3855 réponses à ce sujet

[kinderschlager]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

DAO does a better job of reacting to player character race than the Infinity Engine and Gold Box games did.

the what and the what?

[LobselVith8]

Conduit0 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There is post after post in this thread explaining why that isn't the case for some fans, how they felt the racial options shaped the story for them, how they immersed themselves in their respective characters, and why racial options appealed to them. You might not care about racial options, but I don't see any reason to act like your opinion on the matter is a fact for everyone else when this entire thread proves that isn't the case.

What you're stating is opinion, what I said was fact. Their opinion is that racial choice effects the story,  but the fact is, it does not, you get the same story and the same content regardless of race.

There were responses to my protagonist being an elf, so I don't see how you can claim that what you're saying is true. My Surana Warden received comments about the fact that he was elven, what it was like being an elf , if he dealt with racism in the Circle, inquiries about how it was like growing up in an Alienage, and how he perceived the treatment of elves in Orlais and his people being forced to live in the Alienage.

To claim that what you're stating is fact isn't simply true, because there were reactions to my Surana Warden being an elf in the story. That mattered to me; whether it would matter to you is another matter entirely, but my enjoyment doesn't rely on what you find entertaining.

Conduit0 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People saying that they aren't going to play a game that wouldn't appeal to them is silly? That makes absolutely no sense. People buy games that they find entertainment in; if people aren't interested in Andrastian humans as protagonists, or prefer to play fantasy games where they can play as fictional characters, I don't see any reason to denigrate them.

Certainly not, but what is silly is the assertion that they can't immerse themselves or enjoy a game solely because they have to play as a human. Its like saying you can't enjoy a roadtrip with your friends if you don't get to choose which car you take. It seems to me that when people learned DA3 won't be DAO 2.0 they decided to throw a trantrum because they didn't get what they wanted and are now refusing to give DA3 a chance to stand or fall on its own merits. 

What's silly is your insistence on denigrating fans who find entertainment in playing as fictional races, and acting as though their refusal to purchase a game they won't find entertaining is really a mask for something else entirely. Plenty of people were genuinely bothered by the absense of racial options, and several threads kept popping up because people were venting about the limitation of the new protagonist being human only. Why you feel the need to discredit their opinion puzzles me. Some fans don't want to play Dragon Age if an important part of what they find entertaining isn't going to be available. No one should purchase a game if they won't enjoy it. If fans find their entertainment from playing as fictional races, then I don't see the reason why you should act as though that shouldn't matter.

Some fans like playing as fictional races in fantasy games. I certainly do. If that makes or breaks the decision for some fans to purchase the game, then that's their right.

[ArcaneJTM]

It's all about what helps v.s. hurts immersion. The more a player can identify with their character, the more it helps immersion. The less you can change the character to accommodate that, the more it hurts immersion. The game itself doesn't actually have to even acknowledge the differences, though it can help if it does. In fact, I think people are putting way too much emphasis on it doing so. I mean, it doesn't even make any sense for every merchant in Thedas to know you're life story. The only people who should care are the people your character was involved with beforehand.  DA:O actually did this pretty well.

Frankly, if anything odd does come up narrative wise from playing a less common type of character, guess what. The only people who experience it are the people who play as those characters. Why some people are bothered by the possibility that a total stranger might experience it is beyond me.

Modifié par ArcaneJTM, 29 mai 2013 - 11:26 .

[Fast Jimmy]

kinderschlager wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

DAO does a better job of reacting to player character race than the Infinity Engine and Gold Box games did.

the what and the what?

The Infinity Engine was a popular engine for making RPG's in the late 90's/early 2000's that typically involved an isometric camera view. Examples are Baldur's Gate or Fallout.

The Gold Box games are a series of games created by video game developer Strategic Simulations, Inc in the late 80's up until the late 90's that involved mostly text and rudimentary graphics and were allowed to use the VERY sought after Dungeons and Dragons rights. Examples are Pool of Radiance and the original Neverwinter Nights.

[Fast Jimmy]

IndomitusRex wrote...

In DAO I favoured the Human origins anyway (though I did enjoy Dwarves), so in that regard it's not a huge let-down for me.  From a story-telling standpoint I can understand why a Human would take center stage, as the conflict between Mages and Templars seems to be at the heart of DA3.  Mages and Templars are a Human concern; there are no Dwarven Mages, and there's already enough bad-blood betwen Humans and Elves for the Mage-Templar conflict to significantly escalate things.

