impact it would have on the character would be interesting. 

#20
deathadder99
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 10:58

deathadder99
  • Members
  • 37 messages
I'm pretty sure that it's part of dragon age lore that if an elf and a human have a child it's a human child, you don't get half elves. As for dwarves, I'm not sure :P

#21
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 07 mai 2012 - 04:14

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
Well in that same vein - half elf or not - another cool idea would be to have offspring carry over from DA2. Meaning, if your Hawke romanced an NPC of the opposite sex, say they had a child down the road.

And so in DA3 that child shows up (but grown up), bearing some resemblances to the NPC romanced. That'd be a cool concept. They could be a companion, or even just a quest. (But a potential companion for the new protag would be cooler.)

Also one more suggestion, though I know people will argue with me on this. I was dissatisfied with a couple things about my protag for DA2. I explained it in another thread, so I'll copy and paste what I said:

NPC's never treat Hawke like a real "lady" most of the time. Hawke is such a tomboy (if you're doing fem hawke) which always bothered me. Yes I know, she's deadly and can fight. That does make her less "ladylike" I get it. But they never add in any real flattery like, "oh you'd look pretty in a dress, hawke." Or "your hairstyle is so cute" or "Allow ME to pull out your chair/open the door/be a chivalrous male in the company of a female"

Are the developers that afraid of some female players getting offended? (I know some would. I get it.) I think a lot of players would like a girly Hawke option, with prettier clothes, and maybe a less butchy attitude. It doesn't have to be full force Barbie Doll or anything, but really... I was disappointed with that aspect of my Hawke. She just seemed like a dude with boobs. haha

I wanted her to be a femme fatale - reasons I chose a rogue.

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 07 mai 2012 - 04:29 .

#22
Guest_Faerunner_*
Posté 08 mai 2012 - 09:42

Guest_Faerunner_*
  • Guests

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

Well in that same vein - half elf or not - another cool idea would be to have offspring carry over from DA2. Meaning, if your Hawke romanced an NPC of the opposite sex, say they had a child down the road.

And so in DA3 that child shows up (but grown up), bearing some resemblances to the NPC romanced. That'd be a cool concept. They could be a companion, or even just a quest. (But a potential companion for the new protag would be cooler.)


Yeah, but that would require around 20 years passing between DA2 and DA3... :/

[Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

NPC's never treat Hawke like a real "lady" most of the time. Hawke is such a tomboy (if you're doing fem hawke) which always bothered me. Yes I know, she's deadly and can fight. That does make her less "ladylike" I get it. But they never add in any real flattery like, "oh you'd look pretty in a dress, hawke." Or "your hairstyle is so cute" or "Allow ME to pull out your chair/open the door/be a chivalrous male in the company of a female"


That depends on what you consider "real flattery." I personally feel it's better to compliment someone for their hard-earned accomplishments (like knowledge or fighting skills) over something that they happened to be born with (like good looks or female genitilia). I guess you can argue that beauty is something that needs to be worked at and so should be appriciated, but I think it's a heck of a lot easier to put on a nice dress or gussy up one's hair than it is to cleave an ogre or win a war against you-know-what, so I think the latter deserves more attention than the former. 

I also think that the whole "Allow ME to pull out your chair/open the door/be a chivalrous male in the company of a female" thing sounds way more condescending than flattering, so I'm rather glad that "compliments" like that aren't in the game.

Trista Faux Hawke wrote...

Are the developers that afraid of some female players getting offended? (I know some would. I get it.) I think a lot of players would like a girly Hawke option, with prettier clothes, and maybe a less butchy attitude. It doesn't have to be full force Barbie Doll or anything, but really... I was disappointed with that aspect of my Hawke. She just seemed like a dude with boobs. haha


I think this is another byproduct of having one pre-set character with one set voice, mannerism and background, only three rigid personalities, etc. Individuality is largely lost and you just get what the game gives you, even if that isn't how you envisioned your character. (Lack of races, anyone?) 

I also think it's easier on them to make gender purely aesthetic and keep most of the dialogue the same regardless of gender.  (Instead of having to write separate conversations and/or quests for men and women.) Since the writers were on a time crunch and it's sadly still more socially acceptable to androgynize women than it is to feminize men, so there you go...

With all that said, I actually envisioned a sweet, peppy, bubbly, girly, social butterfly of a Mage!Hawke to romance Fenris (a sort of Natalie Portman Manic Pixie Dream Girl to his Tortured Brooding Lone Wolf) and having her look and act so calm, collected and androgynous did ruin the vision. I was forced to go back and make another character that suited the pre-set voice and mannerisms that Bioware picked out. I ended up loving the second character, but I still understand your frustration. :/

Modifié par Faerunner, 08 mai 2012 - 09:46 .

#23
Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
Posté 08 mai 2012 - 03:34

Guest_Trista Faux Hawke_*
  • Guests
Well regardless of personal feelings on flattery, as far as in-game interaction, I just felt like a dude the whole time. I mean, if there's romance in the game, and I picked a woman Hawke, and I'm a woman picking a male LI, then... why am I always so butch? Even at noble parties, I wear unflattering, butchy outfits. I don't have to be in a huge princess dress or anything, but seriously... those pants/blouse? gag me.

lol

Modifié par Trista Faux Hawke, 08 mai 2012 - 03:34 .

Retourner dans General Discussion


  1. The BioWare Forum
  2. → Dragon Age
  3. → Dragon Age II
  4. → General Discussion