3855 réponses à ce sujet

[aMytallica]

I'm totally fine with this. Whether there is the option of other races or not doesn't really faze me. It’s not a draw card for me. I've always felt that the origin stories in DA:O were largely superficial anyway. Different opening sequences, some differences in dialogue/interactions/scenes etc, but nothing totally game changing. All origins essentially followed the same main path, which was the core of the story and what made DA:O so great.

I prefer DA:O over DA2 overall, despite how tedious it is in comparison, but it has nothing to do with the amount of choice in character creation. This game is sounding like it’s going to be pretty big in scope, especially when compared to DA2. That’s more important in my books. I'm looking forward to seeing the best of both games put together for DA3.

[AlexJK]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Know what would be a good compromise? Human but with different backgrounds.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE GETTING.

[Fredward]

AlexJK wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Know what would be a good compromise? Human but with different backgrounds.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE GETTING.

Oh, really? Woopsydoopersnickle. I should read more. xp

Are we getting the rest that I would like? Or don't we know? Or are we just getting the ME type backgrounds? Speculations!

[ianvillan]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Know what would be a good compromise? Human but with different backgrounds.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE GETTING.

Oh, really? Woopsydoopersnickle. I should read more. xp

Are we getting the rest that I would like? Or don't we know? Or are we just getting the ME type backgrounds? Speculations!

The backgrounds are non-playable if thats what you mean.

[Felya87]

one thing I don't get...

why made all those races and playable origins in DA:O, if there wasn't the will to continue doing it, knowing that people loved it?

I can understand that it's less difficult ad expensive make a game as DA2 than DA:O, but it's only logic that people would like the return of the choise of costumization of the first chapter of the saga.

DA2, and with what we know, at least for now, DA3, would always be considered inferior to DA:O. even if they are good games.

That could be all avoided just not making DA2 and DA3 connected to the brand started with DA:O, making them indipended titles.

After all, the real thing people are disappointed aren't the origins and reces per se, but because they already had them! If a new ME is going to be made, people would not be so upset if the main character is going to be another human, as Shepard (even if it would be very hard, after three games, create a human character with the same appealing...it would fell like a bad copy) so all the problem is in the game's name.

I have played DA:O, and still can't understand what DA2 have in common with DA:O, if I don't count some character (Leliana, Anders) who could have just been a funny easter egg in a non DA game.

[AlexJK]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I should read more. xp

Yes

Are we getting the rest that I would like? Or don't we know? Or are we just getting the ME type backgrounds? Speculations!

We don't know. We are getting character backgrounds (not playable), and it's been hinted that they will be more involved than those of Mass Effect. More information will be revealed in time...

[AlexJK]

Felya87 wrote...

why made all those races and playable origins in DA:O, if there wasn't the will to continue doing it, knowing that people loved it?

Because they were part of the game Dragon Age: Origins. They were not part of the game Dragon Age 2, and will not be part of Dragon Age: Inquisition. Why aren't you complaining that the plot of DA2 wasn't to gather an army and defeat the archdemon? After all, that was in DAO. Why aren't you complaining about not playing as a Grey Warden in DA2, after all that was in DAO... etc.

After all, the real thing people are disappointed aren't the origins and reces per se, but because they already had them! If a new ME is going to be made, people would not be so upset if the main character is going to be another human, as Shepard (even if it would be very hard, after three games, create a human character with the same appealing...it would fell like a bad copy) so all the problem is in the game's name.

You are equating the phrase "Dragon Age" with the gameplay feature of origin stories. This is a little silly, since the first game is called Dragon Age: Origins. You are focusing on the wrong part of the title.

I have played DA:O, and still can't understand what DA2 have in common with DA:O, if I don't count some character (Leliana, Anders) who could have just been a funny easter egg in a non DA game.

You don't realise that the two games are set in the same world? I think you're just trolling now.

Modifié par AlexJK, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:31 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Bruddajakka wrote...

