895 réponses à ce sujet

[Inprea]

One of the major draws for dragon age and mass effect to me was the notion that my decisions would matter in future games. Even if the change was extremely small I was happy whenever I saw them come into play. Then even happier to see renegades crying about missing a cameo. If Bioware was to take away the "world building" aspect of the series I would abandon the series.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

Part of the problem(?) with the imports from DAO to DA2, aside from some technical bugs, is that the two games start roughly in the same place: Ostagar/Lothering. I think this set up a lot of expectations. And yes, I include myself in this. If you are going to give Zevran a cameo, it makes sense that you would want to recognize his relationship with the Warden and his reaction to what happened with him/her. While I enjoyed the different aspects of Alistair in DA2, he didn't further the plot at all.

I enjoyed how, if Nat Howe was in your final party in Awakening, you got a different side quest and the opportunity for more Anders/Nathaniel banter.

Sophia Dryden on the Wounded Coast irritated me, not the quest itself but the fact that it was a different voice actor. What can I say?

In another thread I suggested there should be enough time in Thedas history that would reduce your choices to codex entries (the important ones anyway). My understanding is that DA3 will begin about 3-4 years after Hawke ends Meredith. That's enough time to reach the same boiling point regardless of your earlier decisions. Have a brief checklist: Alistair's fate, Warden's fate, Warden's origin, Warden's LI (since this would affect any codex entry or letters or rumors you introduce), Hawke's class, LI, end choice, Anders' fate (maybe). A war could be brewing between Orlais and Ferelden no matter who rules in Ferelden. After all, Orlais is full of people like Duke Prissface - I mean Prosper.

I don't really need cameos. If I can make the game a bit more my own, reflect my choices from DAO and DA2 and have those choices show in the codex, or rumors in a bar, or letters, I'm fine with that. "In spite of Anora's best diplomatic efforts too many people in Orlais wanted Ferelden back as a province and even Empress Celene was starting to listen . . ." or "Alistair made great strides in governing. Fereldens were happy with him but he still had trouble grasping the intricacies of international diplomacy and as a result relations were strained between Ferelden and Orlais . . ." We get to the same place but our choices are reflected in the history.

I enjoy playing different characters and I look forward to developing a new character in a new situation.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

The writer has the last word. If he doesn't like your choices, he'll retcon them. We've seen that in games before.

The problem is, BioWare makes such a big deal about the save import and your decisions actually carrying over into the next game. For the most part, they do. But when you kill a main character, only to see that character alive and well in the next game, it ruins immersion and makes the save import seem more like a gimmick.

If you are a lead writer and give the player that kind of choice, you should honor that choice. Really liking a character and wanting to have them in future games isn't a compelling enough reason to bring them back to life with no explaination.

The BioWare writers also contradict themselves. I remember when ME2 was in development and people started asking about Kaidan and Ashley staying dead or not. "Of course they'll stay dead. Character deaths are permanent."

With Dragon Age 2, they say the opposite. "Dead isn't really dead. We reserve the right to bring back any character we want." It's no wonder they have so many retcons. This company flip flops more than my flip flops.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 05 octobre 2012 - 11:33 .

[Philosophaster]

*Ambassador enters stage right and speaks to DAIII protagonist*

The sight is dismal;
And our affairs from [Ferelden] come too late:
The ears are senseless that should give us hearing,
To tell him his commandment is fulfill'd,
That [Hero of Ferelden] and [Champion of Kirkwall] are dead:
Where should we have our thanks?

*Ambassador exits stage left*

It is a step towards a clean slate for DAIII's story and provides a satisfactory conclusion to the stories of previous protagonists that everyone can appreciate. Import problem slowly being resolved (that was an excerpt from Hamlet concerning the unceremonious end of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern for those who didn't catch it,. Looking back, wth was I thinking quoting Shakespeare?)

QueenPurpleScrap wrote...

