318 réponses à ce sujet

[Sejborg]

Well. So far there isn't much that has surfaced about DA3 that sounds appealing to me.

The part about controlling a castle sounds kinda cool. But then I remember that Bioware already did something like that in Awakening and that was simplistic, shallow and boring. But it has potential. It could be cool if they did it like something similar to XCOM. That could turn out to be a plus DA3.

But mostly I am hearing stuff that I would put on the minus side of the paper.
No origins.
Forced human. No race selection. But somehow more customization than in Origins? I can't wrap my head around that, so I am calling bull****.

[Jerrybnsn]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

If Bioware thinks that DA2's problem was just no reused maps and companion customization then they weren't listening.  We've had overwhelming polls on here in the last year and a half that supported going back to a game that allowed race selection.  Yet, it's completely ignored.  No reason given either.

They have given reasons.  They're not hard to find.  The reasons were:  Story reasons, customization reasons, and cinematic reasons.

Therefore you either don't care about the reasons, don't believe the reasons, or don't understand the reasons.

Which one is it?

.

Those were the reasons given for DA2 and the game was a disappointment to fans as they complained about lack of races.   Do they plan on using these same reasons for DA3?  Because they are just now letting the little details slip out, and this is the first time we have confirmation that it will only be human again, and no reasoning has been given for it.

[LobselVith8]

Monica21 wrote...

How did your Surana irrevocably change several societies in a way that my Elissa did not?

I was addressing my preference for my elven mage over the human noble Hawke; I never felt like the latter was genuinely my character when he was quite a bit pre-written, especially with confusing paraphrasing and auto-lines, while I was given many options to determine who my Surana Warden was. I don't see why so many choices keep getting stripped away when the developers should have improved on Origins, rather than discarding the freedoms that were available for The Warden (and, effectively, the players).

Also, the royal boons are supposed to be limited to specific Wardens, i.e. only the Dalish Warden can ask for his people to be given their own homeland (the Hinterlands). If your Cousland Warden was able to ask for the Magi Boon, it's evidently a bug.

[upsettingshorts]

Rawgrim wrote...

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.

Completely different.  I was talking about the relative controversy surrounding given features.  The expansion pack was not cancelled because the BSN was mad, in any case.

[upsettingshorts]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

If Bioware thinks that DA2's problem was just no reused maps and companion customization then they weren't listening.  We've had overwhelming polls on here in the last year and a half that supported going back to a game that allowed race selection.  Yet, it's completely ignored.  No reason given either.

They have given reasons.  They're not hard to find.  The reasons were:  Story reasons, customization reasons, and cinematic reasons.

Therefore you either don't care about the reasons, don't believe the reasons, or don't understand the reasons.

Which one is it?

.

Those were the reasons given for DA2 and the game was a disappointment to fans as they complained about lack of races.   Do they plan on using these same reasons for DA3?  Because they are just now letting the little details slip out, and this is the first time we have confirmation that it will only be human again, and no reasoning has been given for it.

No, those are the reasons being given now for a human protagonist now.  There is a laundry list of things holding Dragon Age 2 back as a game, and it's disingenuous to assert that had DA2 had racial options and origins that it suddenly would have been well received.

[Caiden012]

Meltemph wrote...

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.

Did you ever play an elf during Origins. Because it did change the way you could respond to characters and how some characters adressed you. If they took that to the next level Bioware could create great side stories based on race.

[unbentbuzzkill]

@meltemph

if that's the case what was DA2 excuss it suffered in many ways and it had only one playerable race.

[Zjarcal]

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.

I already have played most of their older games.

It's always Bioware's character, that we get to customize them and play them how we want doesn't stop it from being their character, a.k.a., they are the ones who have the final say on that character and who can ultimately decide to do whatever they wanted with that character if so they pleased.

It's never going to be our character 100% unless we can do whatever we'd want with them within the story (and by that I mean, be able to actually make choices that aren't even present in game or go completely against what the plot demands), and that has NEVER been the case in any of their games.

[Monica21]

FINE HERE wrote...
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?

Yes, I'm serious. This is not modern day Earth. This is a copy of the Middle Ages. Have you seen any in-game example of adoption from a different race? If random babies are left laying around in fields they get taken to the Chantry, not raised by parents who have enough problems trying to hide their mage-born children.

[Rawgrim]

miraclemight wrote...

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 Garret 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.

Its Geralt, I belive. And you also struck the core of the complaints here. "Because the game delivered everything else it had promised. Choices wich truly mattered".

See if you can find any of that in DA2.

[zyntifox]

Masha Potato wrote...

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? 

Fair enough. How about being left as a child at the doorstep of the Hawkes? I think that would have been extremly interesting.

[Atakuma]

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

@meltemph

if that's the case what was DA2 excuss it suffered in many ways and it had only one playerable race.

It was developed in little over a year.

[ShaggyWolf]

Maybe, just maybe, it doesn't make sense for the PC to be an elf or a dwarf in this story? If the rumors are true, and we're somehow involved in stopping a war between mages and the templars- two organizations instituted by human society- isn't that mostly a human problem?

I can't see 99% of dwarves really caring enough to involve themselves, at least not to the degree that our PC likely will, and the only elves that would have both the ability and the interest to do something about the conflict would likely be circle mages. I think some Dalish would prefer if the 2 factions kill each other off, and, with very rare exception, most city elves would be powerless to do anything, even if they cared. Remember that it's illegal for a city elf to even carry a weapon. The city elf I play in origins is a very rare case, and his transgression almost got the alienage wiped out.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, it makes sense that in Origins, we could play different races, because the Blight was the focus of the story, and that was a threat to everyone in the entire world. No one worthy of being called a hero could turn their back on it. Not dwarves, not the dalish, and not the one city elf that knows a blade from a pommel.

