57 réponses à ce sujet

[ashwind]

If DA3 is successful (critically and commercially) - I bet there will be a DA4 and beyond. No campaign is needed.

If DA3 is a flop... err... any amount of Campaign may not be enough for it to continue.

[WotanAnubis]

ashwind wrote...

If DA3 is a flop... err... any amount of Campaign may not be enough for it to continue.

Well, look on the bright side.

Maybe they'll give Jade Empire another go. Or come up with some new, exciting universe that doesn't have any baggage from previous games.

[ashwind]

WotanAnubis wrote...

ashwind wrote...

If DA3 is a flop... err... any amount of Campaign may not be enough for it to continue.

Well, look on the bright side.

Maybe they'll give Jade Empire another go. Or come up with some new, exciting universe that doesn't have any baggage from previous games.

 and read all the lore and geography from start!!! -cringe-

Modifié par ashwind, 28 juin 2012 - 04:32 .

[cJohnOne]

If DA3 flops maybe Obsidian will take over DragonAge. That would be fun. Yes?

[Realmzmaster]

cJohnOne wrote...

If DA3 flops maybe Obsidian will take over DragonAge. That would be fun. Yes?

Not unless EA decides to sell it to them. Obsidian has it own problems to solve after having to lay off 20-30 of its staff because Fallout:New Vegas did not reach a 85+ rating on MetaCritic. Obsidian agreement with Bethesada stated that Obsidian would only get royalities from Fallout New Vegas if the MetaCritic score reached 85+. The score was 84 so no royalities.

www.joystiq.com/2012/03/15/obsidian-missed-fallout-new-vegas-metacritic-bonus-by-one-point/

[Its_a_Catdemon]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I wanted DA2 to have a sub-title just like I want the next DA to have a sub-title. I think sub-titles better suit DA games than numbers. I mean each game is about a different protagonist. Dragon Age: Origins sounds awesome. Dragon Age 2 just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Everytime I play Dragon Age: Origins, I shout "Dragon Age: Origins!" as the game comes on and starts that awesome sexy loading screen. When I played Dragon Age 2, I never shouted the title out.

The next Dragon Age game needs to have an awesome sexy sub-title.

As far as I know, there has been evidence found that DA2 was originally intended to be called Dragon Age: Exodus. I would also have prefered the series continued purely with subtitles instead of numbers, even if they progress in such an order. It would probably have been met with different expectations easily from something as simple as the name change, don't know why they couldn't go for it. Even Yahtzee from Zero Puntuation mocked the lack of a subtitle in his review of DA2. I'd prefer one for Dragon Age 3 as well, although I guess we're stuck with the numbers because it would seem awkward to remove them now.

Modifié par Its_a_Catdemon, 28 juin 2012 - 06:47 .

[Silfren]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And... I say let's kill the import flags now! Why wait until the next console generation?

The only way to have choice matter is to stop trying to carry it over from game to game. Give the player a truly satisfying outcome to each of their choices, in game and in the ending, and you will make a great game. Forcing work arounds and hand-me-down, lip service scenes to appease choices made in previous games will extend the longevity and appeal of the series far beyond the artificial "trilogy" limit so many keep naturally assuming.

Er.  First you say that choices will only matter if you STOP carrying them over from one game to another and to have them matter within the game they're made in.  But then you say that the current setup of forced work arounds and lip service scenes-as-fan-appeasement WILL extent the appeal of DA beyond the limit people assume.  

Those two statements seem rather contradictory, no?  The second statement endorses the save import feature since you say it extends the lifetime and appeal of the series beyond three games, but I'm not sure that's what you set out to mean..

[Eternal Phoenix]

cJohnOne wrote...

If DA3 flops maybe Obsidian will take over DragonAge. That would be fun. Yes?

Unless you like bugs and poor gameplay mechanics.

Obsidian raped the Neverwinter Nights series, so no.

I hear they did the same to KOTOR.

There's a reason why Obsidian gets sloppy seconds.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 28 juin 2012 - 07:34 .

[Silfren]

Nizaris1 wrote...

What is there for DA3?
1. Darkspawn, the Blight and Archdemon concluded in DA:O and DA:A
2. Mage-Templar conflict concluded in DA2

There is nothing for DA3, it can't be a trilogy. Unless...

