174 réponses à ce sujet

[SerenityRebirth]

BENIIICHAT wrote...

Top 5 hah!!...OK this list Made for My Male Mage

1. Human Male who is Mage,handsome, good heart and can love My Male Mage
2. Human Male who is Rogue/Warrior, strong but kind and can love My Male Mage
3. Ander or Fenris or Zevran
4. The Champion or The Grey Warden or Alistair
5. Leliana or Any Female Human/Elf who sing a song at the camp after when we get a interesing moment

I love your response! :-) 

1. Male character with a serious/emotionally distant personality. Of course, he'd open up if you romanced/friended him. He'd be a warrior. If romanced, is quite protective. 

2. Male character whose personality is at conflict with number 1. He is jovial, may even have a dark sense of humor. He acts as a comic relief. But this is all a way to deflect that something painful has happened in the past. He reveals said painful past, and you find out why he is the way he is. However, he stays somewhat jovial. His romance would be difficult to get but rewarding in the end. Also a romance with him and the other guy wold add quite a bit of tension, to the point that you may have to choose who will leave/stay in your party

3. Female character who is not too experienced with the world outside of her village, clan, etc. She is ideally a mage. You help craft her either into a a paragon-minded, righteous character, or a ruthless one. She can be romanced, but in my playthrough she will be like my bff. 

4. The Seeker from the intro of Dragon Age 2. 

5. A male character is neutral, and doesn't have the tried and true sob story. He is interesting but in a more simplistic fashion. He helps to counter the heavy-handed pasts of the others. He is not romanceable. 

Lol-all thsese characters seem to be cumulative characteristics from both Dragon Age and Mass Effect. >_<

[Renmiri1]

5. Carver
4. Kell
3. Cullen
2. Varric
1. Anders :wub:

Modifié par Renmiri1, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:00 .

[Maclimes]

I don't mind if our companions are pre-existing characters (such as Cassandra and Cullen), but I don't want any characters that were already companions (like happened with Anders). New companions only, please.

As for specifics, the only thing I can think of is an intelligent, talking Darkspawn. (The Messenger would be ideal for this role, if we hadn't been given the option to kill him).

[wsandista]

All new characters who have good back-stories, are interesting, and not one-note. I do not want cameos for he sake of cameos.

[Sylvanpyxie]

Maclimes:

I don't want any characters that were already companions

May I be so bold as to ask why?

I'm not trying to be rude, or anything. I would truly like to understand why you feel this way.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:08 .

[Renmiri1]

I see a lot of people saying Anders was "spoiled" for them on DA2 so they would rather have new people than see their beloved companions go through a similar bad change.

In my case I think Anders was vastly improved so I'm not worried ^^

[Olorin_85]

1. A Templar (could settle with Cullen);
2. A Mage (Magister would be a plus, I'd like to be able to engage in a 3-way chat with #1);
3. A Qunari (romance option would be a plus, but main reason is to know more about them);
4. An Orlesian Chevalier;
5. A Grey Warden.

[goofyomnivore]

I liked the idea of Bevin joining the 'squad' in future games. He will be 18-ish when I assume Dragon Age 3 timeline starts and in the Origins epilogue it does mention him going off on his own adventure and becoming a hero. Although I guess he could be dead as well in other saves.


(1) But like I posted earlier give me; A cunning and capable women with an Anora or Miranda like personality. (rogue)
(2) Bevin would be a cool nod to Origins and could give some fanservice to the Warden (warrior)
(3) A Qunari female or male would be acceptable. They could be devout followers of the Qun or maybe some wild Qunari Bard heretic seeing the world. Doesn't matter to me Qunari are badass and deserve a spot on the team(warrior or rogue; imagine a Qunari rogue with a hand cannon)
(4) An Elf; not the laid back type like Zevran or 'naive' vibe Merrill had. A more serious elf, but not a total sourpuss like Fenris make him/her have big plans for elves in the future (uniting Dalish Clans with City Elves in hope of reclaiming The Dales? or something) (mage? keeper?)
(5) Shale (dwarf form) she would have interesting views on the issue of magic. The first mage she met used her as a slave, but then Wynne another mage helped her regain her mortality. (warrior)

Modifié par strive, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:25 .

[Mistress9Nine]

new dwarf - possibly an exiled noble, non-comic relief type
new mage - acquired at an early level, possibly an apprentice rescued from a tower or something
new rogue - someone from Tevinter who is not a slave/ex-slave/magister
Cullen - companion/love interest
Morrigan/Leliana/Flemeth/someone from the previous games - temporary companion for just a mission or questline


quote]strive wrote...
(5) Shale (dwarf form) she would have interesting views on the issue of magic. The first mage she met used her as a slave, but then Wynne another mage helped her regain her mortality. (warrior)
[/quote]
Definately want to see this. Even if not as a companion, but it'd be a cool cameo.