Having a more defined main character can definitely be a good thing.  Commander Shepard is an awesome character, who could not have been the same if Shepard could have been a Turian, a Salarian, or whatever.

Hawke was no Commander Shepard, unfortunately.  I feel like I owe DA2 another playthrough before I could speak too much on that, but I just didn't feel like Hawke had the same impact that Shepard did.  I guess the scale had something to do with it; Shepard was fighting to defend the whole frigging galaxy, while Hawke spent his whole time in some city we'd never heard of before DA2.

Could it have not been? Make Eden Prime a multi-species colony and have Shepherd be someone up for Spectre status, not just the first human Spectre. Make the Collector's attacking all colonies (since they didn't take the "Human Reaper is important" story line anywhere anyway) and, suddenly, you can have Shepherd be a Hanar, let alone a Turian or Salarian.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 30 mai 2013 - 01:04 .

[zyntifox]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

IndomitusRex wrote...

In DAO I favoured the Human origins anyway (though I did enjoy Dwarves), so in that regard it's not a huge let-down for me.  From a story-telling standpoint I can understand why a Human would take center stage, as the conflict between Mages and Templars seems to be at the heart of DA3.  Mages and Templars are a Human concern; there are no Dwarven Mages, and there's already enough bad-blood betwen Humans and Elves for the Mage-Templar conflict to significantly escalate things.

Having a more defined main character can definitely be a good thing.  Commander Shepard is an awesome character, who could not have been the same if Shepard could have been a Turian, a Salarian, or whatever.

Hawke was no Commander Shepard, unfortunately.  I feel like I owe DA2 another playthrough before I could speak too much on that, but I just didn't feel like Hawke had the same impact that Shepard did.  I guess the scale had something to do with it; Shepard was fighting to defend the whole frigging galaxy, while Hawke spent his whole time in some city we'd never heard of before DA2.

Could it have not been? Make Eden Prime a multi-species colony and have Shepherd be someone up for Spectre status, not just the first human Spectre. Make the Collector's attacking all colonies (since they didn't take the "Human Reaper is important" story line anywhere anyway) and, suddenly, you can have Shepherd be a Hanar, let alone a Turian or Salarian.

Would be interesting with a DA:O type of game but in the Mass effect setting. Having different origins for the playable species. And in addition to that throw in some space-flight simulation akin to FTL with focus on exploration. That combination would keep any Trekkie and roleplaying enthusiast, such as me, hooked for years.

Modifié par Cstaf, 30 mai 2013 - 08:17 .

[Melca36]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Conduit0 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There is post after post in this thread explaining why that isn't the case for some fans, how they felt the racial options shaped the story for them, how they immersed themselves in their respective characters, and why racial options appealed to them. You might not care about racial options, but I don't see any reason to act like your opinion on the matter is a fact for everyone else when this entire thread proves that isn't the case.

What you're stating is opinion, what I said was fact. Their opinion is that racial choice effects the story,  but the fact is, it does not, you get the same story and the same content regardless of race.

There were responses to my protagonist being an elf, so I don't see how you can claim that what you're saying is true. My Surana Warden received comments about the fact that he was elven, what it was like being an elf , if he dealt with racism in the Circle, inquiries about how it was like growing up in an Alienage, and how he perceived the treatment of elves in Orlais and his people being forced to live in the Alienage.

To claim that what you're stating is fact isn't simply true, because there were reactions to my Surana Warden being an elf in the story. That mattered to me; whether it would matter to you is another matter entirely, but my enjoyment doesn't rely on what you find entertaining.

Conduit0 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People saying that they aren't going to play a game that wouldn't appeal to them is silly? That makes absolutely no sense. People buy games that they find entertainment in; if people aren't interested in Andrastian humans as protagonists, or prefer to play fantasy games where they can play as fictional characters, I don't see any reason to denigrate them.

Certainly not, but what is silly is the assertion that they can't immerse themselves or enjoy a game solely because they have to play as a human. Its like saying you can't enjoy a roadtrip with your friends if you don't get to choose which car you take. It seems to me that when people learned DA3 won't be DAO 2.0 they decided to throw a trantrum because they didn't get what they wanted and are now refusing to give DA3 a chance to stand or fall on its own merits. 

