When I say I want less choice, I mean, I want less choices that are massive setting changers that essetnially make a single coherent setting impossible, where there are so many major choices that it makes it near impossible for BW to properly place importance on these choices in either DLC or the next game.
Here are some examples, that imo, break the setting simply for the sake of choice...
1. The leader of Ozammar - Because of this choice, it makes future introductions with the king of Oz via storyline much harder to develope, in terms of fully fleshed out, because it forces you to focus on multiple rulers, unless you kill off both of them, which kinda defeats the purpose of the choice, imo.
2. The god baby(From someone who nearly never romances or wants to romance Morrigan) - IMO, something like this either need to be a non-choice(no matter what happens this happens) or it needs to not happen. The reason I say this is, something like this, the soul of a old god, you would think would have a pretty big effect on the setting as a whole, and it seems like something that should be cannon inside the Dragon Age setting. Obviously, I am projecting my own personal interpritation of this choice, but a choice like this needs to have a fairly significant impact on the setting at least in terms of the fleshing out of the lore. By this not effecting the setting enough where the people who didnt choose this are missing out, I think it contrivences the choice itself.
3. Destroying the Anvil or not destroying it - This to me was a major choice for the Dwarves, because in the codex's it made it clear that this creation was actually letting them open up old Thaigs and pushing much farther in the deep roads. IMO, somethingl ike this should have been forced to be canon, simply because it had the greatest chance of making the dwarves kingdoms much more insteresting. Maybe it is because I'm sick of seeing the Dwarven kingdoms getting shafted in the fantasy settings, but still.
4. NPC party members shouldnt be able to be killed or should be forced to stick around the party and be completely formed by the player. This is largely because, imo, it hollows out the setting to the point where it makes it very hard to have a Drizzit, Entreri, Elminster, and ect. Some of them sure, you can have them completely formed by the PC, the ones that wont be staples of the setting. For instane, I am infavor in a big way of you having Leliana(coming from someone who is not a huge fan of hers) be a part of the setting regardless of your choices, but, imo we shouldnt have had the ability to kill her then, in the 1st place or to be able to change her personallity in a major way(she needs to be her own story, so to speak, imo).
I dont like this idea, personally, that we have to be able to directly effect the personality and life of the people who join our parties. We need a Jarlaxle/Elminster in our party that has his own past/story AND independence from our influence. It makes the setting as a whole feel more real and alive, imo. I dont want the setting to be so maliable to the PC, because that means the setting is maliable to EVERY PC, which imo, devalues the setting as a whole and makes it more "gamey" then it needs to be, imo.
I want Dragon Age to be the equivalent of the Forgotten Realms, where I can play 5 years down the road, a Dragon Age game and see Sten, and still remember the 1st time I met him without having to wonder which "story arc" BW decided to go with.
Now with the type of choices I like...
The choices I like are ones that change how I get to the destination. For instance, if I want to join the Mages liberation I want that choice to lead me to the end of the gam but with a completely different perspective, where as with if I joined the Templars I would get to the same end point, but again, from a completely different perspective(much like with BG2).
I want the side quests to determin my player agency/personality/choices, mainly, because these you can much easier develop in future itterations without hamstringing the main setting/story arcs. This would allow me to play a more morally ruthless/evil/good/lawful/chaotic player type.
I think the choice I make in the main story should be restricted to my personal player agency and what my character would do, but if in teh main story, I am deciding all these major setting changing choices, at the end of the game after everyone makes their choices, we are all left with a completely or at least VERY different setting. Where the only way to resolve the said differences is to minimize the choices impact on the settings.
If we had smaller choices in scope, but easier to show from game to game(for instance if you sided with Orlais or Antiva from a past game you would get either Zevran or Leliana to join you in the next game). Or for instance if you decided to save a person in the previous game, you would have access to certain equipment in the next game.
I want choices in the game that I can see in future games, that do not hinder the setting of Dragon age as a whole. I want choices that I know can be developed in the next game w/o hamstringing the setting. I want the setting itself though to be something that I can look to and actaully believe it is a world, w/o being reminded every time I look at a map of Thedas that it is a game, because when I look at the map I have to remember all my choices to know what Thedas I'm looking at.
I dont want to choose whether the collector base survives or not, becasue if I can choose such a huge choice, the choice itself will need to be reduced in terms of impact, so the setting as a whole doesnt suffer. Instead give me smaller choices, where the impacts of those choices can be felt on a personal level, but not so big that it contrivences the choice.
Obviously, I am not stating that the setting/game MUST be treated like this or that my way is the only way, but this is just my view on it. But again, I'm viewing Dragon Age as more then just a game, but also a setting that I want to see survive.
TL;DR - I want choices, but I dont want choices that create so many branches that it trivilaized the choices themselves because of the contrivences that must follow because of said choices.
Modifié par Meltemph, 28 septembre 2012 - 07:25 .
Retour en haut
