471 réponses à ce sujet

[HiroVoid]

Silfren wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Just about positive the original plan was to have Hawke as a continuous MC like Shepard, but that kind of changes when DA2's reception came in.

Not sure what you mean by "when DA2's reception came in," because it was well established by Bioware that a different protagonist was intended for each game before DA2 was even announced, and from what I was able to tell, was explicitly stated by Bioware (via Gaider) early in Origins.  Nothing related to DA2's "reception" had anything to do with it.  If it was the original plan, that original plan was changed at least a good year prior to DA2's announcement, if not even sooner.

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

[Vormaerin]

HiroVoid wrote...

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

I believe there was supposed to be an expansion, but that was scrapped in favor of putting more resources into DA3.  Though I didn't see the specific dev quote about that, just other posters referring to it.

[wsandista]

Vormaerin wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

I believe there was supposed to be an expansion, but that was scrapped in favor of putting more resources into DA3.  Though I didn't see the specific dev quote about that, just other posters referring to it.

Here

Executive Producer Mike Darrah said it.

[devSin]

I would throw money at Mark and Mike if they let me play Hawke again in DA3.

But they won't. I'm not sure what I should throw at them now.

Modifié par devSin, 25 mai 2012 - 01:01 .

[wsandista]

devSin wrote...

I would throw money at Mark and Mike if they let me play Hawke again in DA3.

But they won't. I'm not sure what I should throw at them now. Definitely won't be money. ;-)

Really? I'd throw feces if they had Hawke as the PC for DA3

Modifié par wsandista, 25 mai 2012 - 01:01 .

[Silfren]

HiroVoid wrote...

Silfren wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Just about positive the original plan was to have Hawke as a continuous MC like Shepard, but that kind of changes when DA2's reception came in.

Not sure what you mean by "when DA2's reception came in," because it was well established by Bioware that a different protagonist was intended for each game before DA2 was even announced, and from what I was able to tell, was explicitly stated by Bioware (via Gaider) early in Origins.  Nothing related to DA2's "reception" had anything to do with it.  If it was the original plan, that original plan was changed at least a good year prior to DA2's announcement, if not even sooner.

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

I don't have a quote at hand, and Google isn't helping, but I assure you, it is not a baseless rumor, but confirmed fact.  It's been common knowledge since at least 2010, when I first came across a referenced quote to Gaider concerning the issue after my first playthrough of Orgins.  So no, it isn't an idea that was scrapped due to DA2's poor reception.  

I'll keep looking for a source quote, but I'm sure someone else could have it ready to hand as well if you asked about, because it has indeed been common knowledge for several years.

I agree that as it is given to us, Hawke's story comes across as unfinished, but this is a separate issue that has no bearing on whether Hawke was intended for DA3. They were indeed working on an expansion for DA2, called Exalted March, that would have at least added to Hawke's story, that ended up being canceled, but again, finished or not, Bioware always intended to have a new main character for DA3, per their own words.

Modifié par Silfren, 25 mai 2012 - 04:27 .

[Silfren]

wsandista wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

I believe there was supposed to be an expansion, but that was scrapped in favor of putting more resources into DA3.  Though I didn't see the specific dev quote about that, just other posters referring to it.

Here

Executive Producer Mike Darrah said it.

They were asking for a quote pertaining to my statement on having a different protagonist for every game being something that was decided long before DA2 came about, not about the canceled DLC.

Modifié par Silfren, 25 mai 2012 - 04:28 .

[HiroVoid]

Silfren wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Silfren wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Just about positive the original plan was to have Hawke as a continuous MC like Shepard, but that kind of changes when DA2's reception came in.

Not sure what you mean by "when DA2's reception came in," because it was well established by Bioware that a different protagonist was intended for each game before DA2 was even announced, and from what I was able to tell, was explicitly stated by Bioware (via Gaider) early in Origins.  Nothing related to DA2's "reception" had anything to do with it.  If it was the original plan, that original plan was changed at least a good year prior to DA2's announcement, if not even sooner.