So I guess you guys missed the fact that one of the major enjoyment points of DAO compared to DA2 was the variety of races, and Origins. I mean hell if it was a choice between them, and a voiced human protagonist I'd take the variety. Then again it sounds like we're being forced to be part of the Chantry as well which personally I despise as an originization.

I've used this argument several times in the last couple of days, but the moderators come on here and tell me that I'm a small group that believes this and basically I'm irrelavent.  Maybe I am.  Oh well.  Nothing left to say anymore.  Good luck with your game Bioware.  Thanks for letting me speak my thoughts.

[Fallstar]

Can't say I'm surprised by this, but I am a bit disappointed. I played mostly as humans in DAO, but I did do a playthrough as the DN and it was rather refreshing. It certainly added another RP dimension.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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

Hawke's CC is a class and a gender choice. It's literally one of the worst CC's I'v ever seen in a game calling itself an RPG.

Cousland is also a class and gender choice. But just by picking Cousland, you've also chosen a race and an origin story, with all the fluff that comes with that. You also get to assign points to non combat skills, a system which was - for no particular reason other than lack of depth - absent from DA2.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Without looking at said poll:

Did
you properly select a random sample of people to participate in the
poll?  Is the poll created in a non-biased way?  How are the questions
asked?

I posted a thread about the poll in DA2 general discussion. So it is a random selection of people who were reading that forum at that time. There is no such thing as a non biased poll, but there was a minimum of bias in that one. There was an option for those who would not have liked any of the listed features to return, and preferred how they were in DA2/their non inclusion, for example.

Obviously compared to the 5 million customers you had with DAO and the 3 or however many million you had with DA2, that poll is entirely irrelevant. That doesn't mean it was biased though

Modifié par DuskWarden, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:33 .

[ianvillan]

Felya87 wrote...

one thing I don't get...

why made all those races and playable origins in DA:O, if there wasn't the will to continue doing it, knowing that people loved it?

I can understand that it's less difficult ad expensive make a game as DA2 than DA:O, but it's only logic that people would like the return of the choise of costumization of the first chapter of the saga.

DA2, and with what we know, at least for now, DA3, would always be considered inferior to DA:O. even if they are good games.

That could be all avoided just not making DA2 and DA3 connected to the brand started with DA:O, making them indipended titles.

After all, the real thing people are disappointed aren't the origins and reces per se, but because they already had them! If a new ME is going to be made, people would not be so upset if the main character is going to be another human, as Shepard (even if it would be very hard, after three games, create a human character with the same appealing...it would fell like a bad copy) so all the problem is in the game's name.

I have played DA:O, and still can't understand what DA2 have in common with DA:O, if I don't count some character (Leliana, Anders) who could have just been a funny easter egg in a non DA game.

I know what you mean, and why take a game that was one of your highest selling games and recieved high praise and perfect scores and then change almost every aspect of the first game.

Then after DA2 was released and it was less well recieved and sold less than the first game do Bioware insist on going in the same direction as DA2.

[Morroian]

DuskWarden wrote...

I posted a thread about the poll in DA2 general discussion. So it is a random selection of people who were reading that forum at that time. There is no such thing as a non biased poll, but there was a minimum of bias in that one. There was an option for those who would not have liked any of the listed features to return, and preferred how they were in DA2/their non inclusion, for example.

Obviously compared to the 5 million customers you had with DAO and the 3 or however many million you had with DA2, that poll is entirely irrelevant. That doesn't mean it was biased though

No self selected poll is unbiased.

[Felya87]

AlexJK wrote...

Felya87 wrote...

why made all those races and playable origins in DA:O, if there wasn't the will to continue doing it, knowing that people loved it?

Because they were part of the game Dragon Age: Origins. They were not part of the game Dragon Age 2, and will not be part of Dragon Age: Inquisition. Why aren't you complaining that the plot of DA2 wasn't to gather an army and defeat the archdemon? After all, that was in DAO. Why aren't you complaining about not playing as a Grey Warden in DA2, after all that was in DAO... etc.