What's silly is your insistence on denigrating fans who find entertainment in playing as fictional races, and acting as though their refusal to purchase a game they won't find entertaining is really a mask for something else entirely. Plenty of people were genuinely bothered by the absense of racial options, and several threads kept popping up because people were venting about the limitation of the new protagonist being human only. Why you feel the need to discredit their opinion puzzles me. Some fans don't want to play Dragon Age if an important part of what they find entertaining isn't going to be available. No one should purchase a game if they won't enjoy it. If fans find their entertainment from playing as fictional races, then I don't see the reason why you should act as though that shouldn't matter.

Some fans like playing as fictional races in fantasy games. I certainly do. If that makes or breaks the decision for some fans to purchase the game, then that's their right.

I'm willing to bet that half of the people who say they won't buy the game will likely end up purchasing it anyway. They won't neccessarily preorder but they will likely buy it if they hear the game is not like DA2 like they currently expect it to be.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

How is it not like DA2? From everything we have heard, it is following the same exact design philosophy. Voiced protagonist, no playable races, use of the dialogue wheel, iconic looks... literally, the only things confirmed about the game so far echo DA2's game design outlook, aside from the rushed dev cycle.

That one change may make the world of difference... or it may still result in a game that fans of DA:O just don't like. Let's not forget that roughly only half the people who bought DA:O bought DA2. The reasons behind that are debatable, but if fans aren't impressed with what they see before release, there may be even LESS sales than DA2 had if we assume:

- those who bought DA:O but didn't buy DA2 would similarly not buy DA3 because of the design changes
-AND those who bought DA:O and DA2 but disliked DA2 would avoid DA3 for the same reason.

And, of course, assuming no new fans are gained. But if there were not millions of new fans gained by the design changes of DA2, then I'm not sure if DA3 is DA2.1 that it will similarly gain new fans.

[Melca36]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

How is it not like DA2? From everything we have heard, it is following the same exact design philosophy. Voiced protagonist, no playable races, use of the dialogue wheel, iconic looks... literally, the only things confirmed about the game so far echo DA2's game design outlook, aside from the rushed dev cycle.

That one change may make the world of difference... or it may still result in a game that fans of DA:O just don't like. Let's not forget that roughly only half the people who bought DA:O bought DA2. The reasons behind that are debatable, but if fans aren't impressed with what they see before release, there may be even LESS sales than DA2 had if we assume:

- those who bought DA:O but didn't buy DA2 would similarly not buy DA3 because of the design changes
-AND those who bought DA:O and DA2 but disliked DA2 would avoid DA3 for the same reason.

And, of course, assuming no new fans are gained. But if there were not millions of new fans gained by the design changes of DA2, then I'm not sure if DA3 is DA2.1 that it will similarly gain new fans.

We havent seen the game to even assume its going to be exactly like DA2.   Given how little we heard and how DA2 only sold half of what Origins.  I don't expect DA3 to be like DA2.  Lets also take in account it is a new game engine. Things are going to be different.

[Allan Schumacher]

Could it have not been? Make Eden Prime a multi-species colony and have Shepherd be someone up for Spectre status, not just the first human Spectre. Make the Collector's attacking all colonies (since they didn't take the "Human Reaper is important" story line anywhere anyway) and, suddenly, you can have Shepherd be a Hanar, let alone a Turian or Salarian.

Shepard being human is quite tied into the game (and trilogy's) story arc.

It's easy to say "well they could have just done it differently," but be careful. I find it is easy to understate the costs associated with features that people want. I think that the changes you suggest would have meant a lot more significant structural changes to the narrative of Mass Effect.

Yes, it "could have" been done differently. But that doesn't make it equivalent. It could have been done worse, or even better. We don't know, but I think it's a bit simple to just write a few lines for the changes that would have been made to make it work. And that's just from a narrative perspective. Other costs haven't really been factored.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

The Infinity Engine was a popular
engine for making RPG's in the late 90's/early 2000's that typically
involved an isometric camera view. Examples are Baldur's Gate or Fallout.

I have seen this mentioned in the past and on other forums, but Fallout was not made on the Infinity Engine.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 30 mai 2013 - 08:53 .

[Fast Jimmy]

[quote]Allan Schumacher wrote...