If you could find the quote, that'd be nice though you're probably right.  I still stand by the fact that they seem to have not finished Hawke's story like they planned to whether they didn't release as much DLC as they hoped for or something else.

I don't have a quote at hand, and Google isn't helping, but I assure you, it is not a baseless rumor, but confirmed fact.  It's been common knowledge since at least 2010, when I first came across a referenced quote to Gaider concerning the issue after my first playthrough of Orgins.  So no, it isn't an idea that was scrapped due to DA2's poor reception.  

I'll keep looking for a source quote, but I'm sure someone else could have it ready to hand as well if you asked about, because it has indeed been common knowledge for several years.

I agree that as it is given to us, Hawke's story comes across as unfinished, but this is a separate issue that has no bearing on whether Hawke was intended for DA3. They were indeed working on an expansion for DA2, called Exalted March, that would have at least added to Hawke's story, that ended up being canceled, but again, finished or not, Bioware always intended to have a new main character for DA3, per their own words.

If it's too much trouble, there's really no need.  I'm pretty sure I remember something like that too.  I just find it strange to copy the ME formula, and then end it on a cliffhanger about Hawke and the Warden disappearing....only for it to never have any real relevance, and just be a crappy cliffhanger ending.  Still, I really hope DA3 doesn't do another cliffhanger ending.  I'm starting to get really tired of the DA universe adding in more mysteries while there are still plenty of other mysteries not answered yet.

[brushyourteeth]

HiroVoid wrote...

I just find it strange to copy the ME formula, and then end it on a cliffhanger about Hawke and the Warden disappearing....only for it to never have any real relevance, and just be a crappy cliffhanger ending.  Still, I really hope DA3 doesn't do another cliffhanger ending.  I'm starting to get really tired of the DA universe adding in more mysteries while there are still plenty of other mysteries not answered yet.

I agree with this. It'd be five levels of ridiculous to remark on their disappearances and how that's no coincidence in the closing dialogue of the game and then never come back to it in the next installment. The Warden and Hawke need to both be significant somehow, even if only in an indirect way.

[GodWood]

FlyinElk212 wrote...
Some of the most phenomenal scenes in Mass Effect 3 involved the Final Goodbye's portion, where Shepard walked around to each squadmate and had a touching moment with them before the final battle. It was the culmination of over 100 hours and 3 games worth of dedication. By the end, we felt like the squadmates really became our friends; or family. It genuinely hurt to say goodbye. These guys had stuck by our main character until the bitter end, and the relationships we built with them throughout the series was nothing short of heartwrenching.

Now, try to apply a similar logic to the Dragon Age universe. There will never be a scene like the one I detailed above if the main character keeps changing throughout the series.

There was. DA:O had one and it was brilliant.

Modifié par GodWood, 25 mai 2012 - 05:36 .

[wsandista]

GodWood wrote...

FlyinElk212 wrote...
Some of the most phenomenal scenes in Mass Effect 3 involved the Final Goodbye's portion, where Shepard walked around to each squadmate and had a touching moment with them before the final battle. It was the culmination of over 100 hours and 3 games worth of dedication. By the end, we felt like the squadmates really became our friends; or family. It genuinely hurt to say goodbye. These guys had stuck by our main character until the bitter end, and the relationships we built with them throughout the series was nothing short of heartwrenching.

Now, try to apply a similar logic to the Dragon Age universe. There will never be a scene like the one I detailed above if the main character keeps changing throughout the series.

There was. DA:O had one and it was brilliant and far better then ME3's.

ME3's pep talk before the final battle felt much less genuine than DA's conversations with your companions. Especially for those Wardens involved with a certain witch.

[Rabid Rooster]

The Warden sure would love him/her back, but Hawke, yawn, no thank you.

[GodWood]

wsandista wrote...
ME3's pep talk before the final battle felt much less genuine than DA's conversations with your companions. Especially for those Wardens involved with a certain witch.

Just thinking about Oghren's fairwell still makes me smile.

