471 réponses à ce sujet

[Urzon]

History isn't made by one people.

While it would be nice to play as the Warden again, we can't expect him/her to stick around for decades/centuries defending Thedas against every bad guy and dark force. As much as i love my Warden, I already excepted he won't live to the end of the story that is Dragon Age. I gave him the best possibly ending (for me at least) as i could, and I pray that his actions somehow influenced the world. That in turn, would make and shape another Hero i'll grow to love just as much.

That's all we can hope for.

Modifié par Urzon, 26 mai 2012 - 07:22 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
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.

First, I think it's important to qualify that I don't feel the ME3 endings are as bleak as many others do.  This was before the DLC was planned too.  Without getting into spoilers, I do see the endings as bittersweet where, at the very least MY Shepard, accomplished what he wanted to do.  From that standpoint, I don't see the endings to ME3 as being significantly more "downer" than PST's or Fallouts (games which I would disagree have "good endings."  This is probably mostly a semantic argument though).

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.

I'll agree that a video game is more engaging for the reasons you describe.  Though I guess we'll just have to disagree for whether or not it's a painful and wasteful experience.  Different strokes for different folks.  IMO it's only wasteful if, when I reach the end of my playing, I considered the time spent in it to be irrelevant and uninteresting.

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.

It's hard to predict what effect it would have had on sales, and at this point it's something we'll just never know.

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...

If it helps, Mr. Woo moved on because he sought other things in life and it was amicable.  I've just been busy with work and real life

[Drasanil]

 @OP: No. I despised Hawke and I am quite frankly glad it will be gone with the next DA (I only hope they kill it rather horrifically at the start of DA3, a teaser of Hawke's horrible death would probably get me to pre-order the game regardless of other considerations). 

I hope Bioware returns to the "chose your own hero" model from DAO. Yes there may not be the same continuity, but at least I will get to pick the character I want to play, as opposed to some pablumy Shepard Clone. Which quite frankly appeared to be born out of lazy design and cost-cutting measures more than anything else. 

Good riddance to Hawke,  may it forever be consigned to the deepest darkest pits of forgetfulness known to man 

Modifié par Drasanil, 26 mai 2012 - 08:28 .

[Dave of Canada]

Huntress wrote...

in other note: I play games to win it and feel GOOD about it no the other way around.

There's feel-good games like that, not all of them have to be feel-good and pat you on the back to tell you that you've done a good job.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 26 mai 2012 - 08:35 .

[Wulfram]

The thing about Hawke was that they were introduced to us as "the one person who could help you put it back together." Which rather created the expectation that they'd get the chance to do this.

Without it, their story does feel like a bit shaggy dog.

[nightcobra]

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 that sad endings can be well done but i'm mostly in the camp that in a choice driven game, there should also be a myriad of choices in ending from bleak to happy depending on what your choices were throughout the game, the journey is an important part of the experience but the destination is ultimately the payoff of said journey hence why i believe the destination can't be discarded as unimportant compared to the journey. 

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 26 mai 2012 - 10:39 .

[Nadia]

I like the idea of different protagonist for each game for many reasons, but I think it created this problem of Warden's and Hawke's dissapearance. I hope there will be a nice explanation for this in DA3 because it feels...like developers had no clue how to explain in the game that these characters are not participating in ' making the world a better place' anymore.
Well, if no one will come up with a good explanation then just leaving it this way might be fine with me too, sort of ))

[AkiKishi]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
If I understand correctly what you wrote, you say that Hawke did not fullfill the expectations that were created regarding his influence on the story.

This I can agree on. In the end Hawke was just there and contributed in the escalation of the mage/war conflict. It is a story told from Hawke's experiences/adventures s/he endured in a 10 years period.

No influence from Hawke's side to have the possibility to prevent the war in the game.

Sticking a dagger between Anders ribs would have delayed things.