After all, the real thing people are disappointed aren't the origins and reces per se, but because they already had them! If a new ME is going to be made, people would not be so upset if the main character is going to be another human, as Shepard (even if it would be very hard, after three games, create a human character with the same appealing...it would fell like a bad copy) so all the problem is in the game's name.

You are equating the phrase "Dragon Age" with the gameplay feature of origin stories. This is a little silly, since the first game is called Dragon Age: Origins. You are focusing on the wrong part of the title.

I have played DA:O, and still can't understand what DA2 have in common with DA:O, if I don't count some character (Leliana, Anders) who could have just been a funny easter egg in a non DA game.

You don't realise that the two games are set in the same world? I think you're just trolling now.

what you said means: if I played Assassin's creed 1, and I played with the animus, playng than as a character of the past, in the second chapter we should't play with the animus, and play as a character of the past as in the first? but that was the good stuff in AC!

no one ever said Origins indicated the feature of the origins and races. at least for what I know. Origins can be just because is the first game in the lore of DA. is the origin of a saga.

for the Grey Warden things, yes, I was disappointed to not have another Grey Warden as protagonist. that's why I still don't understand DA2. the first game we where one, why shouldn't have been one again? it was part of the good stuff of DA:O.
Gather an army is not so important. Is ok a new story, is not so ok change everything from the first game. expoecially if said game was so loved by fans.

and for DA2 being in the same world as DA:O...it's hard to believe. Kirkwall is not Ferelden, and if not for same detail here and there, it's almost hard to think of DA2 as the same lore of DA:O. let's not speak about how much things are different because of the choise made in DA:O imported in DA2, because a lot of people would became even more upset (people dead who is alive ecc...)

than I think the one who want trolling is you. I just say what I think, and you could just try to not be so angry beacuse I don't think the same as you.

[Fallstar]

ianvillan wrote...

I know what you mean, and why take a game that was one of your highest selling games and recieved high praise and perfect scores and then change almost every aspect of the first game.

Then after DA2 was released and it was less well recieved and sold less than the first game do Bioware insist on going in the same direction as DA2.

DA2 was an experiment, but it was a bad experiment. They can't really tell if the reason DA2 received such criticism was down to their design decisions or the general lack of quality that came from rushing it.

By 'general lack of quality' I am referring to: the repeated environements, low detail interfaces, shoddy implementation of paraphrasing, generically named items, (5 items called 'ring' with different stats np) lack of item descriptions, terrible fetch quests. (At least in DAO someone asks us to go and fetch the items, instead of relying on Hawke's apparently prodigious detective skills.)

Assuming they'll at least be improving on those things, if they get the same reception for DA3 as they did for DA2, maybe then they'll realize why so many people bought Origins and praised it.

Morroian wrote...

DuskWarden wrote...
...There is no such thing as a non biased poll...

No self selected poll is unbiased.

*Looks at what I wrote.

I should have said that my poll had a minimum of bias in the final line, not that it was unbiased though, you are right.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:57 .

[Morroian]

Felya87 wrote...

for the Grey Warden things, yes, I was disappointed to not have another Grey Warden as protagonist. that's why I still don't understand DA2. the first game we where one, why shouldn't have been one again? it was part of the good stuff of DA:O.

Cause Wardens are only important during a blight. I disliked the GWs so it doesn't bother me.

Modifié par Morroian, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:53 .

[GodWood]

If only there was another RPG coming out in the next two years offering racial choice and plenty of freedom to roleplay.

[abnocte]

So we can only play as human and we get different non-playable backgrounds ala ME?

Well, it doesn't surprise me, I never expected to see Origins again even if they had kept the silent protagonist. I always saw it as a high-cost feature.

I don't really feel strongly about having to play as human, but I certainly think we are losing roleplaying options.
It is not the same to see the Templars-Mage wars through the eyes of a human, elf or dwarf, the last ones don't even have mages. So just by choosing the species I can create differents reasons for my PC to take part in the conflict ( regardless of the game acknowledging them or not )

But now I have a question for Bioware.