Which is weird because he wasn't even my favourite character.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

I tend to prefer consistent protagonists.

But I've mostly lost interest in DA so I'm neutral about all this.

If I hear from reliable sources that this new MC is great and the game itself is great sure I'll pick it up.

Till then I'm going to sit back and watch the fireworks.

[The Six Path of Pain]

I was disappointed when I heard that in DAII you were going to play some random character named Hawke.I was like where's my Warden!!!!....but i'm over it now l'm actually looking forward to hear more about this new character,as long as they're not Orlesion.The idea of having a main character with a french accent and having to listen to him/her for hours on end would be a real deterant for me anyway,also no seeker or pro chantry character,have him/her be neutral and let the player decide what he/she should believe in...But the idea of having one main character through out the whole series is appealing,as long as it was the Warden.Since The Warden came first and let's face it The Warden would have made a better Hero and protagonist.

[fchopin]

Hawke = no buy

[Allan Schumacher]

Huntress wrote...

I agree with you OP, but after seen what happen to Hawke and Shepard.. I don't know...

I get tired of players wanting depressing ends and killing the character that are worth keeping, the worst part is after they do that they try to indoctrinated you to see why their end is way better than your own...
Heck if there is nothing for this character to look for in the future why not kill them right after you create them?
Thats what a depressed person do, they finish themselves because there is nothing to look for.
in other note: I play games to win it and feel GOOD about it no the other way around.

I find this interesting as, for myself, games (especially RPG games) is more about experiencing a story.  Satisfying emotional engagement (of any kind) is what I seek from an RPG.  I typically do want to achieve my objectives (or at least some major ones), I don't see it as "not winning" if my character ends up dying or having something bad happen as a consequence for his actions throughout the game.  Vampire Bloodlines I thought did this quite well.  One of their endings gave me that sickly feeling because it was such a "let down" but I loved it for that.  If a game can illicit an emotional reaction out of me, then that makes it so much better.

Though I've learned lately, especially with the time I spent on the ME3 boards, that this isn't necessarily the same for a large group of gamers.  Especially given the attachment people get with their player characters.  I think it's a very interesting, and surprisingly difficult, situation to deal with.

The one thing I disagree with is the notion of whether or not there is anything for the character to look forward to, which is something that can only be ascertained once you know the story arc.  It's pure metagaming at this point since the player character can't know that he may be ultimately doomed by end game.  For myself though, the whole journey is what I appreciate the most.  If it has a potentially happy ending then yay, but if it's still a well done "downer" ending I like those just as well.  My two favourite RPGs (Fallout 1 and PST) have endings that are decidedly downer.

[Silfren]

HiroVoid wrote...

If it's too much trouble, there's really no need.  I'm pretty sure I remember something like that too.  I just find it strange to copy the ME formula, and then end it on a cliffhanger about Hawke and the Warden disappearing....only for it to never have any real relevance, and just be a crappy cliffhanger ending.  Still, I really hope DA3 doesn't do another cliffhanger ending.  I'm starting to get really tired of the DA universe adding in more mysteries while there are still plenty of other mysteries not answered yet.

I haven't played Mass Effect, but from what I understand, DA DIDN'T copy its formula.  Mass Effect was a single story with an overarching conflict, involving one man.  DA, on the other hand, has from the start been marketed as being about the world, each game showcasing one major conflict and the people directly affected by it.

Anyway, Hawke's disappearance was not a cliffhanger.  Her story ended on a on a clear enough note: regardless of who Hawke sided with, she brought the immediate conflict to a halt, and walked away from the Gallows.  How you play the ending may affect when she leaves and under what conditions, but leave she does. The end.

It was at that point that the story was over, no cliffhanger involved.  Varric's remarks about what came later aren't anything to do with a cliffhanger--that would have been if the game had paused automatically and thrown up a "To Be Continued" message in the middle of the boss fight in the end.

