88399 réponses à ce sujet

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Where was that quote from, ladyofpayne?

Sounds good to me, although if characters are allowed to prefer romancing people of one race or another, why can't they prefer one gender over the other?

[TheBlackAdder13]

ManchesterUnitedFan1 wrote...

Where was that quote from, ladyofpayne?

Sounds good to me, although if characters are allowed to prefer romancing people of one race or another, why can't they prefer one gender over the other?

Who's to say they can't? Bioware hasn't committeed to the playersexual approach for DA:I and the quote, assuming it's from a legit source, seems to indicate that they're leaning more towards the Origins approach for LIs, probably with racial (and maybe even class?) considerations included. 

[Quicksilver26]

I think she got it from here
http://www.xbox360ac...estruction.html

[azarhal]

ManchesterUnitedFan1 wrote...

Where was that quote from, ladyofpayne?

Sounds good to me, although if characters are allowed to prefer romancing people of one race or another, why can't they prefer one gender over the other?

The quote is at the bottom of this interview.

I find the answer right after the romance question interesting. Some of the characters coming back in Inquisition were actually supposed to be back for the Exalted March dlc.

[ElitePinecone]

Google says an interview with Jonathan Perry about DA:I, apparently.

I just read through the rest of the interview and it's worth a look.

[Nerdage]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Really interesting tumblr post by David Gaider on the mages vs templars theme, and how they've tried to frame the debate. Also a good point about lore and gameplay dissonance, or why the player-character is never randomly overtaken by a demon when playing a mage:

http://dgaider.tumbl...ssion-unlike-in

Why have mage-players never really been tempted? I mean there was Connor and Feynriel, but they seemed more like demons asking us for favours than going out of their way to entice us.

I suppose the question is what do they tempt us with? I remember being really tempted by Blackrazor back in BG2 even with good characters, but I can't see any one item being all that amazing in DA to tempt me like that; gold has never been in desparately short supply anyway; talent/attribute points would be a pretty underwhelming prize, plus it's a bit awkward to tell the player what they're getting since points don't exist in-game; there really just isn't much to tempt us with.

Losing control of your character could actually be pretty cool though. If the PC did some relatively minor dealings with a demon, but then afterwards they would occasionally lose control to it during dialogue (like Connor) and eventually is does something really bad like killing a loved one, then after the party eventually defeats 'you' and does the ritual like Redcliffe suddenly nobody trusts you anymore. Admittedly that's loads of content, but if he's unhappy with how safe magic's been made to look so far...

Modifié par nerdage, 29 septembre 2013 - 07:09 .

[ElitePinecone]

Yeah, I think the amount of unique content required to make it work is an issue. If it's only one or two lines then you'd wonder why it was included (hello, Shepard's backgrounds!), but significant plot arcs with the Inquisitor gradually being invaded by demons and killing loved ones is an awful lot of extra stuff to make.

Possibly a bigger reason is that they seem to be extremely wary of taking agency away from the player (which seems to be a common line from the devs after DA2). Unless it was very clear-cut that making a deal would lead to all sorts of unforseen consequences, I can kinda see why people would be upset that a decision in one part of the game means control being regularly taken away from the player for a long time afterward. Even more so if that loss of control means significant characters die.

[Nerdage]

I was thinking all the 'losing control' stuff would be limited to the quest where it starts, and you probably wouldn't be able to progress the rest of the game until it's finished. I'm sure it couldn't be spread throughout the whole game; I like ambition but that's a bit crazy.

And I'm not sure I'd really call it a loss of agency. In the most literal sense perhaps it is, but in the most literal sense being stunned/knocked down in combat is also a loss of agency; it's really no different to when you become the slayer in BG2, except this time it could have lasting consequences (unless you perma-killed a companion as the slayer I guess).

