3855 réponses à ce sujet

[corporal doody]

I dislike the idea. I didnt like it in DAII. And with Mass Effect...i wanted to play as an asari since the first one! I was extremely excited after seeing those videos of the early demo where we could bounce between squadmates (ala DA:O) and i wanted to play as Liara. But alas....it wasnt until ME3MP that i could actually play as something other than a human.

With Mass Effect 4 i want to be able to pick which race i can play as.....and i hope it is the same with DAIII. being stuck as a human in DAII stunk. having a fully voiced character was nice and all...but i would GLADLY go without if it meant i could play as another race.

only beef i have with Dragon Age and the races though...is the lack of variety. the all look the same for the most part. the introduction of a few new races would FOR sure sweeten the pot!


so.....i would prefer to choose the race i play as....but i will buy the game regardless.

Modifié par corporal doody, 20 novembre 2012 - 04:39 .

[silentassassin264]

Drasanil wrote...

(Minor Threadomancy FTW.)

The Story: This is also another biggy, were it not for the fact DG already said they would be implementing variable backgrounds for the main character which would have an impact on the game. Unless these background choices are completely token in their nature and affect, it is hard to be believe it would be much more burdensome for the team to cut a few of these in order to make some of the human-centric content work with elves and dwarves. DG already said elves could be admitted into the Andastrian faith as layman and even clergy, if only rarely for the last part. We’ve also dwarf converts so the Inquisition’s presumably faithful over tones are not an insurmountable challenge. (Yes that means elves/dwarves, wouldn’t get a bunch of super unique awesome content, and that’s fine, I’d rather have a workable something, than just flat out nothing.)

The thing is the human protagonist with non-playable backgrounds sounds incredibly Mass Effect-ish even though they said they were not taking cues from Mass Effect.  In Mass Effect we get to see a sole surivivor who saw their entire squad wiped out by thresher maws (giant killer tremor worms if you haven't played it) get into a plotline where you have to summon the mother of all thresher maws in the third game and not a single comment was made about that.  It was supposedly such a traumatic experience in the background that Councilor Udina questioned whether a sole survivor Shepard could be a spectre candidate but it never gets seriously addressed outside of the one designated mission in ME1.  

In other words, the background are likely going to be like Mass Effect and completely token in nature except for a special background related sidequest.  That way they will not have to adjust the story for the most part but they can give lip service that they gave us origins.  Don't get your hopes up.

[Isichar]

Its a tad bit disappointing, I usually played as a human anyways in my primary campaigns but it added a lot of replay value, particularly in DA:O when you could seem situations in primary plot points from a different context.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Drasanil wrote...

(Minor Threadomancy FTW.)

I’ve been thinking on this and what exactly is the big problem/hurdle in implementing race choices in DA3? Looking at it from a technical stand point and potential storyline one working off DA2’s human centric content, it doesn’t seem there is a really good reason not to do it. Point by point:

Voice acting: In theory a big hurdle given Bioware’s choice to implement accents by race. This could be a problem, were it not for the fact no one would reasonably expect to get 6 (or 8 if factoring the Kossith) separate PC voice actors for the same character. Secondly it would also provide Bioware with the opportunity to break from from the ‘accent by races’ model which is in itself poorly thought out and implement a much more sensible ‘accent by nationality’ model. We’ve already had some examples of this such as Anora’s elf servant with an orlesian accent.

The Story: This is also another biggy, were it not for the fact DG already said they would be implementing variable backgrounds for the main character which would have an impact on the game. Unless these background choices are completely token in their nature and affect, it is hard to be believe it would be much more burdensome for the team to cut a few of these in order to make some of the human-centric content work with elves and dwarves. DG already said elves could be admitted into the Andastrian faith as layman and even clergy, if only rarely for the last part. We’ve also dwarf converts so the Inquisition’s presumably faithful over tones are not an insurmountable challenge. (Yes that means elves/dwarves, wouldn’t get a bunch of super unique awesome content, and that’s fine, I’d rather have a workable something, than just flat out nothing.)

