318 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

*Sign* because "fans" have expressed an interest in also being able to play as dragons, unicorns, and fish.

I don't think having Elven, Dwarven, or Kossith Origins is on the same level as dragons, unicorns, or fish.

[Rawgrim]

Zjarcal wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Yes it would excist. Its about choices being removed, and the player being forced to play a character created by Bioware.

You always play as a character created by Bioware, you just chose from different creations in DAO.

Rawgrim wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

I think the rule of Bioware is to do the opposite of what BSN says.

That's actually an incredibly good rule to follow.

Yeah. Look how that worked out for DA2, the old republic MMO, and ME3....

Lol, ME3 is my favorite game, so, I like how that worked. 

No you don`t allways play as a character created by Bioware. Try playing some of the older games, and you might see that.

[FINE HERE]

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...



In my opinion Anders was actually the main character in DA2 anyway, what exactly was the need for Hawke to be Human.

Because a dwarf couldn't have been a mage. Because an elf/dwarf couldn't have been from a noble familly, and regained the noble status, and became  a Champion, powerful enough to protect Anders's ass in Act 3, in which Meredith would've put a nice mark on Ander's head (or behead said head) if Hawke wasn't present.

A dwarf could never be a mage, so that has nothing to do with DA2. The Hawkes could have simply adopted an elf or dwarf into their family. The majority of Kirkwall hated Hawke at the start for simply being Fereldon so an elf or a dwarf becoming champion after killing the Qunari would have been possible, but they'd still receive some abuse from certain people, obviously. And an elf or dwarf could have become stronger enough to protect Anders, strenght has nothing to do with being human.

Modifié par FINE HERE, 21 octobre 2012 - 05:41 .

[Monica21]

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

as long as you please the majority, the minority can roll up and die at least that is what i think bioware thinks imo.

No, the minority just won't buy their games. I don't buy TES games and I'm pretty sure Bethesda doesn't miss my $60.

[upsettingshorts]

Rawgrim wrote...

Actually they did listen to alot of fans when they created the BG series and the NWN series....

And they all surely spoke with once voice too!  They were nodding their heads in agreement with every change from BG1->BG2, and BG2->NWN.

Likewise DA:O had no fandom controversy at all!  The fans were 100% on board with every feature and supported BioWare's decisions completely at every turn!

[Rawgrim]

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

as long as you please the majority, the minority can roll up and die at least that is what i think bioware thinks imo.

Too bad the majority also includes people who have never played an rpg before, and also the CoD crowd....Their longtime fans are now the minority.

[challenger18]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

challenger18 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

I think the rule of Bioware is to do the opposite of what BSN says.

That's actually an incredibly good rule to follow.

Yeah. Look how that worked out for DA2, the old republic MMO, and ME3....

You're also forgetting the Baldur's Gate saga, KotoR, JE, ME, ME2, and DAO ...

Did BSN even exist when those games minus ME2 and DAO came out?

Nope, but that's part of the point. BioWare will listen to good ideas but they hardly ever impliment most of what any fans say and usually come up with something different.

[Masha Potato]

Rawgrim wrote...
No you don`t allways play as a character created by Bioware. Try playing some of the older games, and you might see that.

Could you please be more specific? Because i can't remember a single protagonist who did have at least one predefined trait/ biography fact

[zyntifox]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Cstaf wrote...

They said this when they released DA2 but after playing it i never did understand why this particular story had to have a human protagonist. I think they decided that DA2 would be more focuesed on cinematic presentation and having multiple races increases cost, due to the extra voice work, and posed a problem with camera angles due to differences of height. 

...did you miss the part about the Hawkes having once been a big thing in Kirkwall?  Or how about all the family-centric content?  

Cinematic presentation does matter, as camera angles and animations would have to consider various heights and body types and that would stretch resources.  But voice does and would not be a barrier, all they'd have to do is have all the races come from the same place and they could just be voiced by the same person.

Don't understand why a Dwarf or Elf from Denerim couldn't have had family that was noble in Kirkwall. Might be my ignorance of not knowing whether other races than humans could be nobles in Kirkwall. But even if that is true they could have worked around that issue.

