486 réponses à ce sujet

[Genetic13]

Ok, after mulling things over for a bit, I've come to some conclusions:

septembervirgin wrote...

Gaider, wouldn't the easiest and
perhaps best solution be to kill the Warden? He does have an upcoming
date with the Deep Roads. And of course there's the possibility of
another arch-demon (oh please, let him be eaten by an
arch-demon).

Or just establish a canon between DAO & DA2. The issue stems from working in the confines of an age rather than different ages in a world's history. Combine that with the fact that you make two major characters just up and disappear while only being 10 or so years into the age, and add the possible implications of their disappearances. The Warden could be with Morrigan+OGB, dead, whatever; while Hawke is the catalyst for this whole war and maybe ran off with Isabella, walked through another mirror with Merill, whatever the case may be, he's gone too.

They've been built up as major players in events that took place in the age, so it's kind of hard to just write them off. Much more so when you have someone like Leliana searching for both the Warden (some romanced her, some took her head off) and Hawke.

The world needs fleshed out more is all I'm saying. There needs to be a set canon to allow for more fluid story progression from game to game. I've always seen Hawke as Bioware's character, much like Shepard, so it'd be much easier to do with him than the Warden. For the Warden you'd need a set canon for each romance, dark ritual, Morrigan and the elluvian, alive or dead (Origins made Warden or the new one in Awakening if you died), Architect stuff, etc.

The people whining about wanting COMPLETE control or nothing at all, are just being stubborn, silly, short-sighted, idiots. Is it REALLY so hard to apply your own head-canon to a character simply because he has a set look now/doesn't look like he did in the first game? It wouldn't be hard to implement personality checks from a game save. So maybe they wouldn't have EXACTLY the same personality or certain things would be off. Would you really deprive yourself of a good, maybe even great, story because of something so minor?

I wouldn't. I play these types of games for a good, entertaining story. Getting to see a character I got to create during the same era as another game is a great bonus. So my character would be a little off in spots, small price to pay as long as the story is entertaining and leaves me wanting to come back to this world.

Just my two cents. Take it for what you will.

[JamieCOTC]

I wonder if it's more about presentation than actual plot. With the Warden, DA:O gives great closure for all the possible endings. If the Warden is dead, s/he's dead. If not the Warden is the Hero of Fereldon and they have a destination to hold that position. We don't need to see that story, but it gives the player closure and the writers wiggle room. Awakening, by contrast, just ends. The same in Witch Hunt w/ a non-romanced Warden. A Warden who enters the Eluvian with Morrigan gets great closure, but not so much for the non-romanced Warden. They just walk off screen and that's it. That's the end of their story. It's a bit anti-climactic to say the least.

Hawke's end also feels both a bit anti-climatic and unresolved. I just hope The Inquisitor will get a definite end to their story in DA3 even if they have to die to get it.

Modifié par JamieCOTC, 30 septembre 2012 - 08:33 .

[zombitologist]

I think their done with the Warden. He/she is either with Morrigan(and her child) or they aren't. They left Hawke a little open for a return, though probably not playable. Returning the Warden would be too much like returning Revan, every player's character varies too much.

[Funkjoker]

JamieCOTC wrote...
A Warden who enters the Eluvian with Morrigan gets great closure, ...

Closure? As in "they walked away to live a happy life as happy family until their happy deaths"?

This was not closure. It was a doorstep to the next expansion, which would have been possible, as the triangle Warden/Morri/OGB has huge story potential. Morrigan also says there'll be great changes in the world. One way ticket to the next adventure!

Modifié par Jean-Funk Van Damme, 30 septembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[Heimdall]

Jean-Funk Van Damme wrote...

JamieCOTC wrote...
A Warden who enters the Eluvian with Morrigan gets great closure, ...

Closure? As in "they walked away to live a happy life as happy family until their happy deaths"?

This was not closure. It was a doorstep to the next expansion, which would have been possible, as the triangle Warden/Morri/OGB has huge story potential. Morrigan also says there'll be great changes in the world. One way ticket to the next adventure!

You really think an expansion exclusively for that choice would be something Bioware would consider?

[LPPrince]

Not an expansion perhaps, but it DOES have massive story potential.

Seems to me that while not all fans feel this way(my following statement), many fans would like to see this massive story potential progress into something more.

I know I personally would.

[Heimdall]

LPPrince wrote...

Not an expansion perhaps, but it DOES have massive story potential.