The Cinematic Experience: This would add some work, but to honest most of those would be simple camera angle adjustments. There were very few instance cut scenes in DA2 where Hawke had extensive or prolonged direct physical interaction with other actors. Combined with the fact that if DA2 is any indicator elves are going to be roughly the same height as humans would eliminate much of the reworking needed. Leaving the only adjustments needed for dwarves, which would be minimal unless our inquisitor plans on running around groping everyone in every conversation.

In Game Models: The big bugbear so to speak, Bioware claims (or at least did in DA2) that if they were to implement race choices they would have had to make 6 models for everything, as opposed to just 2 for male/female and that this would have been a heavy burden on resources. Alright, that’s a good one, but Bioware won’t be using the old DAO/DA2 engine again. So this in fact should be an opportunity for them as opposed to a hurdle. Skyrim already showed what you can do with variable body meshes. Not only did the same mesh function for all races which used different height/weight parameters, but it further added a body slider allowing for more physical variance between the same races. Despite all this, armours only needed two meshes per gender to account for the in game weight slider. Designing a similar style of flexible body mesh would likely be more complex and labour intensive than simply knocking out a few static meshes per race, but it would also be an investment and good one to make. The immediate benefit for this game, would be an overall reduction in resources used on screen, with the game only needing to load one model as opposed to several per race, but the benefit would go further than that. For future games the work would already be largely done meaning Bioware could actually just work to carry over/tweak the initial models and save themselves trouble of having to constantly knock out new body meshes for every race and gender.

--- --- ---

So, given all the above mentioned and the relatively steady (though admittedly not necessarily overwhelming ) demand for the return of multi-race PCs, it’s hard to see why Bioware wouldn’t at least make a good faith effort to try and do it. As opposed to cutting it out at a stage so early that they won’t even be able talk about anything else game related for months to come. Now I could be wrong and they may have a really really good reason for restricting choice to human only again. But, it’s hard to believe given DA2 wasn’t exactly a great showcase of the same design decision, and the only other thing mentioned so far was opportunity cost which is incredibly vague.

Good post.

I'm still numbly gobsmacked that Bioware have chosen to go down this route again, despite the overall negative reaction to it's implementation in DA:2.

I honestly think that the creative & managerial staff at Bioware just don't get games or gamers any more. Seriously, ask yourself why you buy FRPGs - it's all about being able to pretend you're an elf/dwarf/whatever. When kids play LOTR they don't all choose to be human nobles, they choose to make-believe that they are some fantasy race, because that's where a big part of the fun lies.

[Flamingdropbear]

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

[Rawgrim]

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

[*]Great post.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 20 novembre 2012 - 11:06 .

[Rawgrim]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

[*]The complaint wouldn`t even be there, if they hadn`t included race options for the first game. By removing it they "lessen" the game, and it seems (to most people) as a huge step back.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Rawgrim wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

[*]The complaint wouldn`t even be there, if they hadn`t included race options for the first game. By removing it they "lessen" the game, and it seems (to most people) as a huge step back.

I agree, but also bare in mind that it's a further step away from D&D/Baldur's Gate which many love too. As I said earlier the whole point in a FRPG of this ilk is to pretend you're another race - what's next? are they gonna limit us to being human office workers? I wanna have grown up with wild elves instead of the bunch of backwards drongos which I did in real life, I wanna slaughter humans at every turn because generally they're a bunch of lazy-ass layabouts and I want the excuse to be that they oppressed my race, I wanna be sleeker and sexier than a human - with smooth, chisled looks. etc.

It's all part of the make-believe which D&D games were built on. But no, let's take all that away. Whoopie

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 20 novembre 2012 - 11:23 .

[SirGladiator]

I think the reason the option got taken away is because so few people used it. I used it, I enjoyed playing as a Noble Dwarf, didn't much care for playing as an Elf but I did enjoy the City Elf Origin, it was nice to dispense sweet steel justice on that evil dude. I don't think there's going to be a storyline reason why the Inquisitor couldnt be a Dwarf or Elf, some people thought there would be a major storyline reason why Bethany or Carver died based on your choice in class, that of course turned out not to be true, it was just a dumb idea. Ultimately they're going to save time and effort for other things, and I'm disappointed to a degree, but if those things they work on instead turn out to be sufficiently awesome it'll all be for the best.