Part of the problem(?) with the imports from DAO to DA2, aside from some technical bugs, is that the two games start roughly in the same place: Ostagar/Lothering. I think this set up a lot of expectations. And yes, I include myself in this. If you are going to give Zevran a cameo, it makes sense that you would want to recognize his relationship with the Warden and his reaction to what happened with him/her. While I enjoyed the different aspects of Alistair in DA2, he didn't further the plot at all.

In another thread I suggested there should be enough time in Thedas history that would reduce your choices to codex entries (the important ones anyway). My understanding is that DA3 will begin about 3-4 years after Hawke ends Meredith. That's enough time to reach the same boiling point regardless of your earlier decisions. Have a brief checklist: Alistair's fate, Warden's fate, Warden's origin, Warden's LI (since this would affect any codex entry or letters or rumors you introduce), Hawke's class, LI, end choice, Anders' fate (maybe). A war could be brewing between Orlais and Ferelden no matter who rules in Ferelden. After all, Orlais is full of people like Duke Prissface - I mean Prosper.

I don't really need cameos. If I can make the game a bit more my own, reflect my choices from DAO and DA2 and have those choices show in the codex, or rumors in a bar, or letters, I'm fine with that. "In spite of Anora's best diplomatic efforts too many people in Orlais wanted Ferelden back as a province and even Empress Celene was starting to listen . . ." or "Alistair made great strides in governing. Fereldens were happy with him but he still had trouble grasping the intricacies of international diplomacy and as a result relations were strained between Ferelden and Orlais . . ." We get to the same place but our choices are reflected in the history.

I enjoy playing different characters and I look forward to developing a new character in a new situation.

In all seriousness, I agree with your stance on this issue, especially the point in bold. Expecting to see previous protagonists in the flesh would simply be unrealistic. It would be a headache for the developers as your protagonists would most likely not look, speak, or act like they did when they were controlled by the players themselves.

Modifié par inconsiderate rick, 06 octobre 2012 - 04:45 .

[rolson00]

yes i think Bioware should do away with the save import for this game have a fresh start DA3 i think it needs fewer ties to 1& 2

[Atakuma]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The writer has the last word. If he doesn't like your choices, he'll retcon them. We've seen that in games before.

The problem is, BioWare makes such a big deal about the save import and your decisions actually carrying over into the next game. For the most part, they do. But when you kill a main character, only to see that character alive and well in the next game, it ruins immersion and makes the save import seem more like a gimmick.

If you are a lead writer and give the player that kind of choice, you should honor that choice. Really liking a character and wanting to have them in future games isn't a compelling enough reason to bring them back to life with no explaination.

The BioWare writers also contradict themselves. I remember when ME2 was in development and people started asking about Kaidan and Ashley staying dead or not. "Of course they'll stay dead. Character deaths are permanent."

With Dragon Age 2, they say the opposite. "Dead isn't really dead. We reserve the right to bring back any character we want." It's no wonder they have so many retcons. This company flip flops more than my flip flops.

First off, save imports are a gimmick and there's nothing wrong with that. Second, two different teams of writers saying something different is not a contradiction.

[Vicious]

If it wasn't a waste of time a la Dragon Age 2, sure. I love bioware but I don't have confidence they can pull it off in a 2 year dev cycle. I just want the game to not suck.

[Si-Shen]

Simple answer, bad idea.
The save imports allow for a semi-custom world, most of which appears in the background and is a novel approach. The old method of telling us "this is what happened" is abused and rather boring, it might make things a bit more difficult but its worth it in the end. That is assuming you paid attention to the entire story in DA2, the little comments that slip in, etc.

[Celtic Latino]

MillKill wrote...

I find this feature unnecessary for Dragon Age. It does nothing but restrict writers heavily and prevent them from making characters from previous games too prominent. If they decide to ignore a decision for the sake of a better story, like Leliana's possible death, the forums scream bloody murder about retcons.