The Warden disappears also, according to Origins epilogues, regardless of whether you end the story with Origins, Awakening, or any of the later-in-chronology DLCs.  But I don't know of anyone complaining that her story ended as a cliffhanger.

[Silfren]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Huntress wrote...

I agree with you OP, but after seen what happen to Hawke and Shepard.. I don't know...

I get tired of players wanting depressing ends and killing the character that are worth keeping, the worst part is after they do that they try to indoctrinated you to see why their end is way better than your own...
Heck if there is nothing for this character to look for in the future why not kill them right after you create them?
Thats what a depressed person do, they finish themselves because there is nothing to look for.
in other note: I play games to win it and feel GOOD about it no the other way around.

I find this interesting as, for myself, games (especially RPG games) is more about experiencing a story.  Satisfying emotional engagement (of any kind) is what I seek from an RPG.  I typically do want to achieve my objectives (or at least some major ones), I don't see it as "not winning" if my character ends up dying or having something bad happen as a consequence for his actions throughout the game.  Vampire Bloodlines I thought did this quite well.  One of their endings gave me that sickly feeling because it was such a "let down" but I loved it for that.  If a game can illicit an emotional reaction out of me, then that makes it so much better.

Though I've learned lately, especially with the time I spent on the ME3 boards, that this isn't necessarily the same for a large group of gamers.  Especially given the attachment people get with their player characters.  I think it's a very interesting, and surprisingly difficult, situation to deal with.

The one thing I disagree with is the notion of whether or not there is anything for the character to look forward to, which is something that can only be ascertained once you know the story arc.  It's pure metagaming at this point since the player character can't know that he may be ultimately doomed by end game.  For myself though, the whole journey is what I appreciate the most.  If it has a potentially happy ending then yay, but if it's still a well done "downer" ending I like those just as well.  My two favourite RPGs (Fallout 1 and PST) have endings that are decidedly downer.

I agree with this, and it's why I have re-evaluated my general opinion of DA2.  Some aspects definitely were broken and need to be addressed for future installments, but overall the story was kick-ass.  A tragedy, a Heroine's Journey, rather than the traditional Hero's Journey, and one that requires more effort from players to fully appreciate.  I don't understand why people who play games solely to win, who are less interested in the story they are given between experience battles along the route to the final endgame boss, bother with games from Bioware.  It is a game, sure, but more accurately I think Bioware products are stories told through the vehicle of games. 

[wsandista]

GodWood wrote...

wsandista wrote...
ME3's pep talk before the final battle felt much less genuine than DA's conversations with your companions. Especially for those Wardens involved with a certain witch.

Just thinking about Oghren's fairwell still makes me smile.

Which is weird because he wasn't even my favourite character.

Funny, I can say the same thing about Sten, Shale, or Zevran.

Guess it is because DAO is such an amazing game with spectacular characters.

Modifié par wsandista, 26 mai 2012 - 03:13 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I find this interesting as, for myself, games (especially RPG games) is more about experiencing a story.  Satisfying emotional engagement (of any kind) is what I seek from an RPG.  I typically do want to achieve my objectives (or at least some major ones), I don't see it as "not winning" if my character ends up dying or having something bad happen as a consequence for his actions throughout the game.  Vampire Bloodlines I thought did this quite well.  One of their endings gave me that sickly feeling because it was such a "let down" but I loved it for that.  If a game can illicit an emotional reaction out of me, then that makes it so much better.

Though I've learned lately, especially with the time I spent on the ME3 boards, that this isn't necessarily the same for a large group of gamers.  Especially given the attachment people get with their player characters.  I think it's a very interesting, and surprisingly difficult, situation to deal with.

The one thing I disagree with is the notion of whether or not there is anything for the character to look forward to, which is something that can only be ascertained once you know the story arc.  It's pure metagaming at this point since the player character can't know that he may be ultimately doomed by end game.  For myself though, the whole journey is what I appreciate the most.  If it has a potentially happy ending then yay, but if it's still a well done "downer" ending I like those just as well.  My two favourite RPGs (Fallout 1 and PST) have endings that are decidedly downer.