Having said all that, there is still an element of 'lets forget about DAO being our most popular game ever, and make it more like the ME series whether people like it or not, they'll learn to like it because we do' , it was obviously an attitude that heavily influenced DA2 in a negative way and I certainly hope it doesn't influence DA3 as well.

[SpunkyMonkey]

SirGladiator wrote...

Having said all that, there is still an element of 'lets forget about DAO being our most popular game ever, and make it more like the ME series whether people like it or not, they'll learn to like it because we do' , it was obviously an attitude that heavily influenced DA2 in a negative way and I certainly hope it doesn't influence DA3 as well.

Yep. There really is the feeling of a "like it or lump it" attitude coming from Bioware. Thing is, from reading these boards I'd guess that far more of their core fans don't like the idea and will be in the "lump it" camp.

Bioware may have been blinded by the pre-order sales of DA:2, which were largely made based on the excellence of DA:O. This time round they aren't gonna have anywhere near as big a fallback cushion (although some fanboys will undoubtably pre-order even if EA decide to pull the game at the last minute and package up a peice of dog poo instead).

It's all part of the Bioware de-volution which became apparent when Brent Knowles quit IMO -

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/4982457/1

Could be wrong, but Bioware seem detimined to prove that the fans that they were wrong about DA:2 by running with the ideas from that sub-standard game, as opposed to listening to them and giving them more of what they want - namely DA:O 2.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 20 novembre 2012 - 12:06 .

[Rawgrim]

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

[Dagon]

Rawgrim wrote...

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

Well said my friend.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Rawgrim wrote...

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

Spot on.

Bioware can't seem to understand that this approach works for a more action-orientated game such as Mass Effect, because that game is all about the action and the "pizaz". In ME you get the sense of interaction by testing your reflexes and skills.

In DA the combat isn't as central, and whereas ME is about fast action, DA needs to be about interaction and choices.

[Adanu]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

[*]
[*]Failure is subjective, and honestly races don't add a hell of a lot.
You'd think that each race had totally unique experiences if you look
at what a lot of pro-multiracers say, when im reality it that happened
is a few specific choices and dialogues were altered. That's it.
[*]
[*]There was nothing that drastically altered the games flow from races, and considering the amount of time it would take to redo multiple races as opposed to human only... I can understand their reasoning. It's far too much investment for too little gain whe 85% of people played human in DA:O
[*]
This forum does not represent every single person who has ever played.

[Rawgrim]

Adanu wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

[*]
[*]Failure is subjective, and honestly races don't add a hell of a lot.
You'd think that each race had totally unique experiences if you look
at what a lot of pro-multiracers say, when im reality it that happened
is a few specific choices and dialogues were altered. That's it.
[*]
[*]There was nothing that drastically altered the games flow from races, and considering the amount of time it would take to redo multiple races as opposed to human only... I can understand their reasoning. It's far too much investment for too little gain whe 85% of people played human in DA:O
[*]
This forum does not represent every single person who has ever played.

[*]Roleplaying isn`t all about what you see on the screen. Its about creating a character in your own mind, and basing your actions in-game on what that persona would do in any given situation. For people who like doing that, the race options and the origin options adds tons to the game.

[Adanu]

That is your view of it. If you want total freedom of choice in that, go play DND board games (I do, btw). These games will not give you what you seek. Maybe Project Eternity will.

[Rawgrim]

Adanu wrote...

That is your view of it. If you want total freedom of choice in that, go play DND board games (I do, btw). These games will not give you what you seek. Maybe Project Eternity will.

One can never have total freedom in a video game. Not doable at all. But DA:O had enough options in it to make it a great rp experience, and it also gave the game a very good replay vallue.

I am sure Project Eternity will be great.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Adanu wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Flamingdropbear wrote...

Haven't read all 100 odd pages, so sorry if this repeats what others have said, but have read Bioware's replies so in response to the OP

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Discuss how this makes you feel here.

It make me feel sad.