[Monica21]

FINE HERE wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...



In my opinion Anders was actually the main character in DA2 anyway, what exactly was the need for Hawke to be Human.

Because a dwarf couldn't have been a mage. Because an elf/dwarf couldn't have been from a noble familly, and regained the noble status, and became  a Champion, powerful enough to protect Anders's ass in Act 3, in which Meredith would've put a nice mark on Ander's head (or behead said head) if Hawke wasn't present.

A dwarf could never be a mage, so that has nothing to do with DA2. The Hawkes could have simply adopted an elf or dwarf into their family. The majority of Kirkwall hated Hawke at the smart for simply being Fereldon so an elf or a dwarf becoming champion after killing the Qunari would have been possible, but they'd still receive some abuse from certain people, obviously. And an elf or dwarf could have become stronger enough to protect Anders, strenght has nothing to do with being human.

I saw this posted last night and it still doesn't make any sense. Why would a human family that's perfectly capable of producing its own children adopt a child of another race?

[ianvillan]

FINE HERE wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...



In my opinion Anders was actually the main character in DA2 anyway, what exactly was the need for Hawke to be Human.

Because a dwarf couldn't have been a mage. Because an elf/dwarf couldn't have been from a noble familly, and regained the noble status, and became  a Champion, powerful enough to protect Anders's ass in Act 3, in which Meredith would've put a nice mark on Ander's head (or behead said head) if Hawke wasn't present.

A dwarf could never be a mage, so that has nothing to do with DA2. The Hawkes could have simply adopted an elf or dwarf into their family. The majority of Kirkwall hated Hawke at the smart for simply being Fereldon so an elf or a dwarf becoming champion after killing the Qunari would have been possible, but they'd still receive some abuse from certain people, obviously. And an elf or dwarf could have become stronger enough to protect Anders, strenght has nothing to do with being human.

I would also say Varric was probably more powerfull than Hawke was, Varric after the expedition seemed high up in his guild and was able to spend lots of money to protect Merrill.

[Atakuma]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

For a game developer who keeps telling us why we aren't allowed to bring our multi-races Wardens through the series is because they don't want it to be about one character but the whole world, they are sure making these sequels all about one character.

Uh, that's because the individual games are about one character, the series however, is not.

[thebigbad1013]

No you don`t allways play as a character created by Bioware. Try playing some of the older games, and you might see that.

You actually do, to some extent. It is their character and you take that character and shape it with whatever choices are available to you. You can argue for more choices all you want, which is perfectly valid, but this "out character vs. their character" doesn't quite hold up in my opinion. The only way you can truly play your own character is if you play a game you made yourself.

[Meltemph]

The difference is that we the players are given more choices. DA2 lacked choice and that was one its many flaws. It may not affect the story but it give us more gameplay features and lets people play the way they want to.

Choices for the sake of choices isnt a net possitive. If I can pick between different races, I have idfferent expectation in terms of tone for a lot of parts throughout a story. We are talking about a settin where race is a very big deal. The idea that nothing would change based on teh race you pick, isnt a choice that is worth anything.

Adding race choices that doesnt actaulyl change anything, imo, hurts the quality of the setting. The setting has made it clear that race issues matter, so if I choose a different race and I dont see a noticible difference that would make me think BW doesnt give 2 poops about their setting. The cultural difference in the races in DA is pretty significant for race not to play a part.

[Rawgrim]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Actually they did listen to alot of fans when they created the BG series and the NWN series....

And they all surely spoke with once voice too!  They were nodding their heads in agreement with every change from BG1->BG2, and BG2->NWN.

Likewise DA:O had no fandom controversy at all!  The fans were 100% on board with every feature and supported BioWare's decisions completely at every turn!

i am sure there was. But nothing on this scale. ME3...they had to create a new ending - for free. DA2. They had to scrap an expansion back. The kotor MMO. No free to play(?).
People were happy with the endings for the older games. No complaints. the expansion packs to games sold bigtime too. Its about scale. You will deffinatly find some exceptions to the rule all over, of course. But it doesn`t invalidate the point either.

