226 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

This is why inter-game coherence is a foolish objective.

On paper, it sounds really cool. And obviously fans love it (after all, you hear people comparing save states on the BSN way more than you hear people talk about endings to, say, Fallout: New Vegas), even though we have yet to see Bioware really deliver on a truly important import. ME2's imports were decently done, but small in nature (just like the story scope of ME2 in general, honestly). ME3's appeared ambitious, but were just railroads left and right, with clone characters filling in for any dead ones and import choices just making it easier to get your Reputation meter up more quickly. Since there is no differnce between, say, the Rachni choice, the Geth Rewrite choice, Maleon's Cure, etc.,etc., then almost every major choice in previous games is almost boiled down to complete non-relevance.

DA2 did fairly well at recongizing flags, but ran away from any choice that had any real relevance from the first game. A side quest here, a cameo there... running away to one city on a different continent for ten years help duck some of the fallout, but I know DA3 will not be able to do that. A world where the Dwarves control the Anvil and are led by Bhelen is much different than one without the Anvil where Harrowmont is in control (Epilogue slides aside, these are just in-game states). A world in which the Chantry is going to war in a philosophical battle as much as a martial one, having the Urn of Sacred Ashes, the equivalent of the Christian Holy Grail, would be a huge determiner. Ferelden having a Circle of Mages or having a large tomb where the Templars performed the Right of Annulment should certainly have an effect on DA3, with its neighbor Orlais being ground-zero for a Mage/Templar War.


And then, of course, there is the infamous Dark Ritual/Old God Baby. And whether or not the Architect, Bond Villain of the Darkspawn, is alive or not.


But I have a very high confidence level that DA3 will not (CAN not) follow these threads up with a high degree of fidelity. Players were presented choices that woudl drastically change the course of history in Thedas, but its impossible to have a dozen different worlds based on what players did back in 2008. So we will, again, have cameos and side quests, codex entries and retcons. And fans will have their dreams shattered when they are told their Wardens are dead, or turned into Ghouls, or didn't come back through the Eluvian with Morrigan, or their Hawke's befell similar fates. People have tried to say I'm being overly pessimistic or that Bioware wouldn't let that type of thing happen and that I'm just a hater.

I'm not a hater. I'm just ahead of the curve.

[Lotion Soronarr]

FINE HERE wrote...

Um... yeah, no. There should be some sort of condition or reason to kill off characters, ignoring them or telling them to go away at anytime should be fine, but killing? It comes across as a little childish to me, if you don't at least learn about their character and views first. It could create situations like this:

Mage- Inquisitior, I wish to join your party and offer my magic to aid you.
Inquisitor- ... Yeah, I don't like your haircut.
Mage- I- What?
Inquisitor- You die.
Mage- But I-Gaaaaah!
Other Companion- Maker! What did you kill him for!? He wanted to HELP us!
Inquisitor- Your hair is starting to look stupid too...

Oh man..that inquisitor would go bats*** insane in Japan.

[Dragoonlordz]

I propose a different idea, let your companions kill you the protaganist if you constantly annoy them with personal questions or threaten them or their personal agenda's. Only so much pro-mage chatter Fenris will listen to before he murder knifes your character. Threatening to tell the Chantry about Anders plotting something maybe he incinerates you.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I propose a different idea, let your companions kill you the protaganist if you constantly annoy them with personal questions or threaten them or their personal agenda's. Only so much pro-mage chatter Fenris will listen to before he murder knifes your character. Threatening to tell the Chantry about Anders plotting something maybe he incinerates you.

That would be great.  I would love that..

[The Elder King]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

FINE HERE wrote...

Um... yeah, no. There should be some sort of condition or reason to kill off characters, ignoring them or telling them to go away at anytime should be fine, but killing? It comes across as a little childish to me, if you don't at least learn about their character and views first. It could create situations like this:

Mage- Inquisitior, I wish to join your party and offer my magic to aid you.
Inquisitor- ... Yeah, I don't like your haircut.
Mage- I- What?
Inquisitor- You die.
Mage- But I-Gaaaaah!
Other Companion- Maker! What did you kill him for!? He wanted to HELP us!
Inquisitor- Your hair is starting to look stupid too...

Oh man..that inquisitor would go bats*** insane in Japan.



snip

Indeed. And there are even worse type of haircuts.

[Arppis]

Would be hilarious to do it in the victory celebration.

Only companion I murdered was that elf guy... but that was only because he tried to kill me twice. Even I got my limits.

