39 réponses à ce sujet

[Vormaerin]

To be honest, I don't think we know enough about the Seekers to know if they are too restrictive.

The Lord Seeker in Asunder was a cynical bastard who didn't give a fig for the Chantry or the Divine and ultimately told her to ****** off. The High Seeker in Dawn of the Seeker was the sort of fellow who trusted his agents absolutely, even when they seemed to be disobeying, and was intensely loyal to the Divine.

The Lord Seeker in Asunder was head of the templars. The High Seeker in DotS was a parallel figure to the Templar's top commander.

So, really, we don't know jack about what being a seeker would mean.

[berelinde]

Yeah, as much as I like Seeker/Templar/pro-Chantry companions, I'd never buy the game if I knew that I would be forced to play a pro-Chantry character. No matter what companions they included or who the LIs were. If it were given as an option, I would choose it sometimes, but I don't like getting locked into a complete set of beliefs as part of the protagonist's backstory. I would consider it akin to saying "You will play DA:O with the mage Origin and you will *always* keep Jowan's secret for him." Yes, most of the time, I do keep Jowan's secret, but every once in a while, I play a mage who betrays Jowan to the First Enchanter. And every once in a while, I play a character who isn't a mage. Would DA:O have been as popular if it imposed a set of beliefs and values on every character?

[The Elder King]

Androme wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Androme wrote...

Yep, day one buy indeed. BioWare just needs to realise how much love there is for the older characters in the series, instead of insisting on ''new protagonist'' all the goddamn time.

So you'll buy the game at day one if it'll be more or less the same of DA2, with the Warden as the PC?

I don't care much for gameplay mechanics, so yes. The most important thing in an RPG game is the story, everything else is second, or so it used to be.

I agree, story is the most important thing in a RPG to me. I was referring to DA2 in general, both story and gameplay.

[Androme]

hhh89 wrote...

Androme wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Androme wrote...

Yep, day one buy indeed. BioWare just needs to realise how much love there is for the older characters in the series, instead of insisting on ''new protagonist'' all the goddamn time.

So you'll buy the game at day one if it'll be more or less the same of DA2, with the Warden as the PC?

I don't care much for gameplay mechanics, so yes. The most important thing in an RPG game is the story, everything else is second, or so it used to be.

I agree, story is the most important thing in a RPG to me. I was referring to DA2 in general, both story and gameplay.

Well, I can't really know how the game will be if I'm doing a day one buy now am I , what we could know before buying the game however, is involved characters and certain aspects of the game, obviously if I felt suspicious, I would perhaps, PERHAPS, wait a day or two before buying the game.

[Jerrybnsn]

hhh89 wrote...

Androme wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Androme wrote...

Yep, day one buy indeed. BioWare just needs to realise how much love there is for the older characters in the series, instead of insisting on ''new protagonist'' all the goddamn time.

So you'll buy the game at day one if it'll be more or less the same of DA2, with the Warden as the PC?

I don't care much for gameplay mechanics, so yes. The most important thing in an RPG game is the story, everything else is second, or so it used to be.

I agree, story is the most important thing in a RPG to me. I was referring to DA2 in general, both story and gameplay.

I love RPGs.  But why not have a great story in an RPG, instead of saying let's just see a good story.  DA3 will fail worse than DA2 if they just want to make a cinematic game like L.A. Noir.

[Vormaerin]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I love RPGs.  But why not have a great story in an RPG, instead of saying let's just see a good story.  DA3 will fail worse than DA2 if they just want to make a cinematic game like L.A. Noir.

To be honest, I have no idea what you are talking about.   I'm assuming you are trying to make some sort of reductio ad absurdum argument that if they make a defined protagonist, they'll stop giving you story choices and you'll be watching a movie?

I might as well respond by saying   "if they put your "RPG" elements first, they'll just give us a really cool character creator and  white screen to imagine our awesome adventures."

Neither assertion makes any sense.

The nature of gameplay is what makes something an RPG or not, not the nature of character creation.   Is the story and gameplay advanced and developed as much by dialogue and player decisions as it is by action?  Then its an RPG.  And that is true whether you are told  "you are Geralt of Rivia" or you are just told  "You are someone who just stepped off the boat onto the isle of adventure for some reason."

[deuce985]

No thanks. A Seeker would seem to be heavily favored to Chantry/Templar. I don't think that's the right approach for a main character.

[Wulfram]

A seeker would be pretty restrictive. Though it could work as a background, maybe.

