Fast Jimmy wrote...
If the writers have a really amazing idea for a story that can be handled by the current technology and scope without much issue, but the reason why it is shot down is the Save Import, then that is a problem. If they say "some people won't have that game state, so its not worth the time to take to make it, despite how good your story idea is" then something is very broken.
Yet, even reigning in the Save Import when has BioWare ever done tons of unique content within a single game? They usually offer a decent amount of optional content that you could miss (BG2, certainly) but not really story related divergent content like The Witcher 2 or Alpha Protocol. It seems they need to change that mentality of not creating chunks of unique content first, if that mindset is indeed present.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
If you don't know what I'm talking about, that sounds absolutely crazy, but it was an AWESOME series of quests and characters that, if Bethesda had a Save Import system, would not have been budgeted because of the ludicrous nature of those flags/game states lining up to justify creating it.
That's the catch though- if the writers have some new plot in mind that involves a variable plot flag, they can railroad it or handwave it to a common point if they REALLY want to do it. That seems to be the case already with Leliana.
I think the big difference and problem with miraculously resurrecting Leliana is that they haven't given any explanation for why/how she is alive again if you killed her. The logical consequence of killing her is that she stays dead. Just saying "I got better" doesn't cut it. If the writers are going to throw a wrench in there and bypass the logical
consequence to a player's action then they need a fairly immediate
explanation or frame the illogical consequence in such a way that its a
mystery guaranteed to be explained. I don't necessarily have a problem with the writers handwaving a logical consequence if it means getting to do an awesome new story, like Harold in Fallout, but then they need a solid way to explain away the discrepency, and not potentially wait several years between games to explain it.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
Back when this thread was originally alive, I conceded to this idea. Its doable, it offers choice and it cleans out the clutter. However, I made sure I emphasized that romance options would likely not make the Top 3 choices. Your class would likely not be on the Top 3. Your gender would not be on the Top 3.
Suddenly, people said we'd need a lot more than 3, as THOSE were the most important things to them and I was foolish for concerning myself with actual plot choices. How silly of me.
Its easy to say "3 choices are all we'll cover" but realize that you're cutting the Save Import choices to the bone and playing favorites. I wouldn't want to be Bioware if they decide to do it. Better to cut all imports and hear a general outcry than to preserve some things and destory others. THAT will result in making true enemies.
I think its more a matter of having 1-3 big plot related choices carried through as possible big consequences. So think back to Origins- what were the biggest choices you made in that game? What were the choices that you ended up sitting there and really thinking about? What choices within the game felt like they were a big ****ing deal, as you were playing the game? Off the top of my head, the Dark Ritual choice fits that. Not only does it affect your Warden living or dying, it affects the whole OGB plot. In something like Awakening, the choice to kill/spare the Architect feels like a big deal.
Ideally, BioWare would have an idea of what choices within the game they're working on are the BIG choices so they can even roughly brainstorm where they might go in the future. Not every sequel would need to touch on a past big choice (like DA2 didn't touch the Dark Ritual). But that all depends on the story the current game is trying to tell.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
And maybe that's the beauty of the game - it never reached out too far. Again, I haven't played it, I'm only basing it off of feedback I've heard from others. But it never offered a cure for zombification (I'd assume) or had the option of launching a nuclear weapon to clear out a horde. Keeping choices focused on small, personal efforts is a more suitable environment for such a mechanic, rather than being a world-traveling hero who is involved in Big Events and makes Big Choices. Your hero changes the world... but the world does not change with your hero. At least, not as much as the Big Choice seemed to make it out to be.
Sure- TWD works better than recent BioWare games because it uses a more fixed protagonist in Lee. He's Lee Everett with or without the player controlling him. He has a backstory. The player controls the nature of his development and interactions but not so much the larger plot events. TWD is a genuinely personal story in that nobody is curing the zombie apocalypse, nobody is doing huge world changing things. Its a story of a group of people simply trying to survive and any impact you might have is on the relationships you have with other characters.
Basically TWD does a much better job at maintaining the illusion of choice than BioWare has done of late. Just as a vague example: Its no surprise that in TWD, people die. So in one episode you have a choice to save/kill Character A. People will react to how you deal with that choice. In a subsequent episode, if you killed Character A, they're gone. They're not coming back. In this subsequent episode, Character B also dies. Its a set in stone plot event. But the nature with how this event happens is totally different based on whether you saved/killed Character A in the previous episode. If you saved Character A in the prior episode, then both Character A and B end up dying in one unique scene. If you had previously killed Character A, then Character B dies in a totally different way. The net result is the same though- by the end of the 2 episodes, characters A and B are both dead. You have no real way to change that. But the game does a good job of giving you the illusion of choice by letting you save/kill Character A initially.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
But if you are playing a brand new character in a brand new location and the writing team isn't going to mention much of any past events/choices anyway, then what is the Import feature bringing to the table?
Its the notion that, ideally, the Save Import can flesh out the world and give it a more personal feeling. As BioWare is wont to say, the Dragon Age games are about the world, not any one character. So being able to toss in some small references to past events can make the world feel like you've had a hand in creating a certain world state even if you're not playing as the same character from game to game.
Ideally, thats how it works. I don't think they've done a great job of this as of yet. But I'm willing to see if they can do a better job in DA3. As an idea, it has a ton of potential.
Knight of Dane wrote...
I hope my warden's can be named in the following games, they did all have set last names after all, things like comparing my Amell warden to her cousin the champion or "King Cousland"
Seriously, YES. That was so annoying in DA2. Even in Origins really. If you're going to bother with giving a character a fixed last name, they can at least use it every once in a while.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
If the Dark Ritual choice isn't resolved by DA3, should it be chucked? It doesn't apply to DA3, so it should be stripped out, according to your above statements. But if that choice is ignored, you will have as many people outraged than if made the Warden a canon Human Noble male.
If a choice is ignored in a new game, it doesn't mean its being retconned or invalidated. It could just mean that any consequence to that choice has no role in the current story/game. Like the Dark Ritual in DA2.
Granted, I think they should try to resolve those loose plot threads sooner rather than later, either in subsequent sequels or in expansion packs.
I think the Dark Ritual choice is kind of a terrible choice/consequence given how BIoWare has handled it so far. It makes for a great immediate sequel/expansion hook, yet now it won't possibly be addressed until maybe DA3, 3+ years after Origins came out. Even in game, its a choice that as far as the OGB goes, won't have a natural consequence for 10-20 years post Origins. It does have the immediate effect of saving your Warden, but the aspect that makes the choice more ambiguous is the OGB. So I always find it disingenuous how some of the writers act like they're only focused on making one game at a time, when placing a choice like the Dark Ritual at the very end of a game won't be resolved within the game, barring some time jump. Its pure sequel bait and within Origins, a major loose end. Its starting a new story thread at the end of the game, with no chance of it being resolved.
Modifié par Brockololly, 18 janvier 2013 - 04:29 .
Retour en haut