Just make a single set of choices canon. If you'd like to pretend that your previous choices are an AU what-if scenario, fine. The comics and novels took this approach. They turned out fine, because Gaider wasn't hamstrung about being ambiguous about whether Alistair was king or whether Wynne was alive. He simply went with the decisions that made for the best stories. Your savefiles where Alistair was a drunk, or Wynne died did not spontaneously delete themselves.

Baldur's Gate 2, which is often held up as Bioware's best game, completely ignored any decisions you made in the first game, even though you were playing the same character. A party from the previous game was made canon, even if you never recruited those characters or killed them. Somehow, the world kept spinning and the game was amazing.

Just let the writers pick the choices that make for the best story. That way, if they want to do a story about the Dark Ritual, they can. If they want to do a story involving Harrowmont being king, they can. Let's not restrict the writers into writing around previous our previous savegames. Let them make DA3 the best it can be by not putting in roadblocks that prevent them from telling the story they want to tell so that those who destroyed the ashes won't feel bad there wasn't a single line referencing how evil their ncharacter was. Plus, I don't want Sten to be prevented from being a prominent figure just because some people left him in Lothering.

Respectfully I disagree  To me that was Baldur's Gate 2's weakest point and probably what shows how far BioWare has come, especially in terms of updated games like the Mass Effect trilogy and Dragon Age series in which decisions DO have consequences. 

The whole purpose of these games is to make tough decisions and have those decisions affect the world. Or at least a medium between the two like what they've been doing. There's alternate sequences there for those who have made different decisions and a canon decision for those who do not have save imports. 

The best way DA3 won't have roadblocks is if they focus on a different nation and don't bring back returning characters, or at least relegate them to minor cameos. That way we can have fantastic storytelling without feeling like anything we've done means nothing.

And as for Sten being a prominent figure. If someone left him in Lothering I think it's fine he shows up in DA3 (somehow he escaped, the Blight is a good excuse on that one). If the Arishok lives (leaves peacefully) then Sten should be given a subservient or minor role.  If he was killed well then.... They handled the situation with Wrex/Wreav in ME3 very well and this seems almost a similar situation so I don't see how Sten and Arishok would be any different. 

If you do enjoy canon decisions, by all means you should not be punished either, as I think there should be an optional set canon for those who either did not play the first two games or who enjoy an overarching storyline from the writers' vision. But for the rest of us, I think we'd like our game without too many retcons. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Celtic Latino wrote...

The whole purpose of these games is to make tough decisions and have those decisions affect the world.

The best way DA3 won't have roadblocks is if they focus on a different nation and don't bring back returning characters, or at least relegate them to minor cameos.

But these are mutually exclusive statements. You say you love imports because they let you change the world... but then you say the best way to address them is to run away from the world and not bring anyone you affected back. What's the purpose of that? Wouldn't you rather revisit Orzammar, even if the king there isn't the one you crowned? Wouldn't you rather see Ferelden, even if Anora is queen instead of the Warden? We, as players, have invested serious time and effort in these locations and people - and the best course of action is to abandon them, or only have them come back for a three minute cameo?

I'd rather ditch the imports, completely. Otherwise, we will NEVER get as many choices as we did in DA:O, or in ME1 and 2. Small choices, like if we recruited Nathaniel Howe and if he lived (small in comparisson to the number of players who got through Awakening and made that choice, and brought Anders into the Deep Roads in DA2) are given more service than huge decisions, like if we saved the Rachni. Small decisions are easy to accommodate; large decisions are IMPOSSIBLE to accomodate. 

Killed Leliana? There's a retcon for that. Destroyed the genophage cure? There's a retcon for that. Perform a boon that does anything in DA:O? There's all kinds of retcons for that.

Essentially, what they wind up doing is ignoring tons of choices, retconning others, and then addressing in a minimalist way any of the choices left. And I'm not saying its their fault - its EXTREMELY difficult to do this kind of customization and world building for choices... which is why they should get rid of them.

I'd be fine if tons of choices were given in a game, where crazily different endings were possible... and then everything reset to a canon for the next game, where things can get back to neutral. 