[quote]Could it have not been? Make Eden Prime a multi-species colony and have Shepherd be someone up for Spectre status, not just the first human Spectre. Make the Collector's attacking all colonies (since they didn't take the "Human Reaper is important" story line anywhere anyway) and, suddenly, you can have Shepherd be a Hanar, let alone a Turian or Salarian.[/quote]

Shepard being human is quite tied into the game (and trilogy's) story arc.

It's easy to say "well they could have just done it differently," but be careful. I find it is easy to understate the costs associated with features that people want. I think that the changes you suggest would have meant a lot more significant structural changes to the narrative of Mass Effect.

Yes, it "could have" been done differently. But that doesn't make it equivalent. It could have been done worse, or even better. We don't know, but I think it's a bit simple to just write a few lines for the changes that would have been made to make it work. And that's just from a narrative perspective. Other costs haven't really been factored.
[/quote]

True. I was replying more to the posters comment that Shepherd was an awesome character, implying that was BECAUSE he was human. I don't think that's inherently true. But yes, there are definite costs to creating multiple species. I was just trying to show that being human wasn't something ingrained in Shepherd's character that couldn't have been done in a different way.

[quote]Fast Jimmy wrote...

The Infinity Engine was a popular
engine for making RPG's in the late 90's/early 2000's that typically
involved an isometric camera view. Examples are Baldur's Gate or Fallout.

[/quote]

I have seen this mentioned in the past and on other forums, but Fallout was not made on the Infinity Engine.
[/quote]

Really? Well. I'll be.

Looking at it now, it seems it was made on the aptly named "Fallout Engine." 

You learn something new everyday.

[kinderschlager]

just for clarification, when i first responded to this thread, it was directed at the OP. i voiced my displeasure at the fact that there is no race selection, it still makes me mad as hell

[Fast Jimmy]

kinderschlager wrote...

just for clarification, when i first responded to this thread, it was directed at the OP. i voiced my displeasure at the fact that there is no race selection, it still makes me mad as hell

Well, I'd wager Allan had about as much input into that decision as you or I did. So getting mad at him is likely not going to get you anywhere. 

Also, you are about half a year too late to the discussion, if you look back to when the thread was first started/the information was announced. You may as well be complaining that the Mayan calendar didn't result in the end of the world in November for how late to the party this seems. 

[Dave of Canada]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

You may as well be complaining that the Mayan calendar didn't result in the end of the world in November for how late to the party this seems. 

God dammit, Mayans. Why didn't the world end? I gave my organs to the black market expecting it to not matter since we were all going to die.

[Harle Cerulean]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

You may as well be complaining that the Mayan calendar didn't result in the end of the world in November for how late to the party this seems. 

God dammit, Mayans. Why didn't the world end? I gave my organs to the black market expecting it to not matter since we were all going to die.

Hey, don't blame the Mayans for that.  It wasn't them who decided that the end of the calendar meant the end of the world - in fact, the Mayans were like "What are you white people smoking?" about the whole affair.  

[kinderschlager]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

kinderschlager wrote...

just for clarification, when i first responded to this thread, it was directed at the OP. i voiced my displeasure at the fact that there is no race selection, it still makes me mad as hell

Well, I'd wager Allan had about as much input into that decision as you or I did. So getting mad at him is likely not going to get you anywhere. 

Also, you are about half a year too late to the discussion, if you look back to when the thread was first started/the information was announced. You may as well be complaining that the Mayan calendar didn't result in the end of the world in November for how late to the party this seems. 

just wanted to put my 2 cents in and state that ANOTHER person is pissed at bioware for listening to EA

[Angrywolves]

I do agree that DAI seems to have more in common with DA2 struturally than it does with DAO . I don't believe Bioware has learned its lessons from all the mistakes made with DA2. That DA2's deficiencies were more than just a short developement cycle Bioware can blame on their bosses at EA and reusing scenery. I believe Brent Knowles assertion that Bioware is no longer the Bioware he knew. We see the devolution shift from ME1 to ME2 and of course from DAO to DA2. From an rpg to more of an action style with some limited rpg elements. In another thread someone asserted DA2 is more like a jrpg. I don't agree with that assertion but I do agree that Bioware appears to be simplifying their games and having only a human protagonist is an example of it. I do believe Bioware hopes to get Bethesda Skyrim players who like the open world concept, hoping that makes up for disenchanted DAO fans they don't get and disenchanted pc fans they don't get due to lack of a toolkit.