[Fast Jimmy]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

This is why inter-game coherence is a foolish objective.

I think it's a good objective in games like Mass Effect, where you're playing the same character and encountering people again and again. I feel that if my character is not imported, and I'm in situations where I'm talking to people I've spoken to before, things they may say based on past encounters can be...RP bending. If you're given choices in conversations, and if you can actually have varying relationships with people, I think it's necessary for a game to show that (if you're playing the same character)

As for DA, what about world consistency? The Warden can do a lot of country-impacting things in DA:O--set up the Dwarven leadership, decide the kind of Ferelden, decide the state of the Circle mages...if we never return to Ferelden, you have a point. But if we DO return to Ferelden, choices like these should be shown, I feel.

Now I would say that in reality, this is a far more ambitious, and possibly too ambitious project. It certainly was (too ambitious) for ME. But I don't think it's bad, per se.

<shrug> If they promise an experience (or the player PERCEIVES they are promising an experience) that can't be delivered, I certainly don't see how its good?

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

This is why inter-game coherence is a foolish objective.

I think it's a good objective in games like Mass Effect, where you're playing the same character and encountering people again and again. I feel that if my character is not imported, and I'm in situations where I'm talking to people I've spoken to before, things they may say based on past encounters can be...RP bending. If you're given choices in conversations, and if you can actually have varying relationships with people, I think it's necessary for a game to show that (if you're playing the same character)

If you're playing the same protagonist, then yes, obviously we need inter-game coherence.  Your PC's personality is impacted by what he has done and what he has seen, and if those things get retconned then his entire personality needs to be rebuilt to deal with that.

As for DA, what about world consistency? The Warden can do a lot of country-impacting things in DA:O--set up the Dwarven leadership, decide the kind of Ferelden, decide the state of the Circle mages...if we never return to Ferelden, you have a point. But if we DO return to Ferelden, choices like these should be shown, I feel.

There I don't agree.  If you're playing a brand new PC, the world is effectively brand new as well.  There's no reason for anything to carry over, because whether some NPC your PC doesn't know is alive or dead doesn't really matter.  He can't perceive the differences.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 03 octobre 2012 - 08:34 .

[Sibu]

Better yet, let us kill mages any time we wish!

[Wulfram]

EntropicAngel wrote...

If two games are set in the same world, with events in one game corresponding to events in another, you don't think that the (big--not whether you have Morrigan's ring or something) choices you make should be in the other game? Things like the Circle mages?

Ideally, that would be nice.  But in practice doing that properly requires stopping the player from making any truly impactful choices, because Bioware aren't going to write two different games the fact that you chose differently two games ago.

And I'd rather have the ability to make big choices, than have a bunch of cameos and an explanation for why that Big Choice I made last game doesn't really matter any more.

[Auintus]

EntropicAngel wrote...

There I don't agree.  If you're playing a brand new PC, the world is effectively brand new as well.  There's no reason for anything to carry over, because whether some NPC your PC doesn't know is alive or dead doesn't really matter.  He can't perceive the differences.

Dragon Age is about the story of Thedas. That's why our characters can disappear, the story is actually about the world. That world should remain as the player has affected it, including who is alive and dead.
The world isn't brand new, that's the whole point of importing data. If Bioware wanted to be lazy and set a game somewhere else with no familiar characters, they would do so. Instead, they do their damnest to give us a single, reactive world where we actually see the results of the choices of our previous protagonists.

Modifié par Auintus, 03 octobre 2012 - 09:35 .

[Fiacre]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

There I don't agree.  If you're playing a brand new PC, the world is effectively brand new as well.  There's no reason for anything to carry over, because whether some NPC your PC doesn't know is alive or dead doesn't really matter.  He can't perceive the differences.

But doesn't the state of the country affect the PC as well? Let's say we get another guy from ferelden. Wouldn't a universe where Alistair is always King limit the PCs characterization that would be influenced by what is going in his country compared to a universe where Alistair is dead and Anora rules -- alone, or even with a (disappeared) Watden consort? The PC doesn't exist in a vacuum, after all, and they've already set up the different possibilities.

And regarding purely my personal preferences -- I have to say, I'd prefer having my choices not make as giant impacts as they might have had and have them carry over than ignore them -- if Alistair where to turn up as King when I never make him King (and usually let Anora execute him), I'd find that incredibly bothersome. But as said, that's more personal prefernce than anything else.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fiacre wrote...