[FINE HERE]

Monica21 wrote...

FINE HERE wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...



In my opinion Anders was actually the main character in DA2 anyway, what exactly was the need for Hawke to be Human.

Because a dwarf couldn't have been a mage. Because an elf/dwarf couldn't have been from a noble familly, and regained the noble status, and became  a Champion, powerful enough to protect Anders's ass in Act 3, in which Meredith would've put a nice mark on Ander's head (or behead said head) if Hawke wasn't present.

A dwarf could never be a mage, so that has nothing to do with DA2. The Hawkes could have simply adopted an elf or dwarf into their family. The majority of Kirkwall hated Hawke at the smart for simply being Fereldon so an elf or a dwarf becoming champion after killing the Qunari would have been possible, but they'd still receive some abuse from certain people, obviously. And an elf or dwarf could have become stronger enough to protect Anders, strenght has nothing to do with being human.

I saw this posted last night and it still doesn't make any sense. Why would a human family that's perfectly capable of producing its own children adopt a child of another race?

Are you serious? Because they're good people? Because they saw a baby elf or dwarf in a dangerous situation and they wanted to help them? Because they saw the baby's family die and could only save the baby? Because there was a random baby left out in the open and noone around to take care of them?

Why does having the ability to have children instantly mean you wouldn't adopt?

[upsettingshorts]

Rawgrim wrote...

No you don`t allways play as a character created by Bioware. Try playing some of the older games, and you might see that.

Oh boy, it's time to repeat myself.  Some players have always worked within the written limitations of BioWare protagonists, yes, dating back to and including Baldur's Gate.

Old post is old:

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
DA 2 is the only one that start to move away.

Mass Effect did it as well, and Origins was sort of a clumsy half-breed, but if we're only talking about fantasy games then sure. 
The balance you speak of is what I mean by it being an accident.  Of the games you list, the one that was least compatible with how I like to play these games was Dragon Age: Origins.  Not the games that preceeded it or followed it.
There are some rather prolific third person gamer posters on this board who will say similar things, for different specific reasons, but they boil down to being ruined for the non-cinematic approach because it emphatically improves the third person experience.  In hindsight, games that lacked this suffer for that kind of player.  So while we approved of it then, it was because we didn't know any better.  That's why when I'm endorsing things like the paraphrased dialogue wheel and cinematics I'm describing them in terms of an evolution.  Of course I understand that first person gamers are going to disagree, that's not really the point, the point is that for us - we don't want to go back to that "compromise" because it would demand giving up what we've already "won" so to speak.
It cuts both ways.  The older Bioware games - this is just my opinion - allowed for first person narrative gameplay due primarily to a lack of explicit contradictions of this approach.  Such as for example hearing your character say things you might not expect, or doing things you view as out of character, or seeing a cutscene involving characters miles away (DAO did this).  Third person gamers like myself - though I don't speak for all of them, obviously - viewed these things as missing, a result of the limitations of technology, or something else entirely, but certainly not ideal.  The very foundations of what makes a first person approach possible are the same things that I list in the negative category for these kinds of games.  
That's why the playstyles aren't compatible.  Any explicit attempt to improve the experience for one approach will harm the other.  
All that being said, I want to make a point about how this tangent is on topic.  Cinematics are more or less by definition an enhancement of the third person narrative.  It would be interesting to think about ways in which they could be used to improve a first person experience I'm just... not sure how it would work.  But I really do think any post that even touches upon the thought process of "I hate cinematics, scrap them" is going to fall on deaf ears, given Bioware's latest trends.  Doesn't mean you can't make that argument, though.  

To some players, BioWare games have always been a cooperative endeavor with the written narrative and player choice.  To other players, such as yourself, they've always been PnP adaptations where your character is wholly your own.  To the former group, cinematics, a voiceover, and a single race are not issues.  To the latter group, they absolutely are.  

[FINE HERE]

J. Reezy wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

as long as you please the majority, the minority can roll up and die at least that is what i think bioware thinks imo.

Too bad the majority also includes people who have never played an rpg before, and also the CoD crowd....Their longtime fans are now the minority.

I doubt that.

