325 réponses à ce sujet

[Burnouts3s3]

 

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

While I understand that the rules of life and death are a bit hazy in Dragon Age and allow for such things as demon possesion or corpse revivial, I think such revivials, such as Leliana's in DA2, seem to undermine and undercut the player's decision. I would point to Mass Effect for a better handling of this: dead characters were replaced by similar model stand-ins while alive characters were 'not' put into situations where they did die.

'Tis a simple suggestion.

[David Gaider]

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

[FaWa]

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

ARCHDEMONS COMIN BACK FOLKS

Modifié par FaWa, 18 octobre 2012 - 02:42 .

[andar91]

FaWa wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

ARCHDEMONS COMIN BACK FOLKS

Heheh, I'm sure a lot of people would be happy about that.

In all seriousness, I don't really mind this (David's point). It can be annoying, but I don't think they would do it if they didn't have a good reason, and it's probably difficult to see into the future where they want a character. I wouldn't be surprised if we have far less options to kill off certain characters in the future.

Edit: See? I was right.

Modifié par andar91, 18 octobre 2012 - 02:46 .

[Terrorize69]

Think of the Dragon age series as stories being told by a story teller, like Varric in DA2. Some details are lies or more hazy then others.

Its all about the bigger picture, single games are only hazy pieces that make up the setting for the series

Modifié par Terrorize69, 18 octobre 2012 - 02:50 .

[Vilegrim]

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Then why offer the option in the first place? 

[syllogi]

FaWa wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

ARCHDEMONS COMIN BACK FOLKS

Well, since the soul of the last Archdemon may be installed in a human, this is possible.

Personally, unless the death is plot related, like Alistair doing the Ultimate Sacrifice, or Anders dying at the crisis point in DA2, I'm not really bothered by Leliana or Oghren "getting better" after the possibility of death at the player character's hand.  The idea that they could be healed isn't particularly wacky...there are resurrection spells in the game, and Leliana's possible death only can occur in the chamber that holds sacred, healing ashes.  It's not that big of a deal to me.

But I will say that it is better just to give us the option to annoy party members to the point that they leave, instead of killing them, if there's even the slightest possibility that they'll come back one day in another game.

Modifié par syllogi, 18 octobre 2012 - 02:50 .

[JWvonGoethe]

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Can we take that as confirmation that a living Leliana in DA2 is, or will be shown to be, entirely consistent with an apparently dead Leliana in DA:O?

I'm just asking because I'm thinking of making a dead Leliana  DA:O save to import into DA2, and then into DA3:I once the game is released, and would like to know if this makes sense. Thanks for taking the time to engage with fan discussion, by the way, it's much appreciated.

Modifié par JWvonGoethe, 20 octobre 2012 - 03:39 .

[marshalleck]

ITT David Gaider confirms Leliana to be a zombie.

[LPPrince]

marshalleck wrote...

ITT David Gaider confirms Leliana to be a zombie.

More Walking Dead connections?

[Atakuma]

JWvonGoethe wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Can we take that as confirmation that a living Leliana in DA2 is, or will be shown to be, entirely consistent with an apparently dead Leliana in DA2?

I'm just asking because I'm thinking of making a dead Leliana  DA:O save to import into DA2, and then into DA3:I once the game is released, and would like to know if this makes sense. Thanks for taking the time to engage with fan discussion, by the way, it's much appreciated.

I doubt they will even acknowledge it.

[Catroi]

If you put choices in a game don't handwaive those choices later on... That is just plain hypocritical and states to the players who got their canon retconned "you were wrong" wich has never happened in a Bioware franchise before...

[Atakuma]

Catroi wrote...

If you put choices in a game don't handwaive those choices later on... That is just plain hypocritical and states to the players who got their canon retconned "you were wrong" wich has never happened in a Bioware franchise before...

Baldur's Gate 2 ignored everything that happened in the first one in favor of it's own canon IIRC, and Mass effect has quite few instances of this as well.

Modifié par Atakuma, 18 octobre 2012 - 03:11 .

[Razhathael]

Vilegrim wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Then why offer the option in the first place? 

Have to second this, it makes no sense. I can understand Leliana's resurrection, since back in da:o's time they propably didn't have much planned, and with DA2 they did. But now that they know such choices shouldn't exist in the first place if there isn't a choice at all...Why make it a choice in the first place?