1. Archedemon return and create new Blight
2. Grey Wardens and mages are needed for a new Blight

Other way it will be...

1. Qunari war
2. Dalish-human conflict
3. Dwarf-human conflict
4. Orlais-Ferelden war
5. Tevinter Imperium rise again

In above case, HUMAN HERO must end all the conflicts

Of course there is something for DA3--trying to claim that there isn't is ridiculous in the extreme.  It's pretty well established that DA3 will deal with the mage/templar conflict at the very least, though how and when (and possiby where) remain to be seen, and likely a Qunari conflict as well.  The question of whether the protagonist can only be a human is a separate issue--and it isn't true, either, that it would HAVE to be a human.  But again, that's a different issue from whether there is "something" for DA3.

The Archdemon and Blight story has been done.  Since DA isn't ABOUT the Blights, but about the world of Thedas, which happens to include darkspawn and Blights, there's no reason to think that this is what any future DA game should be about.  Why would anyone want to re-play a literal clone of Origins all over again? 

[Uccio]

I support many many many more Dragon Age games.

[AkiKishi]

Silfren wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

What is there for DA3?
1. Darkspawn, the Blight and Archdemon concluded in DA:O and DA:A
2. Mage-Templar conflict concluded in DA2

There is nothing for DA3, it can't be a trilogy. Unless...

1. Archedemon return and create new Blight
2. Grey Wardens and mages are needed for a new Blight

Other way it will be...

1. Qunari war
2. Dalish-human conflict
3. Dwarf-human conflict
4. Orlais-Ferelden war
5. Tevinter Imperium rise again

In above case, HUMAN HERO must end all the conflicts

Of course there is something for DA3--trying to claim that there isn't is ridiculous in the extreme.  It's pretty well established that DA3 will deal with the mage/templar conflict at the very least, though how and when (and possiby where) remain to be seen, and likely a Qunari conflict as well.  The question of whether the protagonist can only be a human is a separate issue--and it isn't true, either, that it would HAVE to be a human.  But again, that's a different issue from whether there is "something" for DA3.

The Archdemon and Blight story has been done.  Since DA isn't ABOUT the Blights, but about the world of Thedas, which happens to include darkspawn and Blights, there's no reason to think that this is what any future DA game should be about.  Why would anyone want to re-play a literal clone of Origins all over again? 

They already played their best hand with the Warden/Blight scenerio.

The only thing even close to that would be the OBG. If it's just going to be a series of tedium like DA2, then it's better dropped anyway.

[Silfren]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Dragon Age isn't meant to be a trilogy. It'll span various iterations.

Really, I do have to wonder why many people assume such. Bioware has never made any comments that would even hint at such a thing, so it is somewhat perplexing to me that people see the DA series as being only a trilogy.

Not trying to be rude or anything. But the OP isn't the first person to assume such a thing, and that's why I'm curious.

Three tends to be a very significant number in stories, particularly fantasy. I think people are just assuming it will be a trilogy because so many things are trilogies. They look at Dragon Age as a single, continuous plotline, and don't understand that it's more an "abridged history" of Thedas, where we get to play the important parts.

I call that a failure of imagination, then.  Just because so many stories ARE trilogies doesn't mean that one should expect that all stories WILL be.  And it's worth pointing out that many current fantasy stories are breaking that mold, anyway.  If one looks at fantasy literature, which I suspect is where the idea ultimately stems from, just look at GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire, now up to five books, with (last I read) seven planned.  And of course Jordan's Wheel of Time...what, 14 books long now?  The last several fantasies I read were all longer than three titles.  One of them is slated to be a ten book series.  

If one looks at fantasy movies, well, movies in particular are famous lately for the three-movie setup.  I'm not sure whether to blame Jackson's Lord of the Rings for this, or Lucas's Star Wars.  But even here, it's not a given.  A certain Pirate movie has a 5th title in the works, for one example.

If you look at fantasy games...well.  Elder Scrolls now has five games, and Final Fantasy has what, 12 or 13?

So yeah, fantasy in general does tend to use the trilogy format (to an extent, because a lot of people have no idea what a trilogy actually is--there's a bit more to it than just having 3 titles within a series), but most media seems to be doing a good job of breaking out of that mold.  And people shouldn't just assume something and run with it anyhoo, because people haven't just been asking or wondering if DA will be a trilogy, but defaulting to the assumption that it WILL be...without any reason to think that at all.  Some of us find that a bit annoying given that Bioware has been refuting this notion for more than two years.

