3855 réponses à ce sujet

[NedPepper]

This isn't even close to a deal breaker for me. I still have Origins for that. I don't think it would make sense, at least with the little we know about this game, in the narrative anyway.

Still, I'd bet a thousand bucks there will be multi-player where you can play as dwarf, elf, Dalish elf, Kossith, whether Tal Vosoth or Qunari, Chevaliers, Grey Wardens, etc. So, for people who really want this, there's a silver lining. I wanted to hate Mass Effect's multi-player (and I DO hate that it's connected to the single player game), but playing as Salarians and Qurians and Krogan is actually really fun.

[Rawgrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Would you have been happier with a Hawke Elf, or a Hawke Dwarf?

Depending on how the protagonist was written, I think some people would have liked Elven and Dwarven protagonists; a Ferelden dwarf could have a different cultural view than his Kirkwall counterparts. I think a proactive elven protagonist would have been interesting, in how the Kirkwall elves might have responded to him.

No, I'm talking about no differences.  Just that Hawke (and family, though I suppose we could even make Hawke adopted) are now elves and dwarves.

I'm actually being very specific in asking this.

Because the issue is seeming to be very different than simply wanting to play as a dwarf or an elf.  I'm inferring by your response that the Elf/Dwarf option would only be sufficient if the game was appropriately altered to properly support the characters (insofar as much for your own liking anyways).

You said you didn't like Hawke.  I'm asking "Is it that you didn't like Hawke because he's human or is there other aspects of Hawke that make you dislike him?"

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

[Felya87]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the availability of multiple Origins in the original game was a feature that appealed to a number of people. I certainly think it's loss in Dragon Age II was to the detriment of the game, since Hawke didn't appeal to me on any level.

Would you have been happier with a Hawke Elf, or a Hawke Dwarf?

 it would have made the game much more appetizing, yes. but I have to admit that wasn't the only thing that rested on my stomach.
surely having the chance to play as Elf or Dwarf DA2 would have made much more interesting the game. at least Hawke would have been MY Hawke. not a preimposted Hawke.
even if little was going to change in the story.

[LobselVith8]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

berelinde wrote...

Using Orzammar as an example, my dwarven noble would never, ever choose Bhelen under any circumstances, but my dwarven commoner was just as strongly opposed to Harrowmont.

This is offtopic but I always figured I'd have chosen to do DN->Bhelen, DC->Harrowmont.

Bhelen gets involved with the DC's sister and offers casteless more freedoms, while Harrowmont is for tradition and Bhelen frames (or manipulates) the DN for his brother's death.

[upsettingshorts]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

berelinde wrote...

Using Orzammar as an example, my dwarven noble would never, ever choose Bhelen under any circumstances, but my dwarven commoner was just as strongly opposed to Harrowmont.

This is offtopic but I always figured I'd have chosen to do DN->Bhelen, DC->Harrowmont.

Bhelen gets involved with the DC's sister and offers casteless more freedoms, while Harrowmont is for tradition and Bhelen frames (or manipulates) the DN for his brother's death.

I know, I played all the origins.  What's your point?  That each origin is somehow a fixed character?  Hah.

It's not terribly hard to come up with reasons for Aeducan to support Bhelen, or Brosca to support Harrowmont.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:11 .

[DarkKnightHolmes]

Yeah, I always went with DN > Harrowment and DC > Bhelen.

Though for the chance to make Bhelen really upset (which sadly never gets acknowledged), I side with Bhelen at the start with my Dwarf noble but in the end change sides at the last minute. Just to make him feel betrayal. Ah, good times.

[Nerevar-as]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think the availability of multiple Origins in the original game was a feature that appealed to a number of people. I certainly think it's loss in Dragon Age II was to the detriment of the game, since Hawke didn't appeal to me on any level.

Would you have been happier with a Hawke Elf, or a Hawke Dwarf?

Had it been the same character, no. To me Hawke was pretty pathetic in most senses.

But approaching the Qun from the elf POV, being apparently an equal opportunity culture? Yes. Being able to rub an elf´s success to humans, and being badass enough that they can´t really do anything about it? Approach the mage problem from a dwarf´s POV, being both unable to use magic, but also partiially immune? That too.