From now on are we going to experience the world or Thedas only from a human prespective? Meaning, is there the posibility that we will see a DA game where we play only as:

- elf? Playing as someone who rediscovers the elf's ancient knowledge? for example
- dwarf? as someone who finds a way to reduce the Darkspawn menace upon his/her city?
- kossith? as someone who questions the Qun and wants something "better" for his/her people?

Or we will be playing as the human that partakes is such events?

[AlexJK]

Felya87 wrote...

what you said means: if I played Assassin's creed 1, and I played with the animus, playng than as a character of the past, in the second chapter we should't play with the animus, and play as a character of the past as in the first? but that was the good stuff in AC!

No, I didn't say that. If origin stories were included in DA2 and/or DA3, that would not be a problem. I am saying that there is no reason why we should expect them to be, based only on the fact that they existed in DAO.

for the Grey Warden things, yes, I was disappointed to not have another Grey Warden as protagonist. that's why I still don't understand DA2. the first game we where one, why shouldn't have been one again? it was part of the good stuff of DA:O

Because DA2 is a different game, with a different story, and a different main character. Again, there's no reason why the player should not have been a Grey Warden in DA2 or DA3, but no good reason for why they should be, either.
.

and for DA2 being in the same world as DA:O...it's hard to believe. Kirkwall is not Ferelden, and if not for same detail here and there, it's almost hard to think of DA2 as the same lore of DA:O. let's not speak about how much things are different because of the choise made in DA:O imported in DA2, because a lot of people would became even more upset (people dead who is alive ecc...)

So are you suggesting that all fantasy settings have only one location? Origins had many locations. Orzammar and Denerim were extremely different. Is it that difficult to imagine that Kirkwall exists in the same world?

[ianvillan]

DuskWarden wrote...

ianvillan wrote...

I know what you mean, and why take a game that was one of your highest selling games and recieved high praise and perfect scores and then change almost every aspect of the first game.

Then after DA2 was released and it was less well recieved and sold less than the first game do Bioware insist on going in the same direction as DA2.

DA2 was an experiment, but it was a bad experiment. They can't really tell if the reason DA2 received such criticism was down to their design decisions or the general lack of quality that came from rushing it.

By 'general lack of quality' I am referring to: the repeated environements, low detail interfaces, shoddy implementation of paraphrasing, generically named items, (5 items called 'ring' with different stats np) lack of item descriptions, terrible fetch quests. (At least in DAO someone asks us to go and fetch the items, instead of relying on Hawke's apparently prodigious detective skills.)

Assuming they'll at least be improving on those things, if they get the same reception for DA3 as they did for DA2, maybe then they'll realize why so many people bought Origins and praised it.

The thing that worries me most is that Bioware was willing to release a rushed product that they knew was not as good as it could of been just to capitalise on the success of Origins.

If Bioware was was not forced by EA to make a game in such a short time and Bioware knew they were not ready to release the game why did they not prospone the game till they could work on it more.

Modifié par ianvillan, 23 octobre 2012 - 12:02 .

[Felya87]

Morroian wrote...

Felya87 wrote...

for the Grey Warden things, yes, I was disappointed to not have another Grey Warden as protagonist. that's why I still don't understand DA2. the first game we where one, why shouldn't have been one again? it was part of the good stuff of DA:O.

Cause Wardens are only important during a blight. I disliked the GWs so it doesn't bother me.

that's not totally true...Awakening was after the blight, an there was need of GW too...the Warden are useful whenever there is darkspawn, not only during the blight. they are the ones who know more about the darkspawn, with the legion of the dead.

and even in DA2 Legacy, we see there is much more than a giant dragon god between the secrets of the darkspawn...

so, even without using a Grey Warden, i think that was the most interesting thing to see, being the lore of DA, instead of the Mage/Templar war start in DA2.

just my opinion, or people is going to say I troll even if I don't want to...

[Heimdall]

abnocte wrote...