[Sealy]

I love DA's characters. That being said although I loved my Hawkes I never felt as attatched to them as to my Wardens. I mean the Wardens truly struggle and fight to shape the world before them, deciding fates left, right and center, and then ultimately deciding the fate of Thedas. Hawke really felt more like a very, very important piece of a story, not someone shaping a story. He was very caught up in events beyond his control. So I actually would like to see Hawke again because I feel like he can be put to better use... and not at all because I want to drag Fenris into DA3... but if not a continuation of Hawke then I hope we don't get anything remotely Hawke-esque since I feel that DA3 will need someone like the Warden. Plus my need for races overrides my need for Hawke closure. I want my elves back!

[FaeQueenCory]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

If the narrative within the Dragon Age universe is meant to span across several decades (which is possible but not certain), it makes a lot of sense to not have a single common protagonist throughout the games.

As for pathos, I know quite a few people who felt that the pre-Archdemon battle scene, in which the Warden speaks to each companion, carried a considerable amount of weight and emotion. I know quite a few people who felt that there were several points within DA2 that were equally moving.

Emotional involvement with characters, and/or storyline, is probably always going to be subjective. Part of that comes from what people want out of their RPG, and who or what within that game resonates with them on a personal level.

While I realize that you are sharing your viewpoint OP, I don't know that it's fair to say there will "never" be X, Y, or Z within the DA games. Again, it's all based on the individual. I can say with certainty that the games thus far have drawn me in, and have made me feel an emotional connection to the story and the characters.

whykikyouwhy said it perfectly.

But I would also like to add that Dragon Age isn't so much about a single character doing stuff... but it is about TheDAS, the setting, and how it evolves and changes... and it's kinda about the machinations of Flemeth too...

Another game series that changes the main character every game is the Shin Megami Tensei series.
SPOILERS, so ignore the rest if you want the suprise of these 30 year old games.
In SMT, you were just some random kid... who happened to be Adam reincarnated...
Then in SMTII you play as Aleph... The "man"made Messiah...
And in SMTIII:Nocturne, you play as a random kid who escapes the end of the universe.... who then get's chosen by Lucifer to be his champion...

Like in DA, SMT is about the big picture... not the protagonist and his/her adventures.

[robertthebard]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

The thing about Hawke was that they were introduced to us as "the one person who could help you put it back together." Which rather created the expectation that they'd get the chance to do this.

Without it, their story does feel like a bit shaggy dog.

If I understand correctly what you wrote, you say that Hawke did not fullfill the expectations that were created regarding his influence on the story.

This I can agree on. In the end Hawke was just there and contributed in the escalation of the mage/war conflict. It is a story told from Hawke's experiences/adventures s/he endured in a 10 years period.

No influence from Hawke's side to have the possibility to prevent the war in the game.

The war is the story.  So if you could prevent it, you'd prevent the need for the story.  Tension between the Chantry and the Circle can be felt in Origins, this is the story of what happens when that tension finally boils over.  All forms of government eventually collapse, and while the Chantry is supposed to govern the mages, they have their fingers everywhere.  The Chantry cry of Power corrupts is fitting, since it has also corrupted them, since absolute power corrupts absolutely, and they have had absolute power over the mages for centuries.

[LobselVith8]

Huntress wrote...

in other note: I play games to win it and feel GOOD about it no the other way around.

I guess almost every mage being insane and stupid, and most templars being sadists, didn't appeal to you and make you feel good? I prefer to deal with three-dimensional characters, not a plethora of caricatures.

[Jerrybnsn]

It looks like this will be the last DA game Bioware will be able to get out before the new generation of consols arrive in 2015, so Bioware needs to wrap everything up in "3" if they plan on having decision making import. Because after "3", they'll be no more importing to a DA4. So Hawk's story, the Warden's story, Morrigan, Flemeth and the rest, need closure in this next game.

[mr_luga]

I really like how the character changes around honestly, it gives you diffrent perspective of the world from diffrent people, and I really dont like juggling my saves around as much as I did with Mass effect >.<

[Sajji]

I would have loved Reaper domination and victory. Too bad an end didn't have the final slaughter of all organic life, shown as cattle leading to the slaughter, and mutilation.