Well... they are a part of EA now, and...

[Terrorize69]

J. Reezy wrote...

"Human again. BioWare not listening."

I'm sure BioWare heard this fanbase loud and clear. They don't have to take action on anything they here from it though.

Or deemed playing as another race who's religions are largely different would be inappropriate for a game where the PC works for the chantry (most likely)

[miraclemight]

Rawgrim wrote...

RandomSyhn wrote...

Would this thread still exist if instead of human only our protagonist had to be a dwarf? or had to be an elf? no options just one race choice?

I'm curious mostly because from what I can tell the human protagonist was a decision made to deal with aspects of the plot where the other races would not have been appropriate, or at least more difficult to insert.

Yes it would excist. Its about choices being removed, and the player being forced to play a character created by Bioware.

No one is forcing anyone exactly. You always have the choice of not buying a product if you are really that unsatisfied with a feature of a game. 

Which one do you prefer most? Choices that really matter or a cosmetic difference in the protagonist's appearance? You might want to have both (I know I do). But history had taught me that when games like the Witcher come out, people are too soon to forget the fact that Geralt was a PC with too many fixed characteristics. Why? Because the game delivered everything else it had promised: choices which truely mattered.

In a day and age when time and budget are serious limitations, developers have to sacrifice many parts of their vision to create a game.


Edited to fix a typo.

Modifié par miraclemight, 21 octobre 2012 - 05:47 .

[Masha Potato]

Cstaf wrote...

Don't understand why a Dwarf or Elf from Denerim couldn't have had family that was noble in Kirkwall. Might be my ignorance of not knowing whether other races than humans could be nobles in Kirkwall. But even if that is true they could have worked around that issue.

Dwarven nobility only lives in Orzammar and if you don't live in Orzammar you're not nobility any longer. And seriously, do i have to explain about the city elves? You know, those guys who live in alienages and do all the dirty work just because they're elves? 

[Han Shot First]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote..

Even if it was made canon that a protagonist believed in the Maker, so what?

Some people prefer to have, at least, the same freedom in choices that were available in Origins. Why force the protagonist to be religious Andrastian when you can give them the freedom to not believe in the fictional religion? Why force the protagonist to only be human when you could make elven, dwarven, or kossith protagonists available?

The only thing that stipulated that Hawke should be human was that he bought the family mansion. An elven or dwarven protagonist could have fled Ferelden, allied with the smugglers or mercenaries, become wealthy from the Deep Roads, relocated, become important to the Viscount via the Arishok's demand for the protagonist, and ultimately defeated the Arishok in a duel. None of that demands a human protagonist. And I'm skeptical about the idea that Inquisition truly demands a human protagonist as well.

Bioware protagonists are never really a blank slate, even when they aren't voice acted. The Warden for example had some pre-defined characteristics depending on which origin was chosen.

If Bioware rolls out a protagonist that is some kind of Inquisitor for the Chantry, I'm totally fine with that character being a devout Andrastian. In fact it makes a lot more sense for that sort of character than being an atheist. Likewise if the protagonist had been a Witch of the Wilds instead, I'd expect the character to follow some pre-Andrastian traditions much like Morrigan.

Also atheism in general doesn't make a lot of sense for the Dragon Age universe. Consider that it is a world in which spirts, demons and the Fade are known to exist even by non-mages. People in that world have direct experience with the supernatural, and it isn't just something that exists in myths or in religious dogma. As such people who populate that world having some sort of religious faith in the supernatural makes a lot more sense than people saying, "The supernatural is a bunch of malarkey."

Modifié par Han Shot First, 21 octobre 2012 - 05:45 .

[Rawgrim]

J. Reezy wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

as long as you please the majority, the minority can roll up and die at least that is what i think bioware thinks imo.

Too bad the majority also includes people who have never played an rpg before, and also the CoD crowd....Their longtime fans are now the minority.

I doubt that.

ohh really? Try putting a headset on and playing ME3 online. Did that yesterday. The whole gang I was playing with was pretty much only talking about Black Ops 2, and how the zombie mode for it should end up being simmilar to the ME3 multiplayer.