[Silfren]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

What is there for DA3?
1. Darkspawn, the Blight and Archdemon concluded in DA:O and DA:A
2. Mage-Templar conflict concluded in DA2

There is nothing for DA3, it can't be a trilogy. Unless...

1. Archedemon return and create new Blight
2. Grey Wardens and mages are needed for a new Blight

Other way it will be...

1. Qunari war
2. Dalish-human conflict
3. Dwarf-human conflict
4. Orlais-Ferelden war
5. Tevinter Imperium rise again

In above case, HUMAN HERO must end all the conflicts

Of course there is something for DA3--trying to claim that there isn't is ridiculous in the extreme.  It's pretty well established that DA3 will deal with the mage/templar conflict at the very least, though how and when (and possiby where) remain to be seen, and likely a Qunari conflict as well.  The question of whether the protagonist can only be a human is a separate issue--and it isn't true, either, that it would HAVE to be a human.  But again, that's a different issue from whether there is "something" for DA3.

The Archdemon and Blight story has been done.  Since DA isn't ABOUT the Blights, but about the world of Thedas, which happens to include darkspawn and Blights, there's no reason to think that this is what any future DA game should be about.  Why would anyone want to re-play a literal clone of Origins all over again? 

They already played their best hand with the Warden/Blight scenerio.

The only thing even close to that would be the OBG. If it's just going to be a series of tedium like DA2, then it's better dropped anyway.

Speak for yourself.  Some of us, even as we acknowledge that DA2 had many problems, actually LIKED it, and especially liked that Bioware tried a different kind of narrative from the much over-used Hero's Journey.  

[devSin]

I was hoping to not have to say to read Asunder (not because you shouldn't, but because people complain that they miss out unless they get ancillary products), but basically, read Asunder.

All of the mage circles have now rebelled against the Chantry. There are no more circles that are under Templar authority.

I wouldn't necessarily say it is a "war", but the conflict between mages and the Chantry now encompasses most of Thedas.

This is already implied in the interrogation of Varric (which is happening one year after the end of the events in DA2 IIRC), and Asunder spells out exactly how it happens.

Modifié par devSin, 28 juin 2012 - 08:46 .

[Silfren]

Nizaris1 wrote...

It doesn't mean what Varric say is true, Cassandra just say "Not all of us desire war", in fact it is a denial of what Varric says.

Example, someone say "You have lost all your money", i reply "Not all of us are broke"

How come a simple act of Anders, inspire a big war? There is no internet in Thedas, so peoples just hearing gossips, and gossips is not strong enough to start a war. No one see a video of a Chantry blown up as everyone see WTC blown up.

let say Ferelden Circle mage hear about Kirkwall, they just rebel agaist Templars there? Don't they learned about Uldred already? Wayne is the First Enchanter and she is pro-Templar/Chantry, so she just rebel because hearing about Kirkwall?

Eh, no.  Varric points out that the world is on the brink of war.  Cassandra says that "Not all of us desire war."  It is not a denial of what he says at all.  

This: "Example, someone say "You have lost all your money", i reply "Not all of us are broke" " is a very poor attempt at a comparison to the dialogue between Varric and Cassandra.  NOWHERE does Cassandra deny that the world is about to go to war.  Her saying that not everyone desires war is her way of pointing out that she wants to stop the conflict before war breaks out, it isn't denying anything about the fact that war is on the verge of happening regardless of how those people feel.

An internet is not required for the event of one city to become worldwide news.  It takes longer, true, and it REALLY takes longer without the convenience of gas-powered transport, but news spreads around the world nevertheless.  It's about two weeks' travel by boat from Kirkwall to Ferelden's Gwaren, so it really wouldn't take very long at all for what happened in Kirkwall to become news in Ferelden, and it would take even less time for the news to spread to the Free Marches beyond Kirkwall's borders.  And Orlais would find about it quickly enough too, especially since at least one of the Divine's close assistants is keeping an eye on events in Kirkwall.   Once the Free Marches, Orlais, and Ferelden are aware of what's going on, you can bet that Tevinter won't be far behind, and that's enough "world" for you right there.  