Running from the past is not an answer. The past will catch up with you, because eventually you will run out of places to run.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:34 .

[NovaBlastMarketing]

MillKill I have to strongly disagree i think its  a very valuable  feature and  adds alot to the game experience

in fact ...I have realized that the vast majority of suggestions you make in my opinion are "bad"  would ruin the experience in some way for me . Most notable one would be this and trying to suggested taking out the "best choice " seriosly I have not said this to anyone before but it just seems ever time i see one of your posts i completely disagree with it .

Your are entitled to your opinion however as I am I

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:25 .

[Quicksilver26]

on that matter i think the female Cousland who married Alistair and did the dark ritual is BioWare's canon:lol:
(from everything I've read this seams to be the case:bandit:)

Modifié par Quicksilver26, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:43 .

[Iakus]

Inprea wrote...

One of the major draws for dragon age and mass effect to me was the notion that my decisions would matter in future games. Even if the change was extremely small I was happy whenever I saw them come into play. Then even happier to see renegades crying about missing a cameo. If Bioware was to take away the "world building" aspect of the series I would abandon the series.

Unfortunately, I suspect that at least part of ME3's downfall was the sheer number of variants that had to be kept track of and accoutned for.

Dragon Age doesn't have that problem to quite such a degree, since the focus is going to be on a different protagonist in each game.  But sooner or later a breaking point will be reached.

I think it's ar better if the developers only have to worry about the choices made in this game affecting this game.  And let the next game's choices take care of themselves.   Keep a few "important" choices to customize indivisual games, and leave it at that

[Mr Fixit]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Running from the past is not an answer. The past will catch up with you, because eventually you will run out of places to run.

Well said, as Commander Sisko will attest to in "Emissary" and Worf in "Way of the Warrior".

[MilaBanilla]

 NO. 
<_<
The save imports is what makes the game more replayable.

If you don't like it, don't use it 

Simple.

[MillKill]

Quicksilver26 wrote...

krul2k wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...

Orian Tabris wrote...

Vicious wrote...

These.

Sure. And you'll be here complaining about how xxx cameo made absolutely no sense. You were mad they brought Leliana back. They don't care about your canon already. Why are you vested in it when it is revealed to be naught but GIMMICK?

Better to spend their time on more important stuff. Making a good and memorable DA3 main plot. Making it everything DA2 wasn't.

It's funny, because absolutely NOTHING you said applies to me.

DA2 wasn't quite up to scratch, but it was nonetheless a great game.

I never kept having killed Leliana, because I don't like killing companions off, and I actually really, really... really like Leliana. The ONLY canon I'm worried about, are how they handle the Old God Baby, and deciding whether or not to kill the Architech.

That's just it! They won't handle the OGB in any meaningful way because it doesn't even exist in many imported saves! Or they'll simply handwave another Leliana and make OGB happen. Importing severely restricts what can be done having limited resources in mind.

Im getting the impression from bioware themselfs that the OGB does exist, just look at the "default" history fro DA2 as from that im taking it to mean thats the bioware history and everything else is our imaginations

on that matter i think the female Cousland who married Alistair and did the dark ritual is BioWare's canon:lol:
(from everything I've read this seams to be the case:bandit:)

I hope that if they do decide to ditch the save import, they make the OGB canon. It just has so much plot potential.

Actually, even if they keep the import, I'd be fine if they still made the OGB canon. Just say that Morrigan went to Riordan with the DR.

[Fast Jimmy]

krul2k wrote...

Im getting the impression from bioware themselfs that the OGB does exist, just look at the "default" history fro DA2 as from that im taking it to mean thats the bioware history and everything else is our imaginations

Gaider has come out and said (recently) that if the Ultimate Sacrifice was done and no Ritual occurred, there will be no OGB.