Modifié par Mistress9Nine, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:30 .

[Nashiktal]

I usually hate dragging previous companions into a new game.... But Aveline was just such a wonderful character that I hope we can get another like her! A guardian for the champion....

[Sylvanpyxie]

They would rather have new people than see their beloved companions go through a similar bad change.

I can understand in certain respects - If a companion character has ended their story in a very definitive way then they should not return, there is no reason for it.

However, I have a hard time understanding why a companion character that has been left open ended would be a poor choice for future companionship. If their story has yet to be concluded, and their personality offers opportunity for future development, why shouldn't they return?

Surely, if the companion has the potential to develop further in the series, in terms of both personal story and general character development (personality and beliefs), then it should be considered for future content, no?

I really want to try and understand why people believe that development should not occur for previous companions, but the entire thing is so baffling to me.

[Maclimes]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

Maclimes:

I don't want any characters that were already companions

May I be so bold as to ask why?

I'm not trying to be rude, or anything. I would truly like to understand why you feel this way.

Bringing back old characters has a way of messing with your previous enjoyment of the characters, or even tarnishing their memory. So far, amongst the three groups of companions (DA:O, DA:A, and DA:2) there have been two repeats: Oghren and Anders.

Consider Anders. At the end of DA:A, I had a pretty particular view of Anders: He was a wise-cracking, wind-in-his-hair, running-free, womanizing, fun-loving mage. Now, he had a mild dark side that was hinted at, briefly, but who doesn't? By the end, I was happy with Anders. He was my favorite companion of the original game (short of maybe Shale). But then, DA2 came around. Now, Anders is a broody, entitled, wrathful, rude, violent abomination. Lame. I miss my old Anders, and even his DA:A comedian incarnation seems unejoyable, now that I've been tainted with the DA2 jerk version. I would much rather the part of "Anders" in DA2 have been a whole new character invented for the role. That way, I could still enjoy Anders as a character.

Oghren was not as bad. He seemed a bit ... off?

Either way, I don't need my old friends to become my new annoyances.

I want to make new friends, hear new stories, and write new adventures. No need to re-hash the old.

[Iakus]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

Maclimes:

I don't want any characters that were already companions

May I be so bold as to ask why?

I'm not trying to be rude, or anything. I would truly like to understand why you feel this way.

For myself, it's because there will inevitably be comparisons between the character in previous games to the character in the current one.  Take Anders, for example.  I actually wouldn't want anyone who played a major role in DAO or DA2 to be a companion inDA3.  Cameos, sure.  Supporting characters, maybe.  but I'd hate to see  "They changed Varric, now he sucks!" threads after DA3 is released.

[Nomen Mendax]

1 - An ancient but spry wizard with secret knowledge of the maker
2 - A gruff weather-beaten wanderer who is secretly the heir to a throne
3 - A mighty warrior who is the son of the most important noble in the kingdom that 2 is the heir to the throne of
4 - A dwarf warrior who distrusts elves
5 - An elven archer who doesn't get on with dwarves
6 - Four very small people from a bucolic paradise

Modifié par Nomen Mendax, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:49 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

Either way, I don't need my old friends to become my new annoyances.

I see.

In some ways, I can agree with you. Anders' reappearance in Dragon Age 2 was relatively unnecessary, and his story had effectively ended with Awakening. That is a personal gripe that I can quite easily understand, his return was rather bizarre, if you take into account the definitive close to his personal story.

It gets confusing for me when people wish to see potential character development abandoned, simply because of what may occur.

If a companion's story is left open ended, I see no reason why it cannot, or should not, progress into the next game. Assuming their character is handled with dignity and respect for what they were in the previous game, I find it hard to find fault with it. I would prefer to see the potential used to full capacity, than see nothing become of it.

I can understand annoyance or anger at a companion returning with a relatively different personality, but if the personality from the previous game is respected and used to further the character development in the next game, then I have no qualms about it.

Perhaps I'm in the minority on that, but life would be boring if we all believed the same things.

Thank you for taking the time to explain your opinions to me, it has helped me to understand why people may have problems with returning companions.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 20 septembre 2012 - 02:54 .

[sunnydxmen]

1 fenris
2 carvar
3 isabella
4 morrigan
5 Sebastian

[Maclimes]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

Thank you for taking the time to explain your opinions to me, it has helped me to understand why people may have problems with returning companions.