I think the benefit of having that kind of outcome to something which is meant to be a big deal (maybe the biggest) in-universe but has previously been pretty much overlooked - and the series establishing that it's not afraid to let you make terrible mistakes (nothing ever seems to go all that wrong regardless of how reckless you are) - would be huge pluses to roleplaying, which is the thing you're ultimately trying to improve with increased agency anyway.

Modifié par nerdage, 30 septembre 2013 - 02:51 .

[TheBlackAdder13]

I see how people could take it as a loss of agency if a demon possesses your mage PC at random but I think if it's the result of a choice that you make (IE: specializing in blood magic or making other deals with demons) then it's not so much as an issue of player agency as it is an issue of meaningful consequences to your choices. After all, you could argue that the ultimate sacrifice is a loss of agency as you have no control over what happens in the final scene -- where as if your PC lives you attend a coronation, get a boon, make some final decisions with your companions, etc.

[ElitePinecone]

Perhaps the issue would be more in players' perception of the loss of agency, even if in practice losing control of a demonically possessed mage protagonist is more a matter of 'consequences for your choices'. Unless it was telegraphed rather clearly that a choice to make deals with demons would result in Very Bad Things, I can see people becoming very upset - given that the default reaction to many things happening in-game is "the devs are taking away my agency!!!"

I mean, plenty of fans freaked out when in DA2 they considered the murder of a character by a serial killer a loss of player agency. If the player was possessed by demons and killed a love interest (to pick a hypothetical situation) I don't think the reaction would be... pleasant.

There's also then a question of giving reasonably similar options and quest pathways to other choices. If playing a mage allows demonic possession, or even if that's confined to the blood mage specialisation, what do the rest of the classes get? Or specialisations? It would seem to add up to a lot of content.

[Chanda]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Perhaps the issue would be more in players' perception of the loss of agency, even if in practice losing control of a demonically possessed mage protagonist is more a matter of 'consequences for your choices'. Unless it was telegraphed rather clearly that a choice to make deals with demons would result in Very Bad Things, I can see people becoming very upset - given that the default reaction to many things happening in-game is "the devs are taking away my agency!!!"

I mean, plenty of fans freaked out when in DA2 they considered the murder of a character by a serial killer a loss of player agency. If the player was possessed by demons and killed a love interest (to pick a hypothetical situation) I don't think the reaction would be... pleasant.

There's also then a question of giving reasonably similar options and quest pathways to other choices. If playing a mage allows demonic possession, or even if that's confined to the blood mage specialisation, what do the rest of the classes get? Or specialisations? It would seem to add up to a lot of content.

I don't think it would be that hard, really. Skyrim did it when the dragonborn became a werewolf and went out on a spree with his two "Companion" mates after first being turned, and he had no memory of what he did. Also, when you agree to have a drink-off with that one character that shows up in the taverns, and you end up someplace completely odd and find out that you tried to romance a chicken and you wrecked Dibella's temple (something crazy like that, I don't remember exactly how it goes) and you have to go on this huge quest to find out what happened while you were so drunk you don't remember anything. Bioware could do something like that. You get possessed by a demon, black out while the demon is in control, and have to deal with the consequences afterwards. Maybe you slaughter a village and soldiers are after you. Maybe you tried to have sex with your horse and your companions are like WTF is wrong with you? Anything can happen.

[ladyofpayne]

Have they told something about RPG Set 3?

[Nerdage]

ElitePinecone wrote...

There's also then a question of giving reasonably similar options and quest pathways to other choices. If playing a mage allows demonic possession, or even if that's confined to the blood mage specialisation, what do the rest of the classes get? Or specialisations? It would seem to add up to a lot of content.

I don't see why other classes or even other mages who don't deal with the demon should get something in place of it. If they (or at least David) want to make players understand what a big deal it is and how easy it is to slip up then they can't keep treating all the classes the same. Like he says, when it happens to an NPC the player's reaction is more likely to be "Well that was a stupid thing to do." than "Isn't magic dangerous!", and we've never really had a deal with a demon blow up in our face like that; at worst they attack us but they usually seem to keep their word - we've been crossed more times by dwarves than we have by demons, which can't be right...