Now... how they plan on having a deity walking the face of the earth, being raised by Morrigan, a character who is certainly going to be involved in the spot light of the main plot here at some point, and NOT make that a big deal is going to be interesting. Honestly, I feel like even the best writers in the world could do any justice to the choice at all without resulting in two very different playthroughs, which Bioware has never committed to before in the past.

Its a recipe for creating a stream of constantly, ever-growing sum of custom content. If you have the OGB in DA3 and don't completely kill and negate his existence somehow in the story, then he could be back. So now you have a choice from the first DA game possibly affecting the fourth. And all of the different scenarios that could be changed in DA3 will have to be taken care of for DA4, with the OGB choice further differentiating all of THOSE choices for DA4... its a spiraling task. Its a rabbit hole with no end to it. Its going to either A) result in them giving up on import choices or hopping so far into the future that no choice matters, period and/or have an event happens that wipes the slate clean of any prior events... which is asinine.

The Fallout series is great with this. It lets you make vastly diffferent decisions, killing people as you see fit, wiping out entire towns if it so fits your playthrough... and then, in the sequel, the events are set. That town one character wiped out? Turns out it actually grew to be one of the largest governing bodies in the entire Western Hemisphere. If Fallout tried to do game imports, it would have completely crippled that plot line, or it would have done a cop out where things still happened the same way regardless.

It is a lofty goal to attempt. But it is 100%, undoubtedly, completely unsustainable. They managed to do a sequel where they hid away from any real influence from the first game (much like ME2 did). But the third game, with events happening that are easily influenced by, say, who's the king of Ferelden or if there is a Circle left in the eastern part of Thedas (since both Kirkwall's and Ferelden's could have been annulled or saved, depending on choices in DA:O and DA2) or if the dwarves, who supply lyrium to both mages and Templars, are ruled by an isolationist king or a king that encourages trade with topsiders... all of these things could EASILY have implications to the story.

But they won't. Not in a meaningful way. Because its impossible to do that. Literally - IMPOSSIBLE.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:47 .

[Mr Fixit]

Imports basically promote status quo. Nothing fundamental changes because devs can't commit to dealing with all the variables.

I'd rather they stick with choices they consider 'canon' and boldly shake up things for the future. BioWare tried that (boldly shaking, that is) with DA2, setting the stage for DA3, but because they didn't know what to do with imports, the whole game was hideously railroaded towards a single preplanned ending.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:49 .

[slimgrin]

Mila-banilla wrote...

 NO. 
<_<
The save imports is what makes the game more replayable.

If you don't like it, don't use it 

Simple.

In Mass Effect it added nothing meaningfull. Unless you count 2-3 minute cameos as something special. Camoes don't affect replayability at all. Story depth and combat complexity does.

Modifié par slimgrin, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:51 .

[Philosophaster]

MillKill wrote...

I hope that if they do decide to ditch the save import, they make the OGB canon. It just has so much plot potential.

Actually, even if they keep the import, I'd be fine if they still made the OGB canon. Just say that Morrigan went to Riordan with the DR.

While I agree that the OGB has great potential as a plot device, they will have to find another way to account for its existence than just Riordan accepting the DR. If they are to keep the import system and make OGB canon, they will need to explain why the Warden or Alistair remained dead after slaying the Archdemon. Then again, with Awakening you can have a inexplicably resurrected Warden appear so a ret-con is always a possibility when it comes to the nuances of the DR.

[MillKill]

Mila-banilla wrote...

 NO. 
<_<
The save imports is what makes the game more replayable.

If you don't like it, don't use it 

Simple.

This is not a don't like, don't use issue. In fact, since the effort was made to implement the feature, I use it. The problem is resources and story restrictions.

Even if I didn't use it, the writers have their hands tied by the people who did. The problem exists as long as the feature exists.

In the best of all possible worlds, every choice would have huge sweeping onsequences that resonated throughout the series and every permutation of the story was an instant classic. In that world, I'd love imports. But so long as development resources are scarce, that world won't exist.

In the real world, the costs outweigh the benefits.