12 réponses à ce sujet

[Rune-Chan]

One of the largest flaws I felt in regards to importing Origins into DA2 was that some characters, specifically Zevran and Leliana had the potential to die in the first game, and yet the canon says they survive.

What bothered me was that the player was given a choice, and had that choice ignored.

If there is a certain vision that you want when creating this game, certain characters that you would prefer to be alive, or dead, then please do not give us the "option" of deciding their fate. If you want things to be a certain way, then please do not give us the illusion that we can have it another.

Choices are great, and they are one of the things that the fans of Bioware series' love so much, but choices need consequences to actually matter. If we make a choice and are then effectively told "That was the wrong choice, this is how it should have happened", then we may as well not get given it in the first place.

It wasn't just an issue with DA2 imports, it was one of the most jarring things in Mass Effect as well (yes, I know they are different teams). Choices were made, but they did not actually make a difference beyond perhaps a single line of dialogue.

So please, if you have a certain vision or direction you want to take, please just make it happen. Don't pretend we can make a choice only for it to not count or be changed to suit your direction. If you are going to give us choices, please save it for when it actually counts, when it has consequences, when it is acknowledged and makes a difference.

[Auintus]

The Maker saved Leliana, and I believe Zevran is an import bug.
If choices had too large an impact, they might as well just make separate games. Choices are integrated enough to be applicable, but not so much so that it prevents the game from being doable.

[JCAP]

Zevran appearence in DA2 is a bug from save import.

[Terrorize69]

Magic exists in DA. They can change whatever they like and blame it on magic lol.

[Brodoteau]

Sorry for the early post, here's the full text:

I understand that people do not like this because they feel their choices are being ignored but I always think of a couple of things that make these conversations unnecessary:

1.  You as the player probably die multiple times in the game.  So really, the canon playthrough is the one where Hawke or the Warden didn't die.  Maybe Bioware should start respect this fact and players should not be allowed to reload.  
2.  This is like the bisexuality argument.  Fenris is not gay if play a femHawke; nor is really bisexual in a male playthrough if you don't use the heart choice.  He ends up having an implied relationship with Isabela.  It take metaknowledge to know that Fenris will always be a romance option.   People want multiple "realities" but then complain when one of these multiple realities are not respected. 
3.  I don't think this effects a large number of people.  In all honesty, who really kills Zevran or Leliana or Sten or Wynne etc.  Most people always recruit all NPCs because they want options and character development.  So really there are only a small % that are effected here, and most of them are probably using their own personal canon playthrough (which probably was resulted from multiple playthroughs to get the perfect results they wanted)
4.  There is headcanon.   As suggested above.  Maybe Leliana was saved.  Maybe Zevran wasn't really dead.  Just deal with it.  The world did not end when Edwin showed up in BG2 despite dying in most people's BG playthrough.  Player choice was not ignored, it was just assumed that the game universe had proceeded in a particular way. 
5.  If Bioware really wanted they could always bring back Biff the Understudy.  He was awesome (and recruitable)  

Modifié par Brodoteau, 17 octobre 2012 - 05:42 .

[Rune-Chan]

Brodoteau wrote...

Sorry for the early post, here's the full text:

I understand that people do not like this because they feel their choices are being ignored but I always think of a couple of things that make these conversations unnecessary:

1.  You as the player probably die multiple times in the game.  So really, the canon playthrough is the one where Hawke or the Warden didn't die.  Maybe Bioware should start respect this fact and players should not be allowed to reload.  
2.  This is like the bisexuality argument.  Fenris is not gay if play a femHawke; nor is really bisexual in a male playthrough if you don't use the heart choice.  He ends up having an implied relationship with Isabela.  It take metaknowledge to know that Fenris will always be a romance option.   People want multiple "realities" but then complain when one of these multiple realities are not respected. 
3.  I don't think this effects a large number of people.  In all honesty, who really kills Zevran or Leliana or Sten or Wynne etc.  Most people always recruit all NPCs because they want options and character development.  So really there are only a small % that are effected here, and most of them are probably using their own personal canon playthrough (which probably was resulted from multiple playthroughs to get the perfect results they wanted)
4.  There is headcanon.   As suggested above.  Maybe Leliana was saved.  Maybe Zevran wasn't really dead.  Just deal with it.  The world did not end when Edwin showed up in BG2 despite dying in most people's BG playthrough.  Player choice was not ignored, it was just assumed that the game universe had proceeded in a particular way. 
5.  If Bioware really wanted they could always bring back Biff the Understudy.  He was awesome (and recruitable)  

1) It's a game, dying doesn't count as story progression, as it never happened as far as the story is concerned.
2) Uh. No. The characters are bisexual, they are attracted to both genders, they just happen to be attracted to Hawke. They can show sexual interest in you regardless of gender and you can choose to accept it ore reject it, but it's still there. If it isn't, then they are not characters.
3) Irrelevent, it has nothing to do with the argument that choices should be recognised.
4) No. I will not "just deal with it", if they want a character to always live, then why shouldn't they just make it so. I am asking for coherency and the lack of pretend choices.
5) No idea who that is, nor do I particularly care, because Bioware can obviously do what they like. I am just mentioning something that I would like to happen, you know, because this is a forum to discuss our own opinions and all that.

[AlexJK]

Machines Are Us wrote...

2) Uh. No. The characters are bisexual, they are attracted to both genders, they just happen to be attracted to Hawke. They can show sexual interest in you regardless of gender and you can choose to accept it ore reject it, but it's still there. If it isn't, then they are not characters.

Isn't this is the same as arguing that Bethany and Carver must be some kind of undead, since they are both dead for most of the game (in some playthroughs) and alive (in others).