Modifié par nerdage, 30 septembre 2013 - 01:23 .

[azarhal]

ladyofpayne wrote...

Have they told something about RPG Set 3?

BioWare doesn't really talk about the RPG Set. The best place for news is Green Ronin forum thread (looks like the editor had health issues but he's back to work since last week).

[JerZey CJ]

ladyofpayne wrote...

"I wouldn't say that anyone can romance anyone, but there will certainly be characters who fancy a certain type of person more than another. We haven't really been able to comment on how many of your followers will be 'romance-able' or who will be 'romance-able', but we do have a whole lot of interesting combinations. Romance is a really important part of our storytelling, and we really want to give the player a lot of options there."
I hope quinary PC can't romance a characters. Really- Fem quinari is taller than human male, this looka noncence. Hot dog and a door.

So tall people shouldn't be able to be in a relationship with shorter/normal sized people? That is your only reason for not wanting a qunari PC to be able to romance anyone?

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

ladyofpayne wrote...

"I wouldn't say that anyone can romance anyone, but there will certainly be characters who fancy a certain type of person more than another. We haven't really been able to comment on how many of your followers will be 'romance-able' or who will be 'romance-able', but we do have a whole lot of interesting combinations. Romance is a really important part of our storytelling, and we really want to give the player a lot of options there."
I hope quinary PC can't romance a characters. Really- Fem quinari is taller than human male, this looka noncence. Hot dog and a door.

So tall people shouldn't be able to be in a relationship with shorter/normal sized people? That is your only reason for not wanting a qunari PC to be able to romance anyone?

That logic would lead to a lot of lonely basketball players

[ElitePinecone]

nerdage wrote...
I don't see why other classes or even other mages who don't deal with the demon should get something in place of it. If they (or at least David) want to make players understand what a big deal it is and how easy it is to slip up then they can't keep treating all the classes the same.

It's another one of those situations where lore would seem to conflict with the demands of gameplay and development - just because something is more interesting doesn't necessarily mean (IMO) it should be privileged in terms of content across classes, though that's something the devs would sort out. Playing as a blood mage or a Templar specialisation would ideally involve unique content, but you could reasonably argue that every specialisation has a quirk or story hook that would justify quests or experiences that only they could access. Using a warrior or rogue similarly has no major impact on the story; it entails changes to the gameplay and not much else. If mages had an extensive quest arc involving demonic possession, it would be usual for players to expect unique content for the other classes also.

That's probably part of a larger question about how class choices in all Bioware's games affect the story, but I've never really heard a detailed explanation of their thoughts. I remember in the Mass Effect series the lack of class differentiation was a constant point of feedback (over three games it amounted to a few lines of changed dialogue), but Shepard was a much more defined character than any of DA's protagonists to date. In Dragon Age the in-universe positions of the classes are much more varied than Mass Effect's three classes, which fundamentally didn't affect the protagonist's positions or people's perceptions of them. 

The downside to making the classes very different and unique, I suppose, is the cost, and that's a balancing act that we have no real insight into.

[Jaulen]

ElitePinecone wrote...

nerdage wrote...
I don't see why other classes or even other mages who don't deal with the demon should get something in place of it. If they (or at least David) want to make players understand what a big deal it is and how easy it is to slip up then they can't keep treating all the classes the same.

It's another one of those situations where lore would seem to conflict with the demands of gameplay and development - just because something is more interesting doesn't necessarily mean (IMO) it should be privileged in terms of content across classes, though that's something the devs would sort out. Playing as a blood mage or a Templar specialisation would ideally involve unique content, but you could reasonably argue that every specialisation has a quirk or story hook that would justify quests or experiences that only they could access. Using a warrior or rogue similarly has no major impact on the story; it entails changes to the gameplay and not much else. If mages had an extensive quest arc involving demonic possession, it would be usual for players to expect unique content for the other classes also.