Someone recruited by Cassandra/Leliana to try to fix the Mage/Templar situation might work though. She's clearly prepared to cooperate with fairly strongly pro-mage characters, because she's after Hawke even if they sided consistently with the mages.

[Blacklash93]

BobSmith101 wrote...

There was a big thread about this a couple of months back .Seemed a lot of people objected to having to play a quasi religious character.

They object to backrounds as defined at that and the defined PC personality could accompany it. Religion has nothing to do with it.

[Wulfram]

Blacklash93 wrote...

They object to backrounds as defined at that and the defined PC personality could accompany it. Religion has nothing to do with it.

I think religion has something to do with it, for some people.  Together with people being not too keen on the Chantry for in-universe reasons, of course.

Being a Seeker isn't any more defining than being an Alliance Commander and a SpecTRe.  It's not really any more defining than being Warden-Commander, either.

[deuce985]

Blacklash93 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

There was a big thread about this a couple of months back .Seemed a lot of people objected to having to play a quasi religious character.

They object to backrounds as defined at that and the defined PC personality could accompany it. Religion has nothing to do with it.

Definitely. If we could choose our background, then this isn't a issue. The Seekers still have a lot of mystery that surrounds them.

[Vormaerin]

deuce985 wrote...

No thanks. A Seeker would seem to be heavily favored to Chantry/Templar. I don't think that's the right approach for a main character.

Except that the Templars aren't part of the Chantry anymore.  They got mad because the Divine was in favor of reform of the Circles.   And the Seekers, at least some of them, are still working for the Divine.   In the Dawn of the Seeker movie, the Seekers and the Templars were rivals.

It was different in the book,  but Cassandra sounds like she's working for the Divine in DA2 and that's after the Templars told the Divine to take a flying leap with the rest of the Chantry.   So Cassandra could be a Seeker who didn't rebel with the rest of the Templars or the Seekers could be a separate organization.   Not enough information.

[R2s Muse]

Vormaerin wrote...

deuce985 wrote...

No thanks. A Seeker would seem to be heavily favored to Chantry/Templar. I don't think that's the right approach for a main character.

Except that the Templars aren't part of the Chantry anymore.  They got mad because the Divine was in favor of reform of the Circles.   And the Seekers, at least some of them, are still working for the Divine.   In the Dawn of the Seeker movie, the Seekers and the Templars were rivals.

It was different in the book,  but Cassandra sounds like she's working for the Divine in DA2 and that's after the Templars told the Divine to take a flying leap with the rest of the Chantry.   So Cassandra could be a Seeker who didn't rebel with the rest of the Templars or the Seekers could be a separate organization.   Not enough information.

There's a little more information on that from DG, allthough IMO still not enough. The Seekers are separate, but above. So, they would have the authority to "divorce" both the templars and the Seekers from the Chantry. That said, still unclear how many of either would remain loyal to the Chantry. That's part of why I think being a Seeker would be so interesting. You could probably be either pro or con the Chantry in a post-DA2 world.

[brushyourteeth]

R2s Muse wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

deuce985 wrote...

No thanks. A Seeker would seem to be heavily favored to Chantry/Templar. I don't think that's the right approach for a main character.

Except that the Templars aren't part of the Chantry anymore.  They got mad because the Divine was in favor of reform of the Circles.   And the Seekers, at least some of them, are still working for the Divine.   In the Dawn of the Seeker movie, the Seekers and the Templars were rivals.

It was different in the book,  but Cassandra sounds like she's working for the Divine in DA2 and that's after the Templars told the Divine to take a flying leap with the rest of the Chantry.   So Cassandra could be a Seeker who didn't rebel with the rest of the Templars or the Seekers could be a separate organization.   Not enough information.

There's a little more information on that from DG, allthough IMO still not enough. The Seekers are separate, but above. So, they would have the authority to "divorce" both the templars and the Seekers from the Chantry. That said, still unclear how many of either would remain loyal to the Chantry. That's part of why I think being a Seeker would be so interesting. You could probably be either pro or con the Chantry in a post-DA2 world.

And thus, a double-agent! Yes!

Unfortunately, the vibe I've gotten from some people is that the idea of playing a character that even once had any kind of religious affiliation (even fictional) is so repugnant that it would ruin the game.

[ames4u]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I just hope whatever character I'm suppose to play, I don't get asked "Who will you side with?" because I know I'll just have to kill everybody anyway.

No truer words have ever been spoken! Bless you!!

To be honest, I have this strange premonition that no matter what comes from DA3,
I will most likely water-board everyone in the game because I will be that p*ssed off
by their behaviour or actions. DA2 pretty much constructed the hanging bar for that.