The current (rumored) conflict is a threat to the foundation of human society, does it not make sense for a human to solve it? Maybe the rare individual dwarf or elf who cares and wants to do something about the conflict fits a companion role better, rather than the role of the player character?

They said this choice isn't representative of the Dragon age franchise as a whole, and that they want to get back to a variety of playable races at some point, and I accept that. Just bring them back in a story that makes sense to play as all of them. Maybe DA4's conflict will be about something that no Dalish, dwarf, or city elf can turn their back on. Perhaps, the subtly hinted at Qunari invasion that you should've been expecting since DA:O? That's even a story that would make sense to have a Tal-Vashoth Kossith PC.

[Rawgrim]

Zjarcal wrote...

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.

I already have played most of their older games.

It's always Bioware's character, that we get to customize them and play them how we want doesn't stop it from being their character, a.k.a., they are the ones who have the final say on that character and who can ultimately decide to do whatever they wanted with that character if so they pleased.

It's never going to be our character 100% unless we can do whatever we'd want with them within the story (and by that I mean, be able to actually make choices that aren't even present in game or go completely against what the plot demands), and that has NEVER been the case in any of their games.

Again its about scale. In BG the character felt like he was mine. In DA2 or ME the character never felt like he was mine.

I`d rather have one thats 90 percent mine, than one thats 2 percent mine. Its supposed to be a roleplaying game, after all. Not Assassin`s Creed or anything like that.

[Atakuma]

nevermind:ph34r:

Modifié par Atakuma, 21 octobre 2012 - 05:52 .

[upsettingshorts]

Rawgrim wrote...

Its Geralt, I belive. And you also struck the core of the complaints here. "Because the game delivered everything else it had promised. Choices wich truly mattered".

See if you can find any of that in DA2.

That depends how one defines "choices that matter."  On the BSN the closest to a consistent definition I've seen is either "setting big impressive plot flags with corresponding epilogue cards that tell me what happens like in DAO" or "diverging narrative paths like in the Witcher 2."  Those are not the same thing.  My own definition is different, and I valued a lot of the decisions that I was allowed to me in Dragon Age 2, but most of them were roleplaying and not plot-flag related so I don't think they'd qualify for either definition previously stated.

[ianvillan]

Masha Potato wrote...

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? 

Or mage Hawke who in one of the places that has a massive templar presence and a reputation for harsh practice towards mages should of been forced into the circle but for the whole game was able to run free without anyone bothering about him.

Why could a mage run free and be a major player in Kirkwall but a Dwarf or Elf is not possible.

[thebigbad1013]

J. Reezy wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

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.

Well I can do that and I don't even play CoD.

Also, ME3 multiplayer IS a shooter, so how is this surprising? It also has very little to do with DA3.

[challenger18]

Rawgrim wrote...

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.

Heaven forbid you play an RPG Shooter and people start talking about the next game in the biggest shooting franchise ever.

[Meltemph]

Did you ever play an elf during Origins. Because it did change the way you could respond to characters and how some characters adressed you. If they took that to the next level Bioware could create great side stories based on race.

The hell? How did it jump from DA:O to DA2, then back to DA:O? You clearly are trying to take that resposne out of context. I was obviously in response to the coments about race not changing anything in DA2.

IF you want to argue the merits of DA2, fine, but that wasnt what I was talking about and you know it.

[Monica21]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

How did your Surana irrevocably change several societies in a way that my Elissa did not?

I was addressing my preference for my elven mage over the human noble Hawke; I never felt like the latter was genuinely my character when he was quite a bit pre-written, especially with confusing paraphrasing and auto-lines, while I was given many options to determine who my Surana Warden was. I don't see why so many choices keep getting stripped away when the developers should have improved on Origins, rather than discarding the freedoms that were available for The Warden (and, effectively, the players).

Also, the royal boons are supposed to be limited to specific Wardens, i.e. only the Dalish Warden can ask for his people to be given their own homeland (the Hinterlands). If your Cousland Warden was able to ask for the Magi Boon, it's evidently a bug.

I agree that there was less choice for Hawke than for any PC in Origins, but that is not a result of race choice. If you were able to play as a dwarf or elf, the story and lack of choice would have played out exactly the same. Regardless, you don't get more choices in how the story plays out because of race. You get more choices because they're given to you as options. Chalk that up to bad writing or shortened development time, but it's not based on race.

[Jerrybnsn]

hhh89 wrote...


In the TW2 you played a PC with a more fixed backstory than Hawke, and your choices in the game matter more than in DAO and in DA2.

The W2 had awesome graphics and lots of gratuitous sex.  But Origins outsold both the W2 and DA2 combined.

[upsettingshorts]

ianvillan wrote...

Masha Potato wrote...

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? 

Or mage Hawke who in one of the places that has a massive templar presence and a reputation for harsh practice towards mages should of been forced into the circle but for the whole game was able to run free without anyone bothering about him.

Why could a mage run free and be a major player in Kirkwall but a Dwarf or Elf is not possible.

Finally, it took eight pages but someone actually brought up an issue with Dragon Age 2 I actually agree with.  Gameplay/story segregation!

Hopefully Frostbite 2 will help with that.  But we'll see, they haven't said much on the subject.

But to answer your question seriously, because the issue you raise is one of gameplay and story conflicting with each other, and the issue you're responding to is entirely story.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 octobre 2012 - 05:53 .