[Rune-Chan]

AlexJK wrote...

Machines Are Us wrote...

2) Uh. No. The characters are bisexual, they are attracted to both genders, they just happen to be attracted to Hawke. They can show sexual interest in you regardless of gender and you can choose to accept it ore reject it, but it's still there. If it isn't, then they are not characters.

Isn't this is the same as arguing that Bethany and Carver must be some kind of undead, since they are both dead for most of the game (in some playthroughs) and alive (in others).

No. Because sexuality is a part of a persons personality. Death is a state of being.

A more apt comparison would be if you had one sibling, and depending on which class you chose, depended on what class they were. Say, if you were a mage then Bethany was a warrior, whereas if you aren't a mage, then she would be a mage instead.

This would not work. Bethany is a mage, it is an intrinsic part of her character, it defines her to a certain extent. Take that away and they are not the same character.

Having them alive or dead is a consequence of actions, it has nothing to do with them as a character, as opposed to what happens to them.

That is why characters such as Hawke, Shepard and the Warden are more like avatars than actual characters, they are what we make them.

Modifié par Machines Are Us, 17 octobre 2012 - 06:42 .

[KENNY4753]

@OP The Zevran thing must be an import bug because I killed Zev in one of my playthroughs and he didn't appear in DA2. So BW didn't mess with Zevran's fate like Anders.

If I'm correct we never actually see Leliana die (I would never kill her anyway). You can fight her but she just fall down after the battle. That is no proof that she dead. She could have just passed out.

With Anders if left behind at the Keep when saving the city, we never actually see his body and there is no way to prove the body the epilogue states was found is Anders so his story of running away makes sense. The only problem with Anders is that if you don't recruit him he still says he was a Warden (over active imagination I guess).

Modifié par KENNY4753, 17 octobre 2012 - 06:42 .

[Brodoteau]

Machines Are Us wrote...

[1) It's a game, dying doesn't count as story progression, as it never happened as far as the story is concerned.
2) Uh. No. The characters are bisexual, they are attracted to both genders, they just happen to be attracted to Hawke. They can show sexual interest in you regardless of gender and you can choose to accept it ore reject it, but it's still there. If it isn't, then they are not characters.
3) Irrelevent, it has nothing to do with the argument that choices should be recognised.
4) No. I will not "just deal with it", if they want a character to always live, then why shouldn't they just make it so. I am asking for coherency and the lack of pretend choices.
5) No idea who that is, nor do I particularly care, because Bioware can obviously do what they like. I am just mentioning something that I would like to happen, you know, because this is a forum to discuss our own opinions and all that.

To respond... since I do realize this is a forum...
1.  That was my point.  Bioware doesn't recognize the decisions that caused you to die.  The choices that caused you to have a total party wipe because it helps the game and story progress.  No one really complains that Bioware didn't recognize their "choice" to not bring enough health potions to fight the Archdemon and get killed.  No one complains the Bioware didn't recognize their "choice" to fail at the Landsmeet and, hence, let Loghain win.  No one complains that Bioware didn't recognize their tactical "choices" that resulted in a wave of thugs kill you in the DOcks of Kirkwall.  Bioware ignores these player choices all the time because they are necessary for "story progression".   So maybe it's not such a big deal the they ignored your "personal canon" where you killed Zevran.  If you get to reload, then maybe he does too. It worked for Bondari (that's a BG2 reference... look it up... it's hilarious).   
2.  Fenris is bisexual.  Isabela is bisexual.  Sure, you want to make that argument from in-game clues sure, I 'll concede that could be "canon".  But Merril does not hit on any females in the game if you play a male Hawke.  Nor does Anders hit on any females in a Male Hawke game.  They are not bisexual in any one particular reality, only through meta-knowledge.  We will have to agree to disagree on this.
3.  It's not irrelevant that a game developer should not have to cater to a small percentage of the players who decide (again usually after multiple playthroughs) to have an "unusual" outcome.  After, Shepherd can die at the end of the Suicide Mission in ME2. ME3 is therefore a betrayal of that player's "choice."  No.  Because I'm willing to bet the most people don't let their Sheperd die.  So go ahead and kill Merrill.  That doesn't mean she can't be written back in later on.  If comic books couldn't resurrect dead characters where would they be?  
4.  There is coherency.  The major issues and choices are dealt with.  Ultimately, we are always railroaded to a conclusion.  At no point in DA:O can my Warden say "Screw it.  I give up."  or  "Screw the dwarves.  I'm not recruiting them."  He has to finish all 4 missions to move to the Landsmeet.  So how is that any different than forcing characters to be alive?   Yet again, no one complains because it is necessary for "story progression."  So, perhaps, is Leliana being alive. 
5.  Go play BG1:  Here is Biff and, yes, he was awesome:  http://forgottenreal..._the_Understudy And would solve most of your complaints. 

[Rune-Chan]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I feel that having characters stay dead or alive is a good rule for world consistency, but I disagree with your statement about consequences being necessary for choices to matter. Choices matter because they define your character, not because the world changes. I feel the game should...acknowledge them if they can, but I don't believe it is necessary.

When I say choices should matter I am not saying they need to be world changing, I am saying they need to actually have some kind of relevence.

For example if my character is a mage sympathiser, you'd think all of the fellow apostates would ask for my help with fightning Meredith and helping them escape.

But no, they will still attack me, treat me like a threat despite the fact that I am also an apostate, and walking around with two others. Despite the fact that I have helped other mages escape, despite me openly opposing Meredith.

The Templars on the other hand don't give a damn that I am an illegal mage, or that I have done the above. I can even do it in front of them, including an ally that is using blood magic, and it apparently doesn't matter.

That kind of thing completely kills immersion.