So yes, I would have liked it. But the game barely addressed being a mage in a city where they are hunted down constantly. I stopped my mage playthrough because my suspense of disbelief couldn´t take any more.

[Allan Schumacher]

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

[Ianamus]

Erm.. a bit of a random question but I'm confused: where has this been announced? I hear people talking about threads being de-ralied by it, but I'm not sure where the information came from int he first place.

I'm also surprised we know this already, despite knowing next to nothing about the game. I suppose Bioware thought it was best to drop the bomb early so that people wouldn't get upset/angry about it when the game is announced, like people did with Dragon Age 2.

[LobselVith8]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Would you have been happier with a Hawke Elf, or a Hawke Dwarf?

Depending on how the protagonist was written, I think some people would have liked Elven and Dwarven protagonists; a Ferelden dwarf could have a different cultural view than his Kirkwall counterparts. I think a proactive elven protagonist would have been interesting, in how the Kirkwall elves might have responded to him.

No, I'm talking about no differences.  Just that Hawke (and family, though I suppose we could even make Hawke adopted) are now elves and dwarves.

I'm actually being very specific[/i] in asking this.

Because the issue is seeming to be very different than simply wanting to play as a dwarf or an elf.  I'm inferring by your response that the Elf/Dwarf option would only be sufficient if the game was appropriately altered to properly support the characters (insofar as much for your own liking anyways).

You said you didn't like Hawke.  I'm asking "Is it that you didn't like Hawke because he's human or is there other aspects of Hawke that make you dislike him?"

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.

[upsettingshorts]

EJ107 wrote...

Erm.. a bit of a random question but I'm confused: where has this been announced? I hear people talking about threads being de-ralied by it, but I'm not sure where the information came from int he first place.

I'm also surprised we know this already, despite knowing next to nothing about the game. I suppose Bioware thought it was best to drop the bomb early so that people wouldn't get upset/angry about it when the game is announced, like people did with Dragon Age 2.

BioWare confirmed it at a con in Edmonton during a panel.

[Heimdall]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I completely agree. I'd like to see what being a human is like in the DA universe not being born into a rich family (which is what we we got in DA:O and DA2).

Meh. Don't forget that in DA2 we were a poor family, and refugees. The goal was to become someone in Kirkwall, so I don't reallly think it was the same while yes, the blood of Hawk was noble.

Well, Hawke grows up in a rich family. Sure, they have to flee Lothering and then slum it for a year or so in Kirkwall, but then they are rich and live in a mansion. So having oa year or so of your life (especially years that aren't formative, like your childhood or pubescent years) still means your character would be identified as a rich character. 

We haven't really gotten a chance to play a human who has grown up in desperation or had to live without. 

Wait, Hawke was never "rich" pre-Kirkwall. They "lived well below their mean" in hamlets to avoid templars. (at least, that is what the codex says)

Really? Maybe I am totallying not remembering this correctly. For some reason, I thought they had a good chunk of wealth which helped pay off the nobles and Templars in Ferelden. If I am off base, then I apologize. I just always felt like the Hawke's never had to worry about a roof over their heads or where their next meal came from.

It seemed to me that all the dialogue suggested they were living in poverty in Lothering.  Leandra had cut all ties to her family, or at least she seemed to be under the impression that they had done so to her, and without that I doubt she and Malcolm could have carried enough wealth on their backs to bribe nobles and Templars for over twenty years.

[Rawgrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Nothing at all. But you you arn`t forced to play a Cousland. You can play a City elf or something else instead. adds replayability and the choice "make your own" character. But I see you point.

The inclusion of Non-combat skills also helps. But thats a different matter.

Modifié par Rawgrim, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:17 .

[Shadow Fox]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Well Cousland to my knowledge doesn't have a semi-canon default appearence.

[Felya87]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Hawke was imposted. Cousland choosen.

I may seem little, but in truth, is a lot. it remind me of "Antz". the theme is that.

[Caiden012]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Because we made Cousland. We looked at a list of possiblities and said "That is who I am going to be and he will have the personality I give him. He will be my character"

But Hawke was just given to us. Sure we could change his appearence and choose from three personalities but he wasn't ours. Also since you play the tutorial as a pre-set Hawke and then he is the first appearence option given to you in the menu it just does more to show that Hawke was not our character. We just got to control one given to us.