So, a suggestion on how to calm down the mad if you decide to resurrect someone:

Better way: clear acknowledgement of the death in game, rumors start flowing around the story/subtle hints, you get a quest and eventually you discover they're alive, this will be treated as a twist instead of "your choice never existed"

Bad way: you play the game believing a character is dead, since no info is given, you believe it. Then a while later the character just pops alive on the screen like nothing happened, with at most a "I thought you died" question answered by a mundane answer.

Dragon Age universe has magic, if something has to be resurrected then I can understand that. But if that resurrection is done by a decision retcon instead of a plot element, people won't be happy. Please consider, if there is to be a resurrection in the future, it can be handled with more care.

[Bfler]

Catroi wrote...

If you put choices in a game don't handwaive those choices later on... That is just plain hypocritical and states to the players who got their canon retconned "you were wrong" wich has never happened in a Bioware franchise before...

Which franchise except of Dragon Age and Mass Effect has also such an import feature with player choices?

And the development of Origins started long way before they introduced this feature. Maybe that is why there is such a kill option.

Modifié par Bfler, 18 octobre 2012 - 03:17 .

[marshalleck]

Vilegrim wrote...

Then why offer the option in the first place? 

Because they don't plan anything ahead and don't know how the story will change from game to game, so naturally that leads to them having to overturn earlier decisions

[WazzuMan]

Technically, Bioware is the Maker of the DA world. If they say this character isn't dead anymore then they aren't dead. And who are we to argue with god?

[JWvonGoethe]

Atakuma wrote...

Catroi wrote...

If you put choices in a game don't handwaive those choices later on... That is just plain hypocritical and states to the players who got their canon retconned "you were wrong" wich has never happened in a Bioware franchise before...

Baldur's Gate 2 ignored everything that happened in the first one in favor of it's own canon IIRC, and Mass effect has quite few instances of this as well.

To be fair, BG2 was never advertised as importing the choices that the player made during BG1. In contrast to this, ME2 and DA2 were advertised as having imported choices. So I think Catroi's point was valid.

EDIT: Personally, I like both systems, but I think the imported save file system is one of Bioware's strongest ideas, has a lot of potential and needs to be developed as much as possible.

Modifié par JWvonGoethe, 18 octobre 2012 - 03:27 .

[Catroi]

Bfler wrote...

Catroi wrote...

If you put choices in a game don't handwaive those choices later on... That is just plain hypocritical and states to the players who got their canon retconned "you were wrong" wich has never happened in a Bioware franchise before...

Which franchise except of Dragon Age and Mass Effect has also such an import feature with player choices?

And the development of Origins started long way before they introduced this feature. Maybe that is why there is such a kill option.

I wasn't talking about the mechanic of importing save but about the fact that Bioware never said "if you make this choice, you're playing the game wrong". Now with the retconning it pretty much is

[Bfler]

Catroi wrote...

.....
I wasn't talking about the mechanic of importing save but about the fact that Bioware never said "if you make this choice, you're playing the game wrong". Now with the retconning it pretty much is

They must draw a line somewhere, if they plan to continue the franchise. You can't regard every decison since the first game in the future, or it would lead to endless possibilities. That is impossible to implement.

Only alternative would be to get rid of the player choices and I am not sure if that is what you want.

[Sejborg]

Vilegrim wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Then why offer the option in the first place? 

I wonder this as well. 

[ledod]

David Gaider wrote...

I feel this point needs to be made: if there was an option to kill off a character or a companion, I feel it is best that said companion 'stay' dead and not be written back.

The point has been made-- numerous times. I understand there are some folks who fret a great deal when something they've done (such as killing a character) results in the decision being hand-waved... no matter how it's explained (or is yet to be explained). Understanding that, it is still going to happen from time to time when we deem it necessary.

Is it safe to assume that our main characters will not make random reappearances? For example, my Warden got super dead when she battled the Archdemon- I mean, like so died hardcore.

[Sejborg]

marshalleck wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

Then why offer the option in the first place? 

Because they don't plan anything ahead and don't know how the story will change from game to game, so naturally that leads to them having to overturn earlier decisions

A new character could just as well have filled the Nightingale role. Turning it into a corny cameo was not necessary.