Why? A number of reasons, some linking to Bioware responses,so in no particular order:

• while more races would call for more content ( as Allan suggests) it is not an incerase in over all content that I want, but more the fact I want content that allows me to play they way I want to. It would be similar to (but not exactly like) removing Snarky dialougue options. The Snark choice was one way we expressed our selves in the game as was hair colour, nose size and race selection. Removal of any method of expressing youself in a game like DA is a sad thing.
• reduced roleplay and replayability. One of the reasons I loved DAO (over 600 hrs spent playing) is that the origins gave a wonderful jumping off point for roleplaying in game. Games like Skyrim or NWN would allow for roleplay, but with generic or non exisitant backstories for the character I found roleplaying in them required more input from me. DAO was the 1st game where getting into and keeping in character was so easy I did it without thinking. While Mage Hawke and Rogue/ Warrior Hawke gave different perspectives and allowed for different roleplaying options it does limit them. Again a sad thing.
• My 1st playthrough in DAO was as a casteless Dwarf, which helped hugely as the he was an un educated thug. This made playing through learning about the world seem more emersivce as Agi was learning about it at the same time as me. While I now know about the world (even better that most in game characters) it was as cool coincidence.

Now about one or two other things mentioned in the posts I've read

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I probably
wouldn't have liked it, then. I wasn't a fan of Hawke; I found him to be
very passive, and reactive instead of proactive. Doing nothing about
Petrice, doing nothing in the Bethany/Cullen situation, doing nothing
about Quentin's note, doing nothing about Meredith's dictatorship for
three years. I wouldn't have liked him as an elf or a dwarf if he
remained the same. Just my two cents, of course.

That's fine.  I think that disliking Hawke for his passivity is a fair critique
of DA2.  The point I'm making is that I've seen some state that DA2
didn't have racial selection, and DA2 wasn't successful, and to the
extent that the lack of race choice was a significant cause of this.

I could be see as a cause, If Hawke was an elf or dwarf it would not be too far a step to assume that the reason for his passive and reacticve nature was due to his/her attitiude of 'I'm not getting involved in theses human troubles'. Also if Hawke was a dwarf no mage choice (like in DAO) and  Bethany could be explained as an adopted child. This could lead to some interesting roleplaying (even if it did lead to more can we romance my non blood related sibling threads form those people who spend too much time on 4chan:pinched:)

I do like the idea that we will be able to choose backgrounds, even if they are non playable, and hope we have more than three to choose from and that the have a greater impact on the game that in Mass Effect (both in the form of stat bonuses [+10 nature resistance to raised by Dalish, + 10 to physical resistance for ex tervinter slave] and more than just one bonus mission for a background).

I do hope that in a future Dragon Age game race choice returns

Another good post.

What worries me is how stubborn and detirmined Bioware are to totally ignore the faliure of DA:2's "human only" option.

Reading these boards it's clear that the majority would far sooner have different races as an option. I'd say the majority would gladly sacrifice a speaking protagonist (hate them personally) for the choice of more races. But again Bioware just don't seem to care.

Anyone would think DA:O was a despised faliure of a game, not a loved classic that sold well.

[*]
[*]Failure is subjective, and honestly races don't add a hell of a lot.
You'd think that each race had totally unique experiences if you look
at what a lot of pro-multiracers say, when im reality it that happened
is a few specific choices and dialogues were altered. That's it.
[*]
[*]There was nothing that drastically altered the games flow from races, and considering the amount of time it would take to redo multiple races as opposed to human only... I can understand their reasoning. It's far too much investment for too little gain whe 85% of people played human in DA:O
[*]
This forum does not represent every single person who has ever played.

Rawgrim's response above is bang on.

Plus how can faliure be subjective when DA:O was one of Bioware's biggest selling games ever?

They can't seem to compute that the reason ME is more popular with a mass audience is because that audience wants that type of game and not a FRPG. Trying to change a FRPG into ME is only gonna ****** off FRPG fans, not attract ME ones.