But doesn't the state of the country affect the PC as well? Let's say we get another guy from ferelden. Wouldn't a universe where Alistair is always King limit the PCs characterization that would be influenced by what is going in his country compared to a universe where Alistair is dead and Anora rules -- alone, or even with a (disappeared) Watden consort? The PC doesn't exist in a vacuum, after all, and they've already set up the different possibilities.

Sure, but since this character is built anew with the new game, there's no extra work involved in building him in accordance with whatever reality BioWare has established.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 03 octobre 2012 - 10:15 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

If two games are set in the same world, with events in one game corresponding to events in another, you don't think that the (big--not whether you have Morrigan's ring or something) choices you make should be in the other game? Things like the Circle mages?

I don't see why it would matter.  Whatever the state of the world is in the new game, you can build your character in accordance with it.

You can't do that with an imported PC because that character is already built as developed, so changing the environment breaks the character.

[wright1978]

Auintus wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

There I don't agree.  If you're playing a brand new PC, the world is effectively brand new as well.  There's no reason for anything to carry over, because whether some NPC your PC doesn't know is alive or dead doesn't really matter.  He can't perceive the differences.

Dragon Age is about the story of Thedas. That's why our characters can disappear, the story is actually about the world. That world should remain as the player has affected it, including who is alive and dead.
The world isn't brand new, that's the whole point of importing data. If Bioware wanted to be lazy and set a game somewhere else with no familiar characters, they would do so. Instead, they do their damnest to give us a single, reactive world where we actually see the results of the choices of our previous protagonists.

Yeah import function is important to me. Love that ambiance that it is the world i have shaped.

[Alessa]

Sibu wrote...

Better yet, let us kill mages any time we wish!

Why should we do this?         

[Texhnolyze101]

Killing annoying companions should be allowed.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Auintus wrote...

Dragon Age is about the story of Thedas. That's why our characters can disappear, the story is actually about the world. That world should remain as the player has affected it, including who is alive and dead.
The world isn't brand new, that's the whole point of importing data. If Bioware wanted to be lazy and set a game somewhere else with no familiar characters, they would do so. Instead, they do their damnest to give us a single, reactive world where we actually see the results of the choices of our previous protagonists.

And yet Leliana is alive.

Either she's not human, or that's a retcon.

[Althix]

It should work both ways, companions should be allowed to kill us as well. And what is more important they should have a strenghts and ability to do that.
When i first time dueled Loghain, that was indeed hard fight. I mean it. Loghain is awesome. So fight was hard and fight was good. And he can kill you if you are not ready for him.
So as example, let say i have a good character in my group as companion, that person see my dark deeds, and he wants to stop me. And he is trying to do so, in some point of the game. Duel or something.
Or i have party of chaotic evil bastards just like me, and after some acts of mercy from my side one of them decide to turn on me, because on his opinion PC is weak and pathetic and should not lead.

I mean, killing companions in a camp or on the street is not fun, i guess some break points when you can decide what to do with your current or former companion.

You just should not be able to be a friend to everyone in your party, there should be conflicts of interests and different point of view on the world around. If my character decided to slaughter sick, helpless, wounded people, some companions must protect them, simply because they can't agree with a course of actions choosen by PC.
As example how things should not be - is the moment when PC is executing Anders. Does anyone said - "pc you are heartless, cruel, bastard! How could you kill this man? Go to hell PC i don't wanna be part of this, i am leaving!"? Only Fenris said "yeah cool, high five me!" The others? Nothing.

Conflicts, Choices, Desicions, Consequences! <- More of this. I don't want brainless, mute sheeps in my party. I want characters!

Modifié par secretsandlies, 04 octobre 2012 - 03:09 .

[Vitlen]

I think killing can really brake the game but why not make it so pc will be able to punish them
by beating or even enslaving disobedient companions and make them do as she/he wants?
This won`t  brake storyline and can give some good dialog topics.
Plus some companions can try to beat you up or try to make PC to do what they want.
I think it can be really interesting.

Modifié par Vitlen, 04 octobre 2012 - 03:53 .

[Althix]

How can it break a game if killing a character in some circumstances can be a part of plot for the game?

[FINE HERE]

secretsandlies wrote...

How can it break a game if killing a character in some circumstances can be a part of plot for the game?

The title of the thread says 'anytime we wish.' That's not part of the plot. It's a random variable that might effect other scenes/quests later in the game.