[Khayness]

The Foundation trillogy has no consistent protagonist, still it managed to be good.

As much as I'd love playing as The Warden or Hawke again (or both!), I think the concept of "this franchise is about Thedas" can work without having the same main character in games.

[Direwolf0294]

I'd much prefer to play as Hawke in DA3 then some random character I've never heard of before. If they do make us play an entirely new character though, which is what they'll most likely do, then I really hope they set it up so that in DA4 (if they make a DA4) you're playing as that character once again. With video games whose story spans multiple games I find it hard to get invested with the story, characters and world if I'm going to be playing a new protagonist every game.

I'm trying to view the DA games like A Song of Ice and Fire. A story with multiple important characters and all that. The problem with DA though is that the actions of one protagonist don't really feel like they have any major impact on another protagonist. My Warden's actions in DA:O didn't really feel like they had any effect on the story of my Orlesian Warden in Awakening and neither of my Warden's actions felt like they had much of an impact on Hawke or her story in DA2 aside from a few brief cameos and some characters getting mentioned once or twice. Also, once the game's done you don't get to go back to that protagonist and see their story continue to unfold at a later date. It's very unlikely there will be a game released where I play as my Orlesian Warden and get to see what they've been doing since Awakening. It's unlikely I'll get to play as Hawke again and see how her story unholded once DA2 had finished. It's like once the game's finished the main character gets banished from the world, never to be seen or heard from again. I mean I guess BioWare could give Hawke or the Warden a cameo but it's not going to feel very satisfying because you still won't completely learn what they've been up to and also because you won't have control over what they say or how they respond to something.

[Sabriana]

I don't want the Warden back, mine are done, they were done at the end of DAO. I don't own DLC, because I don't buy DLC on principle. I don't own Awakenings, because I don't like it. So yes, my Wardens are done, all 16 of them. Their story is over, and I'm satisfied.

I don't know where DA2 Leliana gets the "disappeared, just like the Warden" from. None of my Wardens disappeared. A few are dead, but they volunteered for that. It was right for them. But none simply up and disappeared. But eh, maybe she meant it metaphorically. Maybe she deliberately lied. Maybe she was drunk. Whatever.

The Hawke I got to play with is also done. She left to go somewhere with Fenris. I hope she's happy, wherever she is, as long as she doesn't try to come back. I do not like her at all, and I never want to see her again. So please, don't bring her back. I couldn't even bring myself to play a 2nd time because of her. (Please note that the above paragraph contains only my personal opinion, I speak for no one else)

Dragon Age is the story about the Dragon Age, and its heroes. Thedas is big enough for many heroic deeds of its women and men. I like not having the same protag. I want a new character that is *my* character. Go away predetermined pixel-doll Hawke. No more ME juice in my Dragon Age, please. There's far too much in it (imo, personal viewpoint, etc.) already.

[nightscrawl]

Sejborg wrote...

It could be used as some background banter gossip between some npc's at a market or in a bar. 


Guy 1: Did you hear about the Champion of Kirkwall?

Guy 2: What about it?

Guy 1: This Hawke person wandered off a cliff and died!

Guy 2: Wow. What a moron.

Guy 3: That's not true. The Champion went sailing and drowned in some huge waves!

Guy 2: Speaking of drowning... Let's go to the tavern!

There could be alot of funny death stories around the world. 

Rumors of Hawke's death have been greatly exaggerated...

While I'm not a fan of something as huge as death of one of my characters being taken out of my hands, this is pretty funny. XD

Modifié par nightscrawl, 27 mai 2012 - 09:15 .

[Homebound]

personally i think itd be better to have a 5years later timegap between da2 and da3 then start over so things wont be so convoluted, Hawke be damned.

[Lord Gremlin]

Hm, to me Hawke's been established as an idiotic and pathetic person - although that is due to poor design of DA2. I bet getting rid of this character is a priority if they want to sell any copies of DA3.