[Rawgrim]

Seems to me that alot of the games budget is poured into voiced protagonist + cinematics. Its probably the least important features an rpg could have. Absolutely none of the (considered) great rpgs had none of this. Nobody complained about the lack of it either. If Bioware had made a plain old 2d isometric rpg set in the DA world, it would have sold millions. The core of an rpg is to design your driver, and drive the car. Making it a different experience every time you play a game. Effects and visuals are a bonus. Whats been happening with Bioware games lately is that they have focused way too much in telling and showing a story to an audience. Blinding them with cinematics and whatsnot, and sacrificing alot of the stuff that makes an rpg a great rpg.You add cool stuff into the mix, but remove vital ingredients. What you are left with is a great looking cake, that has a sour aftertaste.

[unokolo]

Rawgrim wrote...

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

This.
In DA:O you got to choose, who you wanted to be - an elf, a dwarf, a human - mage, rogue, warrior... Human origin was a bit of a kick in the quad, because it really missed another option (being a chasind, or simply not of noble birth), but yeah... It was a great game, you could play many, many times and never get bored of it, because you always experienced the story from a different angle. You looked at things differently when playing a noble(wo)man and differently if playing an Alienage elf, who has been "tortured" by nobles his/her whole life.
In DA2 you got pretty much a pre-made character, you could "paint" in blue, purple or red, and that was it for changeability of the story, because - lets not lie to ourselves - our actions didnt really matter in the end. Meredith always goes nuts and Orsino always acts out of his character and turns himself into a monster. And the war begins. If there wasnt for my love for the DA:O, I wouldnt really enjoy DA2.
Bioware (or EA) shouldnt rely on this love any further. Every love has its limits - if you keep feeding your fans rubbish, they wont stay faithfull to you. Masseffectying the Dragon Age series isnt the way to go. I love Mas Effect, but I dont want any of it in Dragon Age.

Modifié par unokolo, 20 novembre 2012 - 01:00 .

[unokolo]

Modifié par unokolo, 20 novembre 2012 - 12:59 .

[TheRealJayDee]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

Spot on.

Bioware can't seem to understand that this approach works for a more action-orientated game such as Mass Effect, because that game is all about the action and the "pizaz". In ME you get the sense of interaction by testing your reflexes and skills.

In DA the combat isn't as central, and whereas ME is about fast action, DA needs to be about interaction and choices.

I kinda have to disagree about ME being all about action. There was way more of a "passengers seat" feeling in ME3 than in both previous games, mostly due to the introduction of vast amounts of dialogue without player input. Besides all the action ME games used to be 'talky' games as well. They lost the balance between "pew pew" and other player input in the third game.

[Rawgrim]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

DA2 made me feel like I was told a story, mostly. I was given a character, but I could decide how that charqcter kills his enemies in fights. Thats it, really. As opposed to origins, and other rpgs, where I actually played a story and affected the outcome via choices. Some choices also bit me in the ass a few times. That never really happened in DA2. Felt more like an interactive movie being played out infront of me, where I got to kill stuff in between the scenes. Ok way for telling a story in book or movie-form. Not so much in a roleplaying game. The player is supposed to be in the drivers seat, not in the passangers seat.

Spot on.

Bioware can't seem to understand that this approach works for a more action-orientated game such as Mass Effect, because that game is all about the action and the "pizaz". In ME you get the sense of interaction by testing your reflexes and skills.

In DA the combat isn't as central, and whereas ME is about fast action, DA needs to be about interaction and choices.

I kinda have to disagree about ME being all about action. There was way more of a "passengers seat" feeling in ME3 than in both previous games, mostly due to the introduction of vast amounts of dialogue without player input. Besides all the action ME games used to be 'talky' games as well. They lost the balance between "pew pew" and other player input in the third game.

Quite right. The first game had loads of skills and whatsnot. In the second and third game we have 4? skills. Mostly just about how your ammo works. Aparantly your training magically changes the ammo of a gun. Made no sense, really. in the thrid one I felt like i had completely lost control of my character. Way too much auto-dialogue. This wouldn`t have been a problem if they had started off with this in the first game. But changing the entire gamestyle and genre, in a way, in the middle of a series was just odd. I got the feeling that they wanted to get rid of the old fanbase and replace them with a different one.

[Adanu]

ME Shepard was never, ever meant to be completely your character. Invalid comparison.