Seems to me that while not all fans feel this way(my following statement), many fans would like to see this massive story potential progress into something more.

I know I personally would.

I get that.

I just don't think Bioware would spend the resources necessary to make such content for what amounts only to a portion of the playerbase, at least enough to be satisfactory.

[Fawx9]

A cameo may not be too liking becuase of characterization issues, but what of a DMC4 scenario? Where you play as new character that runs into the warden, and you play as him for the first act, then the warden for the second and a mix(or just new guy) for the third?

[LPPrince]

Lord Aesir wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Not an expansion perhaps, but it DOES have massive story potential.

Seems to me that while not all fans feel this way(my following statement), many fans would like to see this massive story potential progress into something more.

I know I personally would.

I get that.

I just don't think Bioware would spend the resources necessary to make such content for what amounts only to a portion of the playerbase, at least enough to be satisfactory.

I don't think they have to make it only accessible to a portion of the fanbase.

They should be able to make it integrate into...the main plot.

*I'm seeing holes in that idea already*

[blaidfiste]

David Gaider wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...
It wasn't unti they announced a new protagonist for DA2 did we hear that the Dragon Age series was just about the world of Thedas and not allow importing succesive characters.

That makes it nothing more than a MMO world designed for a single player experience.  Each game is nothing really more than a stand alone experience such as what the Final Fantasy series is.  Considering Bioware's legacy, it has surprise me that they would go with such a limiting standard. 

I too was under the impression that the Dragon Age series was going to be an epic saga connected by the characters and events experience.  Just like the high fantasy sagas that I read when I was younger.  But in a video game, I wouldn't be just reading it, I was actually participating in it and help shaping that world of Dragon Age.  I think  what all sagas have is that something keeps all the series connected by characters, and mostly a single hero.

There must be threads connecting a series-- but it needn't be the protaganist. For Dragon Age it's the setting and many of the events/characters within it.

Why do so many people assume otherwise? I imagine because there was a lot of PR for Mass Effect going on at the same time as when Dragon Age was created. I can't imagine what other "Bioware" legacy you could be referring to... as the only other Bioware game that even had a returning protaganist was Baldur's Gate.

Though, I suppose by the logic of some folks, even one game is enough to establish a pattern (like how some suggest that importing choices between games is also some kind of common CRPG mechanic when no games other than DA and ME have really even attempted it). And we did say that Dragon Age: Origins was a spiritual successor to the BG games (ignoring that BG also dumped every other variable), so fair enough... though it seems like a lot of assumptions to place on a game where the protaganist could rather definitively die.

At any rate, we'll say it again: DA is about the world of Thedas. Chances are there will never be a re-occuring protaganist between games, even if there is a common thread in the world and the plots that you've taken part in.

And thus the next series that BioWare makes can inherent all the assumptions from fans who assume it will work exactly the same was as Dragon Age. Good luck, imaginary next series!

Can this post be stickied?  Better yet include it in the popup we get logging in.

[Morty Smith]

David Gaider wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...
But with DA:2 you changed that to where something came up and now players are left wondering what that something is.

Excellent. That is, however, a new story.

Or just a cheap way to keep selling half-baked products.

[Icesong]

Genetic13 wrote...
The people whining about wanting COMPLETE control or nothing at all, are just being stubborn, silly, short-sighted, idiots. Is it REALLY so hard to apply your own head-canon to a character simply because he has a set look now/doesn't look like he did in the first game? It wouldn't be hard to implement personality checks from a game save. So maybe they wouldn't have EXACTLY the same personality or certain things would be off. Would you really deprive yourself of a good, maybe even great, story because of something so minor?

A whining stubborn short-sighted idiot you say? I'm sure this discussion is going to be worthwhile.

It's not minor; it's the entire reason I play this genre and enjoyed the game. I put a ton of thought into my Warden. Even the slighest deviance, and Revan knows it won't be slight, will diminish the character. It won't be a great story if that happens.

TES already handled this "problem" more or less perfectly. It's only a problem if you make it one which BioWare did by having the Warden disappear. The solution now is to resolve the disappearance as simply as possible, including the option of making the disappearance go away entirely.

I wouldn't. I play these types of games for a good, entertaining story.

I play these games to make my own characters. If I wanted the developer to make my character and a good story I'd go play MGS or something. The indirect choice to save Meryl or Otacon is about what you'd be satisfied with.