That's probably part of a larger question about how class choices in all Bioware's games affect the story, but I've never really heard a detailed explanation of their thoughts. I remember in the Mass Effect series the lack of class differentiation was a constant point of feedback (over three games it amounted to a few lines of changed dialogue), but Shepard was a much more defined character than any of DA's protagonists to date. In Dragon Age the in-universe positions of the classes are much more varied than Mass Effect's three classes, which fundamentally didn't affect the protagonist's positions or people's perceptions of them. 

The downside to making the classes very different and unique, I suppose, is the cost, and that's a balancing act that we have no real insight into.

I have to agree that it would probably be a rather large investment in resources to add in the type of 'consequences' for being a blood mage that some people seem to want. I think being a lyrium addicted Templar would be easier, maybe all they'd have to do is add in a timer effect for the Templar to get to a Chantry and get his next fix.....and the longer he delays the less powerful his attacks or 'spells' are.

And come on....the vast majority of players, if there were 'real' consequences for being a blood mage....(demon possession, perma-killing a companion), even if they say they want 'conseuqences' they would have a fit. All they probably want for 'consequences' of being a BM is a couple of lines of dialogue or comments from NPCs.

To see any sort of real and in-depth consequences, i could see Bioware needing to make a game where you can only pick being a BM or Templar.

[Lady Sif]

Joe Hendriks@Sjosz: This week I'm making another dungeon. *Another dungeon?* Yes, I'm confirming that there are dungeons (PLURAL!) in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

[agonis]

doublepost. sorry

Modifié par agonis, 30 septembre 2013 - 05:06 .

[agonis]

Rakia Time wrote...

ladyofpayne wrote...
*snip*

That logic would lead to a lot of lonely basketball players

*laughs* Your comment made me google "basketballplaye+girlfriend". Here is the result.


Now lets give the Qunari/Elf/Dwarf players a rest.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

There is another way to illustrate the dangers of magic without the PC actually making the deal or becoming possessed and it is not limited to class. What if an NPC, somebody the Inquisitor would be prepared to respect if not trust (ike an influential bann, captain of the guard, or even a revered mother) was possessed by a blood mage or a demon much more subtle than the one who sent Connor on his rampage or abetted Lady Harriman's ambition? This possessed NPC becomes a quest giver or, if in the position to offer hospitality, subtly poisons the party so they become slower and less effective which results in lost battles and more damage to you and your companions. You could even regularly 'forget' to do something or go someplace you planned.

In either scenario you don't realize right away that the NPC is to blame and you might not realize even then that a demon or bm is to blame. I realize that this contains aspects of different quests from DAO and DA2 but is less in your face. Perhaps if you are a mage, or a blood mage, yourself you can actually come to the possession conclusion faster than if you are a warrior or rogue. You could hear rumors that so-and-so seemed somehow different than previously. Then you have to decide:
* investigate
* leave the NPC alone and make them think they are not discovered, possibly even feed
them misinformation
* confront and defeat the demon/bm
* try to find out if they are part of the bigger conspiracy or just somebody taking advantage
of the chaos
This scenario might not even trigger if you choose not to interact much with this particular NPC.

Perhaps if you are a mage (or just a blood mage) you periodically have encounters with demons in the Fade while you sleep. They can try to poison your mind or tempt you with whatever. Perhaps they are more likely to occur after a battle you lost, or a situation in which x lives were lost, a quest which didn't go the way you wanted.

[Wickwrackscar]

Rachel73 wrote...

Joe Hendriks@Sjosz: This week I'm making another dungeon. *Another dungeon?* Yes, I'm confirming that there are dungeons (PLURAL!) in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

So I guess the plan for the week is

Monday: Ctrl + C
Friday: Ctrl + V

[Jaulen]

Rachel73 wrote...

Joe Hendriks@Sjosz: This week I'm making another dungeon. *Another dungeon?* Yes, I'm confirming that there are dungeons (PLURAL!) in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

And there was cheering...