There's actually another major problem, one that Mass Effect does not have.

In Mass Effect, because you have the same protagonist from one game to the next, so it makes sense that he'd take his friends along with him. I don't question why Garrus is with me in ME3. He was with me in ME2, why wouldn't he be?

But Dragon Age is different. In Dragon Age, the protagonists are different people, with barely any connection at all. It seems very weird that they would each keep picking up each other's friends. It makes the world seem too small. It's like, "Jeez, is that guy just everywhere?"

[Cutlasskiwi]

At the top of my head:

1. Varric.
2. Avvar tribesman, hunter with bow and arrow or something like that.
3. Cunning, selfish, thieving rogue.
4. Mage from Tevinter
5. Older warrior with a lot of experience on the battlefield.

[Lioncourt87]

I'd like to see more new characters as companions than older ones reappearing to join you. But here are the five I wouldn't mind seeing with you again in order of favourite:

Top 5
5) Varric
4) Leliena
3) Fenris
2) Alistair
1) Morrigan

[Sylvanpyxie]

It seems very weird that they would each keep picking up each other's friends.

Another very understandable reason.

I can understand why the inclusion of a previous companion simply "because" would be seen as a bad thing, it would be an extremely poor choice on behalf of the writers and ultimately damage not only the content of the game, but also the character itself.

However, should the foresight be included and that the companion is built up as relatively vital to future content, if the companion is purposefully built to progress into another game, should it not be included?

I can understand people's reasons for not wanting to include previous companions in terms of it possibly being nothing but a mere "fan-service", but the exclusion of all previous companions seems rather excessive.

If a companion is built up to be included in future content, if their story is left purposefully open ended and their personality has room to develop, I honestly feel that they should be considered for a new game, at the very least. That's an understandable view point on my part, no?

I fully respect your opinions on it, and I understand and agree that the inclusion of companions without forethought is a bad thing, an inexcusable decision, but I don't see how the full exclusion of all previous companions is any better.

I appreciate that you're taking the time to explain your view point on this and I hope i'm not being too forceful in sharing my own point of view, but I find it hard to fully support the complete and utter exclusion of all possible companion characters.

[JJDrakken]

1. Quanari (Female with romance option)
2. Sigrun
3. Finn
4. (Someone new)
5. Carver or Bethany(depending who lived)


JJ

[Maclimes]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...
I appreciate that you're taking the time to explain your view point on this and I hope i'm not being too forceful in sharing my own point of view, but I find it hard to fully support the complete and utter exclusion of all possible companion characters.

No worries at all! I'm enjoying this discussion. 

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

If a companion is built up to be included in future content, if their story is left purposefully open ended and their personality has room to develop, I honestly feel that they should be considered for a new game, at the very least. That's an understandable view point on my part, no?

 

IF IT IS DONE CORRECTLY, then yes, I have no problem with this. I can see, perhaps, the inclusion of Leliana as a companion. I never cared for her personally, but I have no problems if she's written in as a companion (as long as it's done in a way that makes sense). Also, Flemeth seems to always be in the thick of things, so maybe Morrigan makes sense.

But there are many companions that people seem bizarrely insistent on, that makes no sense at all. For example, Carver. Yes, in some games, he has a potentially open-ended story going on there, with lots of ways he could go and adventures he could have. But, in literally 2/3rds of all games (Warrior & Rogue games), he dies in the first 15 minutes. In many of the other games, he dies at the end of Act 1. In the ones where he survives, there's a 50% chance he's a Grey Warden, and a 50% chance he's a Templar, two VERY different destinies. And of those destinies, only one of them makes sense as being relevant in the mage/templar war setting of DA3. There is absolutely NO logistical way to include him ever again, short of a very brief (obviously optional) cameo.

Anders, if he lives, would make sense as a major player (or, at least an attempted one) in the mage/templar war... but to make him a major character in the game makes no sense, since in many games he is quite dead. (Also, stop ruining Anders! *boo hoo*)

Even taking less obvious examples, you have to question why does this one person keep getting mixed up in the affairs of these physically and chronologically distant heroes?

I guess, a better question from my end: Which of the companions that have appeared in the past do YOU think could make sense as companions for an Orlesian Inquisitor, ten years after the fall of the Archdemon?

[llandwynwyn]

Not in order: Carver, Varric, a templar that isn't Cullen, and Sigrun*. We'll probably get Tallis and Cass so I won't list them.

*we must see a female dwarf again!

[ladyofpayne]

Brutal, calm, stern chevalier. Someone like


For anothers I really don't care.

Modifié par ladyofpayne, 20 septembre 2012 - 03:46 .