Speaking of short-sightedness: you say you want "the world" to be developed but you want to do it by recycling characters in every story within the world. Do you know how small that makes the world feel? When everything is connected to everyone? A great story can be told by doing this but your world will often suffer for it. You can go the Star Wars route and produce such a magnitude of content that it doesn't matter; otherwise look to TES or LotR for worldbuilding: characters have their apportioned lot, then take their place in history.

Revan.

Modifié par Icesong, 02 octobre 2012 - 02:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

David Gaider wrote...

There must be threads connecting a series-- but it needn't be the protaganist. For Dragon Age it's the setting and many of the events/characters within it.

Why do so many people assume otherwise? I imagine because there was a lot of PR for Mass Effect going on at the same time as when Dragon Age was created. I can't imagine what other "Bioware" legacy you could be referring to... as the only other Bioware game that even had a returning protaganist was Baldur's Gate.

Though, I suppose by the logic of some folks, even one game is enough to establish a pattern (like how some suggest that importing choices between games is also some kind of common CRPG mechanic when no games other than DA and ME have really even attempted it). And we did say that Dragon Age: Origins was a spiritual successor to the BG games (ignoring that BG also dumped every other variable), so fair enough... though it seems like a lot of assumptions to place on a game where the protaganist could rather definitively die.

At any rate, we'll say it again: DA is about the world of Thedas. Chances are there will never be a re-occuring protaganist between games, even if there is a common thread in the world and the plots that you've taken part in.

And thus the next series that BioWare makes can inherent all the assumptions from fans who assume it will work exactly the same was as Dragon Age. Good luck, imaginary next series!

I am glad about this. I always said the best way to handle this series for me was new game equals new protaganist. All previous protaganists should be limited to appearence in their respective game, DLC and expansions. I do not want a cameo of the protaganist from any previous game in a following one, I do like cameos from companions of past games however and also I think having a protaganist and his or her actions merely mentioned whether in bars, from companions or companion cameos or travellers like Bodain and Sandal like it was done in DA2. I think it should continue to be handled as was done in DA2 regarding referencing your previous protaganist but never appearing in the following games themselves. I can always go back and play those characters again in their respective games if enjoyed playing them, they should not be in the following games though. Just mention of the previous protaganist and their deeds via bars, companions and such is enough of which I am 110% with DG on this aspect.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 octobre 2012 - 05:14 .

[unbentbuzzkill]

having a different protaganist every game is not my core concern, my concern is the truck size gaps in the story that are starting to take shape and to tell you truthfully if they drag DA out over too many games with the same plot holes all it will do is annoy people or at least that's just my opinion

[CARL_DF90]

After reading through this forum, I say chill my fellow fans. We still have another year and DAIII is not getting rushed out the door like DAII was. They have the time, they're aware of people's collective concerns, and they know what they're doing. Trust in that and let's sit back, wait, and see what happens. 'Kay?

[Potato Cat]

I really hope so. Not because I didn't like my Warden or Hawke, but because I love Thedas more, and DA was ALWAYS about the world and not just one person. To be honest, I hated that in ME we continuously had to play as Shepherd who I felt no connection to whatsoever until maybe half way through ME3. But while I felt connected to my Warden and I genuinely liked Hawke, all I want is to know where they disappeared to. What I don't want is a dodgy cameo like what happened to poor Alistair and his lovely face. I spent ages in character creation and would hate for that to all be for naught with them both looking more like genlocks that what they used to look like.

Now if they were turned in to genlocks, then I wouldn't mind...

[Get Magna Carter]

Personally, I would prefer it if after the game the character simply "disappeared" into obscurity rather than mysteriously vanishing in the story.
At least that way, players can have "headcanon" as to what happened to them

[Vicious]

New story, new heroes. If they didn't keep bringing back the old companions and made the world as 'huge' as it is painted to be [because apparently Thedas is the size of britain the way you keep running into people.] then people wouldn't care so much about the Warden or Hawke.

Besides, the Warden is destined to die long before the Dragon Age is over. Hawke, well as Dragon Age 2 loved to show us, he was just one guy/gal. The pebble that gets caught in the river.

[Huntress]

"David Gaider wrote...

There must be threads connecting a series-- but it needn't be the protaganist. For Dragon Age it's the setting and many of the events/characters within it.

Why do so many people assume otherwise? I imagine because there was a lot of PR for Mass Effect going on at the same time as when Dragon Age was created. I can't imagine what other "Bioware" legacy you could be referring to... as the only other Bioware game that even had a returning protaganist was Baldur's Gate......"