[Ketten]

Might as well toss my two cents because this was something I wasn't hoping would happen in DA3.

In any game that offers the chance to be another race, I will always be the other race. Particularly because I find humans in normal games to be a completely boring experience. We're already human, why not try something different? If I could have been a female turian in Mass Effect, I damn well would have. From my time playing SW:TOR, they let you play as another race without it impacting the story at all. I can reference DA:O with their handling of the character back stories, the nice quality dialogue or two that pertained to whatever race you chose. That felt awesome. You weren't just another human in the flock, you were different, and the game recognized you for it.

What I'm trying to say is, yes it might have been more work to implement the amount of lore and writing it took to make the races work in DA:O, but it made that game so much more replayable. It made it a blast when it came to immersion. Which is why I'm honestly a little disappointed that once again, we are shackled into being human and only human. Heck, I had enough pro-human experience in Mass Effect, can't I get some qunari fem-action somewhere?

Either way I'll still probably pick up DA3. This is just again, my opinion on the matter.

[Nefla]

Even when races are a mostly aesthetic choice like in swtor or skyrim I still love playing them and I come up with different backstories and such in my head why would I want to play a human in a fantasy setting? Especially when that human culture isn't exotic or exciting, it's the very definition of default. You are the privelaged race, your culture is like real world western culture complete with imitation Catholic Church, your people had subjugated another race in the past, they may as well have the PC work a ****ty customer service job as many of us do just to complete the theme.

[Mykel54]

My main fear is that we will be only seeing human protagonist from here on, because they are what people are familiar with and are easier to sell. A solution to preserve the origins, but limit the amount of work, would be to give only 3 origins. Instead of how DAO handled it (ex. an elf mage, a city elf, a dalish elf) this game would only give you the option to play as a dalish elf, for example, so the workload is less, but you aren´t playing as a human and see the game from a different perspective (i really liked this about DAO).

Modifié par Mykel54, 31 mai 2013 - 03:24 .

[kinderschlager]

Ketten wrote...

Might as well toss my two cents because this was something I wasn't hoping would happen in DA3.

In any game that offers the chance to be another race, I will always be the other race. Particularly because I find humans in normal games to be a completely boring experience. We're already human, why not try something different? If I could have been a female turian in Mass Effect, I damn well would have. From my time playing SW:TOR, they let you play as another race without it impacting the story at all. I can reference DA:O with their handling of the character back stories, the nice quality dialogue or two that pertained to whatever race you chose. That felt awesome. You weren't just another human in the flock, you were different, and the game recognized you for it.

What I'm trying to say is, yes it might have been more work to implement the amount of lore and writing it took to make the races work in DA:O, but it made that game so much more replayable. It made it a blast when it came to immersion. Which is why I'm honestly a little disappointed that once again, we are shackled into being human and only human. Heck, I had enough pro-human experience in Mass Effect, can't I get some qunari fem-action somewhere?

Either way I'll still probably pick up DA3. This is just again, my opinion on the matter.

i just want to see a female qunari IN-game. or are there none:crying:

[Allan Schumacher]

just wanted to put my 2 cents in and state that ANOTHER person is pissed at bioware for listening to EA

This decision was hardly motivated by any sort of "Corporate EA" influence.


As for voicing your displeasure, that's in large part why I went with this thread (it was easier to track, and some people got upset [justifiably] because I had closed off some other threads at the time because they got VERY hostile very quickly).

[Lau Maru]

Would it be possible to have a non-human character as DLC? like say have elf package and world treats character as elf or dwarf, qunari etc.?

[Beerfish]

Like everything in a game it is give and take. Sure they could easily open it up to other races, they did it in origins. That is the give. The take part is that the overall story arc they want to tell is shorter, perhaps the # of companions is less. The story itself is not as tight. It's a huge game decision and you have to do it right or not at all.

It's a massive decision that has to be made very early on because it really affects the whole game. I have no problem with BioWares decision on this one or the one they made in DA2.

[Cutlass Jack]

kinderschlager wrote...

just wanted to put my 2 cents in and state that ANOTHER person is pissed at bioware for listening to EA

Just curious...do you really think that there was some intense focus study EA did that said Nonhumans don't buy as many video games as humans? Or that being inclusive to nonhumans drives away the much bigger human market?

Because I can't see EA caring much otherwise.