Anyway, you're ignoring the point that when Varric and Cassandra are talking, we are no longer getting a possibly altered story through Varric's perspective, but Cass and Varric are, in the end, talking about the state of the world as it is.  Moreover it appears that Cassandra was already aware of Anders role in the Chantry destruction, and only need Varric to confirm that main point and to fill in the details. 

We know from hints provided in both games that tensions were already running high between mages and templars.  Anders' act of rebellion didn't start anything, it just caused an already dangerous situation to blaze out of control. 

You can be sure that Wynne did not rebel in the earliest stages of the conflict, and she certainly didn't rebel because of Kirkwall.  Also, I wouldn't say she is pro-templar/Chantry so much as anti-any
action she believes would do more harm for mages than good.  She is NOT a
Loyalist, and she definitely advocates for changing things for the
better. 

I highly recommend reading Asunder.  That's where a lot of us are getting our info, and before the objection is raised, Asunder IS canon.  It's obviously meant as a bridge between DA2 and the next installment.  It very much IS relevant to the discussion, as it fleshes out a lot of what we see hinted at between Varric and Cassandra. 

Modifié par Silfren, 28 juin 2012 - 08:52 .

[Silfren]

Nizaris1 wrote...

I don't see event in Kirkwall lead to big war

"The Chantry in Kirkwall blown up by a Mage, let us Mages rebel!"...is it as easy as that?

It is like "Osama blown up WTC, let us all Muslims declare jihad, Allahuakbar!" and all Muslims all the world attack USA embassy at each Muslim countries...

Could you ease off on the constant 9/11 bit?  I agree that there are some parallels to be seen, but you don't really make an effort to make those comparisons in a way that keeps it relevant to the topic, you only just bring it up over and over and over and over and over and over again.

[SafetyShattered]

Rest assured Bioware has said on numerous occasions that Dragon Age, unlike ME, is NOT meant to be a trilogy.

[SafetyShattered]

@Nizaris 1

I believe that the book Dragon Age Asunder(think that was the name) was supposed to answer what further motivated the other circles to rebel.

[Silfren]

Nizaris1 wrote...

Let see...

Kirkwall Templar have a crazy Knight Commander who oppress mages, not all Cirlces have the same condition as Kirkwall Circle

What motivate all Circle to rebel?

NONE

Ferelden Circle is fine after Uldred gone, the Templar there also okay, then Wayne becomes First Enchanter and she is pro-Templar...what motivate Ferelden Circle Mage to rebel? No motivation at all.

Only Kirkwall who have problem

1. crazy Knight Commander
2. crazy Anders
3. blood mage First Enchanter
4. full of blood mages

All those above lead to the event in Varric story, what motivate other Circles to rebel?

Ferelden's Circle is hardly fine after Uldred's death.  And the templars there are NOT "all" okay, though I would agree that there seem to be far more decent ones than in Kirkwall.  Wynne  (It's Wynne, not Wayne) is, again, not pro-Templar.  She's pro-moderation, on both sides.  She advocates for changing things for the better for mages, but she also thinks it would be dangerous to advocate for a total split because she feels the Chantry would sooner see all mages dead first.  She isn't pro-templar/chanty so much as she's afraid that antagonizing the Chantry would be counter-productive in the worst possible way.

Again, we're given hints throughout the games that the general relationship between mages and templars is strained everywhere, not just in Kirkwall.  Uldred's rebellion indicates in a very powerful way that mages in the Ferelden Circle were unhappy with the situation.  For all that it is supposedly the most liberal of all Circles, mages there stil felt oppressed enough to listen to Uldred's ideas.  Even if not all the mages who supported him went so far as to want to cavort with demons and blood magic, we still see that enough wanted more freeom that he was able to use that discontent to gain a foothold. 

Kirkwall mentions a bit about the Starkhaven Circle.  Hints there indicate the mages were unhappy as well.  And in Asunder we see inside the Orlesian Circle that mages there aren't happy either. 

Finally, Varric and Cassandra mention, depending on how you play the end, that rebellion happens either through mages being inspired to open rebellion, or through templars reacting so viciously to Kirkwall that mages rose up in self-defense. 

There are PLENTY of reasons provided for why what happened, happend as it did.