Although different protaganist in every game is not my first concern, my greatest fear is Dragon age turning to be a one race story and on top of that you have to like it or you are called troll, whinner you name it. pff
What I care about is choices, choices for the hero race, choices for the hero to join or destroy a group or organization, choices for the hero to live of die but never the less CHOICES. After you remove that, then is not a RPG is a story telling and we already had that game is called DA2.

[Genetic13]

Icesong wrote...

I play these games to make my own characters. If I wanted the developer to make my character and a good story I'd go play MGS or something. The indirect choice to save Meryl or Otacon is about what you'd be satisfied with.

Speaking of short-sightedness: you say you want "the world" to be developed but you want to do it by recycling characters in every story within the world. Do you know how small that makes the world feel? When everything is connected to everyone? A great story can be told by doing this but your world will often suffer for it. You can go the Star Wars route and produce such a magnitude of content that it doesn't matter; otherwise look to TES or LotR for worldbuilding: characters have their apportioned lot, then take their place in history.

Revan.

And there in lies one of the problems. TES (never cared for LotR outside of the original books) doesn't take place in a single time period. Dragon Age DOES (it's kind of in the name). So my want of returning characters is valid in this arguement. DA is linking these games together by events that occur in the same age (DAO->Lothering->DA2->Hawke's actions->DA3 Mage/Templar War). They don't have to be companions, just important NPCs is enough, and you don't have to include all of them with every new game.

Couple that with the end of DA2 where they say Hawke disappeared just like The Warden and it leads to some interesting directions the story could go involving these two main characters. You don't drop a line like that and just go, "Oh, those two are done." I don't mind a new protagonist each game, and you can very easily flesh out the world this way while presenting a great story, but the way they have gone with the story, The Warden and Hawke still have parts to play at some point. They've already establish Leliana and Flemeth being alive as canon (even tho you could kill both in DAO) so why not just establish some more things as canon to give the world a little more life?

I like making my "own" characters as much as the next person. It's the second reason why I play games like DA, TES, BG, NWN, IWD, etc. But I also realize that I'm merely playing my version of a hero character that belongs to the writers of these games. At the end of the day you are still playing The Warden/Hawke/Shepard/Revan/The Bhaal Spawn/whoeverelseyouwanttoinclude, a Bioware character, like it or not.

Modifié par Genetic13, 11 octobre 2012 - 11:35 .

[Icesong]

Genetic13 wrote...

Icesong wrote...

I play these games to make my own characters. If I wanted the developer to make my character and a good story I'd go play MGS or something. The indirect choice to save Meryl or Otacon is about what you'd be satisfied with.

Speaking of short-sightedness: you say you want "the world" to be developed but you want to do it by recycling characters in every story within the world. Do you know how small that makes the world feel? When everything is connected to everyone? A great story can be told by doing this but your world will often suffer for it. You can go the Star Wars route and produce such a magnitude of content that it doesn't matter; otherwise look to TES or LotR for worldbuilding: characters have their apportioned lot, then take their place in history.

Revan.

And there in lies one of the problems. TES (never cared for LotR outside of the original books) doesn't take place in a single time period. Dragon Age DOES (it's kind of in the name). So my want of returning characters is valid in this arguement. DA is linking these games together by events that occur in the same age (DAO->Lothering->DA2->Hawke's actions->DA3 Mage/Templar War). They don't have to be companions, just important NPCs is enough, and you don't have to include all of them with every new game.

First of all: how could you not geek out over The Silmarillion? I still remember the shockwaves of excitement I felt a dozen times throughout just the Ainulindale.

Skyrim was set 200 years after Oblivion but Oblivion was set just about 6 years after Morrowind. They could just as easily have set Skyrim closer but wanted to let the Fourth Era that began in Oblivion to unfold further. Realistic passage of time: another key element for growing your world.

TES accomplished having the player character be more or less unknown in subsequent games by having those games take place in the vastly different nations of Tamriel. Despite how important you were as the Nerevarine to Morrowind it didn't really impact the lives of people living in Cyrodiil. The same could be said for The Warden's notoriety outside of Ferelden. They know what you did but they don't know who you are.