Modifié par Caiden012, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:18 .

[The Elder King]

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.

You mean Carver, right? Or when Cullen took Bethany away?

[upsettingshorts]

Caiden012 wrote...

and choose from three personalities

You did not have to do this. 

[Maclimes]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Hawke's family and backstory are EXTREMELY closely tied in with every single aspect of the plot and story, so Hawke is so EXTREMELY defined, without player input.

Cousland's family and backstory are important during the first 5% of the game, and occasionally mentioned elsewhere, leaving the player fare more open to decide their character's life and story.

Hawke was imposted. Cousland choosen.

Also this.

Modifié par Maclimes, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:19 .

[Caiden012]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

and choose from three personalities

You did not have to do this. 

I sort of need to give Hawke a personality but there was not much to choose from. I am talking over the span of the game.

[upsettingshorts]

Maclimes wrote...

Hawke's family and backstory are EXTREMELY closely tied in with every single aspect of the plot and story, so Hawke is so EXTREMELY defined, without player input.

If Hawke's EXTREMELY defined, what word do we use to describe Geralt of Rivia?

Caiden012 wrote...

I sort of need to give Hawke a personality but there was not much to choose from. I am talking over the span of the game.

The tone icons were instructive, they don't indicate three distinct characters.  It's not like Paragon Shepard and Renegade Shepard.  There's just Hawke.  That's all I mean.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:21 .

[Nerevar-as]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Would you have been happier with a Hawke Elf, or a Hawke Dwarf?

Depending on how the protagonist was written, I think some people would have liked Elven and Dwarven protagonists; a Ferelden dwarf could have a different cultural view than his Kirkwall counterparts. I think a proactive elven protagonist would have been interesting, in how the Kirkwall elves might have responded to him.

No, I'm talking about no differences.  Just that Hawke (and family, though I suppose we could even make Hawke adopted) are now elves and dwarves.

I'm actually being very specific in asking this.

Because the issue is seeming to be very different than simply wanting to play as a dwarf or an elf.  I'm inferring by your response that the Elf/Dwarf option would only be sufficient if the game was appropriately altered to properly support the characters (insofar as much for your own liking anyways).

You said you didn't like Hawke.  I'm asking "Is it that you didn't like Hawke because he's human or is there other aspects of Hawke that make you dislike him?"

But in the Dragon Age setting race is a factor. It´s the same with mages, they come with a baggage that you can´t just ignore without hurting immersion. I´ve seen few videogames where there are such differences (well, only the Witcher, where Geralt being an "outdated" mutant is usually mentioned and prejudiced people awho are stupid enough look down on him). So I see it as a wasted opportunity to focus on humans when you can´t work a rather different playing experience with other races. I don´t think neither VO nor cinematics are worth it.

[Caiden012]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

Hawke's family and backstory are EXTREMELY closely tied in with every single aspect of the plot and story, so Hawke is so EXTREMELY defined, without player input.

If Hawke's EXTREMELY defined, what word do we use to describe Geralt of Rivia?

I didn't know that we were playing The Witcher now.

Modifié par Caiden012, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:21 .

[Ianamus]

Maclimes wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

i am pretty sure its because he is Bioware`s character. A human named Hawke. Its like someone creates a character for you. Starts the game, and then lets you play the rest.

Specifically from a character creation point (since it's what you've highlighted), what's the difference between Hawke and Cousland?

Hawke's family and backstory are EXTREMELY closely tied in with every single aspect of the plot and story, so Hawke is so EXTREMELY defined, without player input.

Cousland's family and backstory are important during the first 5% of the game, and occasionally mentioned elsewhere, leaving the player fare more open to decide their character's life and story.

I'm not really buying this. Cousland's family and backstory were just as pre-defined as Hawke's they just didn't matter as much in the long run, which in my mind is a negative. 

I agree with the "partially canon appearence" thing though. Why did we have to play default Hawke in the tutorial? it would have made far more sense to go to character creator before the tutorial - and would have avoided the slight unfortuante implication of Varric's story always starting with a white hero even if Hawke well, wasn't. 

Modifié par EJ107, 22 octobre 2012 - 08:24 .