So we can only play as human and we get different non-playable backgrounds ala ME?

Well, it doesn't surprise me, I never expected to see Origins again even if they had kept the silent protagonist. I always saw it as a high-cost feature.

I don't really feel strongly about having to play as human, but I certainly think we are losing roleplaying options.
It is not the same to see the Templars-Mage wars through the eyes of a human, elf or dwarf, the last ones don't even have mages. So just by choosing the species I can create differents reasons for my PC to take part in the conflict ( regardless of the game acknowledging them or not )

But now I have a question for Bioware.

From now on are we going to experience the world or Thedas only from a human prespective? Meaning, is there the posibility that we will see a DA game where we play only as:

- elf? Playing as someone who rediscovers the elf's ancient knowledge? for example
- dwarf? as someone who finds a way to reduce the Darkspawn menace upon his/her city?
- kossith? as someone who questions the Qun and wants something "better" for his/her people?

Or we will be playing as the human that partakes is such events?

I believe I saw a developer quote to the effect that they hadn't ruled out racial choice in the future, just not in DA: I.

[Heimdall]

Felya87 wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Felya87 wrote...

for the Grey Warden things, yes, I was disappointed to not have another Grey Warden as protagonist. that's why I still don't understand DA2. the first game we where one, why shouldn't have been one again? it was part of the good stuff of DA:O.

Cause Wardens are only important during a blight. I disliked the GWs so it doesn't bother me.

that's not totally true...Awakening was after the blight, an there was need of GW too...the Warden are useful whenever there is darkspawn, not only during the blight. they are the ones who know more about the darkspawn, with the legion of the dead.

and even in DA2 Legacy, we see there is much more than a giant dragon god between the secrets of the darkspawn...

so, even without using a Grey Warden, i think that was the most interesting thing to see, being the lore of DA, instead of the Mage/Templar war start in DA2.

just my opinion, or people is going to say I troll even if I don't want to...

Thing is, it limits the Dragon Age universe to the darkspawn and their attempts to destroy the world.  They want Dragon age to be about more than monsters trying to destroy the world. 

[AlexJK]

Lord Aesir wrote...

I believe I saw a developer quote to the effect that they hadn't ruled out racial choice in the future, just not in DA: I.

Mike Laidlaw would certainly like to see it return:
http://twitter.com/M...839329482985475

[Sidney]

ianvillan wrote...
The thing that worries me most is that Bioware was willing to release a rushed product that they knew was not as good as it could of been just to capitalise on the success of Origins.

If Bioware was was not forced by EA to make a game in such a short time and Bioware knew they were not ready to release the game why did they not prospone the game till they could work on it more.

I will always believe DA2 was rushed to get a cash flow to Bioware because of the sucking money black hole TOR had become. DA2 was a game that had a lot of good ideas but the execution was clearly rushed and too many corners cut.

[Tymvir]

I assume they used the statistics they were talking about so much a while ago, discovered that the vast majority of players chose the human origin, and thought they should save resources. The problem with using statistics is that it's valuable for a player to have a choice, even if it is an unlikely choice. Having additional options gives weight to a decision, even if it is rarely chosen, so the majority of players who chose the Human origin felt more "unique" than if they'd never had a choice.

Personally, this particular limitation isn't a big deal for me though, especially if we get other types of character backgrounds.

Modifié par Tymvir, 23 octobre 2012 - 12:19 .

[ianvillan]

Tymvir wrote...

I assume they used the statistics they were talking about so much a while ago, discovered that the vast majority of players chose the human origin, and thought they should save resources. The problem with using statistics is that it's valuable for a player to have a choice, even if it is an unlikely choice. Having additional options gives weight to a decision, even if it is rarely chosen, so even the majority of players who chose the Human origin felt more "unique" than if they'd never had a choice.

Personally, this particular limitation isn't a big deal for me though, especially if we get other types of character backgrounds.

But as I said earlier why only use the racial choice statistics and not any of the other statistics.