Couple that with the end of DA2 where they say Hawke disappeared just like The Warden and it leads to some interesting directions the story could go involving these two main characters. You don't drop a line like that and just go, "Oh, those two are done." I don't mind a new protagonist each game, and you can very easily flesh out the world this way while presenting a great story, but the way they have gone with the story, The Warden and Hawke still have parts to play at some point. They've already establish Leliana and Flemeth being alive as canon (even tho you could kill both in DAO) so why not just establish some more things as canon to give the world a little more life?

Well, I think that line was a terrible mistake as far as The Warden is considered. I think the best thing to do is to walk it back; it's not too late to do so without retconning.

It's just the player character being reused without us playing as them that I object to. I only brought up the worldbuilding point as an aside, which I still maintain. You can pile on the lore but that won't necessarily make the world feel big. Warcraft is a decent example of this: every time there's a crisis the major players of Azeroth are on deck to deal with it. This isn't a criticism, really, I love Warcraft. Honestly, I don't get enough of Thrall. But if Leliana and Alistair keep cropping up throughout Thedas with their hand in something important then the world will lose a sense of grand scale.

But back to the actual point. Preserving the sanctity of the player character should be a foremost consideration for any RPG. I see that you think that our characters are the developer's/DM's so maybe we're just going to talk past each other on this. To me, they just give us a framework. It's as if they took an indescript shadow from history whose deeds were known and asked us to say who they were. They know what you did but they don't know who you are.

Exactly what kind of things would you want to see made as canon? I can't object without knowing,  but I can't think of anything DA so desperately needs established except perhaps Orzammar(and Flemeth wasn't really a retcon). They'll soon be unveiling Orlais to us, an entire nation we haven't truly gotten a sense of. That's an amazing amount of life to me. There's plenty else to work with as well.

Revan.

Modifié par Icesong, 12 octobre 2012 - 11:50 .

[h0neanias]

Perhaps it bears mentioning that "the Warden disappeared" says nothing else that Leliana is unable to determine his/her whereabouts. It can as well mean he grabbed his beloved elven assassin and sneaked out under the cover of night to escape into far away lands where they f'd happily ever after. I for my part feel no desire to be given "closure" about my character, as long as a story is concluded satisfactorily. Origins was. DA2 leaves a lot to be desired -- that, however, has little to do with disappearance of characters and more with disappearance of the plot.

Modifié par h0neanias, 12 octobre 2012 - 11:07 .

[Dutchess]

h0neanias wrote...

Perhaps it bears mentioning that "the Warden disappeared" says nothing else that Leliana is unable to determine his/her whereabouts. It can as well mean he grabbed his beloved elven assassin and sneaked out under the cover of night to escape into far away lands where they f'd happily ever after. I for my part feel no desire to be given "closure" about my character, as long as a story is concluded satisfactorily. Origins was. DA2 leaves a lot to be desired -- that, however, has little to do with disappearance of characters and more with disappearance of the plot.

The fact that the Warden's and Hawke's disapperance are "no coincidence" says that the Warden did not just sneak out with his beloved. What, it's no coincidence Hawke did that too? That makes no sense. 

I hated this cliffhanger. It removed every sense of closure for Hawke the game might have given otherwise. And in addition to that it also dragged the Warden back from a nicely ended story into some kind of big mystery plot. "FIND OUT WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON IN DA3." That was the level of subtlety.

[h0neanias]

renjility wrote...
The fact that the Warden's and Hawke's disapperance are "no coincidence" says that the Warden did not just sneak out with his beloved. What, it's no coincidence Hawke did that too? That makes no sense. 

You know them heroes, always sneaking away like cats in heat. "Damn, there goes another one."

Yeah. I hated the cliffhanger, too.

Modifié par h0neanias, 12 octobre 2012 - 11:29 .

[Icesong]

h0neanias wrote...

Perhaps it bears mentioning that "the Warden disappeared" says nothing else that Leliana is unable to determine his/her whereabouts. It can as well mean he grabbed his beloved elven assassin and sneaked out under the cover of night to escape into far away lands where they f'd happily ever after. I for my part feel no desire to be given "closure" about my character, as long as a story is concluded satisfactorily. Origins was. DA2 leaves a lot to be desired -- that, however, has little to do with disappearance of characters and more with disappearance of the plot.

What if Leliana was the LI? And what if you stayed in Denerim? That's basically asking to believe Leliana didn't look anywhere before saying The Warden disappeared.

Which is something I'm willing to take. Maybe I was at the tavern when she dropped by the house?

Modifié par Icesong, 12 octobre 2012 - 11:39 .