9 réponses à ce sujet

[20x6]

I always thought Bioware should move away from the whole "Morality Engine" that all of their games seem to work on.

Imagine a story, split in two - written in the perspective of the "Evil" and the "Good" side.  Good and evil is relative and it is easy to switch the two with some clever writing.


In Dragon Age: Awakening, the line between good and bad was blurred, if I recall correctly.  We assumed the darkspawn were all evil, godless bastards... and then one spoke and had motives.  Since DA:2 left off with no Darkspawn, and the Qunari, Mages, and Templars all had their own reasons for thinking they were the "good guys", wouldn't it be cool to make three separate stories where you are able to see things through the eyes of each faction and realize that NONE of them are the "bad guys"?  I admit, I sided with the Qunari morally, but the option of joining their cause was not permitted by the canon.  Instead, both mages and templars were made out to be douchebags and the Qunari were the only ones left who had any shred of honor... but I killed them off and scared them away.

Imagine reading the story to two separate groups and then having both groups meet up and discuss the book, both having full understanding of the story, but through the perspective of only Mages for one group and Templars the other?
What kind of a discussion would happen?

Anyhow.  I was thinking that this style of story telling would be the next logical course for Bioware to reign as king of story-driven gaming.  'Good' and 'Evil' from a set bias is getting old.... or I should say IS OLD.

[scootermcgaffin]

Possible? Yes.

Practical? Not so much.

[20x6]

I think it could be practical.
Afterall, we did have multiple origin stories in DA:Origins. They'd just need to extend them through a few acts.

You'd think after sinking as much money into these types of games as Bioware has (NWN, KOTOR, Jade Empire, SW:TOR, ME, DA), there'd have been a breakthrough to go one step further?

[Emzamination]

Dragon age has never been light or dark, just grey.

[cJohnOne]

Depends of the individual. For me being good is a motivation. For other it probably is a dis-motivation. I don't see how having factions would be particularly motivating.

As far as everyone thinking they're the good guys you need to be able to relate to the faction so I guess different points of view would work okay for me but I relate better to the chantry.

[Sable Rhapsody]

20x6 wrote...
In Dragon Age: Awakening, the line between good and bad was blurred, if I recall correctly.  We assumed the darkspawn were all evil, godless bastards... and then one spoke and had motives.  Since DA:2 left off with no Darkspawn, and the Qunari, Mages, and Templars all had their own reasons for thinking they were the "good guys", wouldn't it be cool to make three separate stories where you are able to see things through the eyes of each faction and realize that NONE of them are the "bad guys"?  I admit, I sided with the Qunari morally, but the option of joining their cause was not permitted by the canon.  Instead, both mages and templars were made out to be douchebags and the Qunari were the only ones left who had any shred of honor... but I killed them off and scared them away.

I think what happened in DA2 is the flip of what happened in Awakening.  Instead of realizing that there were no real "bad guys," DA2 shows that there are really no "good guys" either.  There's just a bunch of different factions, murdering each other in the name of the Qun or freedom or the Maker or, I dunno, tasty cookies.

I agree that DA2 had a weird way of doing it, by making just about everyone fairly unsympathetic.  The qunari got a more "human" treatment probably because we hadn't seen them before in any systematic fashion (Sten was just one dude).  That made them more sympathetic than the mages and templars, who just came off nutjobby.

IMO it bodes well for DA3, though, because we've already been introduced to all these varying factions.  We can safely delve deeper into them, and that gives the writers more room for moral ambiguity.

[Lithuasil]

Has been done, the game's called "Enclave"

[daffl5]

good idea. but like the world, games should never be Good vs evil. its the side you choose to act on.

[Plaintiff]

Dragon Age already allows the player to make up their mind about who is wrong or right on any number of issues. There is no "morality" bar. You're free to make your own decisions.

[MichaelStuart]

I'm not a fan of morality systems in general.