To be fair though, Vampire Bloodlines, Fallout 1 and PST all had the option of getting good endings as well. 

I think a "downer" ending is acceptable... if it is one of many. If Mass Effect 3 really did have the 16 truly different endings (as opposed to the 1 with different colors), then I think many people would be totally fine with a downer ending as a possibility, if it was accompanied by a truly great ending, if the character so decided and/or worked for it. The problem many gamers have at this point is that it seems more and more games are embracing the "downer" ending as the only ending option, which is truly unsatisfying.

Struggling for hours upon hours to accomplish your goals only to see everything you did result in nothing but loss and heartache is arguably just as bad as experiencing that loss in real life. That's the immersive power of video games. I've been made sad or even a little angry after reading book series or movies where the ending turns out pretty dark or unfulfilling, but I never felt as if the time I put in enjoying those books or movies was wasted or a complete effort in futility. 

With video games, though, it is very different. The amount of effort I put in, working to crafting the story the way I most wanted it, working at accomplishing goals as successfully (or even purposefully NON-successful) as I saw fit, trying my best to keep my character alive... these are all things that don't just make you feel emotion if things don't end well, but they devalue all the effort you put in. Reading a book or watching a movie takes minimal effort, just attention. A video game's neccesity of requiring the player to actually work makes the fact that if a game offers no satisfying conclusion, only loss and heartache no matter how hard the player tries, then it becomes a painful and wasteful experience. 

Even though I loved the 200+ hours I spent on ME 1, 2 and 3, I felt that none of it was worthwhile after finding out all my hard work and effort had not only zero affect on the ending, but that things will still end marginally bad to flat out disasterous regardless. If, however, the endings were truly varied and offered me a myriad of outcomes based on my decisions and how hard I tried over the course of the three games, I would have likely picked up ME1 as soon as I was done and started all over again. 

This is not only taking advantage of being one of the first video game series ever to take so many choices over the course of games and import them in, but it would also be a financial incentive, as sales of the first two games could have been through the roof if the "happily ever after" ending could only be achieved through a concerted effort over the course of all three games. People who just bought ME 3, or started on ME2 would then be very compelled to go out and buy the first games in the trilogy. Not that everything should tie back to money, but the current ending is not successful from a story-telling point of view, as it lead to only confusion, misinterpretation and dissatisfaction, but it also failed fto capitalize on this from a money-making point of view. Multiple endings, one of which would be a happliy-ever-after ending, could have done both.



On a side note, its good to see you back on the forums Allen! We hadn't seen you in a while and, with the recent departure of Stanley Woo from Bioware, some of us had begun fearing the worst...

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 26 mai 2012 - 04:13 .

[berelinde]

Fast Jimmy, I do not always agree with you, but here, I do.

A tragic end works if it is one possible end of several, but more importantly, that ending has to mean something. There has to be a larger purpose beyond "It just worked out that way." classic example: The Warden has to make the ultimate sacrifice to stop the Blight. Tragic ending? Check. Voluntary? Check. Meaningful? Check. Epic? Check. That's a tragic ending done right. The protagonist railroaded into going out with a whimper? Not even remotely satisfying.

[Iakus]

 I actually approve of having a different protagonist for each game.  It would give us more of a clean slate for each game.  Consequences from previous games don't need to be felt as strongly if the next game in the series is about a different person in a different country.  I, for one, found the whole imported choices thing in the Mass Effect series was somewhat...lacking... New protagonists each game will make it far easier to make these games more into self contained stories.  

Now I'm not opposed to Hawke possibly playing a part in DA3, there are a few loose yets yet to the story there.  But as the main character?  No thanks.  As far as I'm concerned, both Hawke and the Warden's stories are done.  I wnat to see who's next.

Edit.  And while I'm a fan of Earn your Happy Ending that does include the premise that there is a happy ending to earn.  that's another failure of Mass Effect: 

Modifié par iakus, 26 mai 2012 - 05:03 .