233 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The canon choice for DA4 or the templar-only choice for DA3?
It's not like they didn't follow the reason of popularity or narrative already in ME3.

Yes, and look how that turned out.

I agree, but that doesn't mean they couldn't try it again (al least going against popularity, this time maybe with decent writers during the decisions).
Not that I want a templar-only outcome. I want multiple outcomes. In this way everything could have the end they wants (or the majority). Their decision during the development of the game shouldn't be influenced by the problem that could came during the development of the sequel.

They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

[Fast Jimmy]

Xilizhra wrote...

They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

The ME2 Suicide Mission did everything right. 

Its the import flag system that totally the wrong idea.

[Vandicus]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The canon choice for DA4 or the templar-only choice for DA3?
It's not like they didn't follow the reason of popularity or narrative already in ME3.

Yes, and look how that turned out.

I agree, but that doesn't mean they couldn't try it again (al least going against popularity, this time maybe with decent writers during the decisions).
Not that I want a templar-only outcome. I want multiple outcomes. In this way everything could have the end they wants (or the majority). Their decision during the development of the game shouldn't be influenced by the problem that could came during the development of the sequel.

They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

Tali, Legion, Mordin, (EDI arguably) all received pretty major roles. They also had "replacement NPCs" ready in the wings. Wrex from the original ME received a fairly minor role. The game does however have a limited development cycle and resources, meaning we can only have so many "full" companions. The only companion who was plot necessary for ME3 was Liara.

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...


They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

Again, make a canon. The sequels shouldn't limit the writers when they'll write a game plot. And again, you're fine with limiting the choice at the mage victory because it's what you want and it's (probably) the popular one. If popularity and narrative would suggest the templar option as the more safe, would you still be defending having only one outcome in the game?

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...


They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

Again, make a canon. The sequels shouldn't limit the writers when they'll write a game plot. And again, you're fine with limiting the choice at the mage victory because it's what you want and it's (probably) the popular one. If popularity and narrative would suggest the templar option as the more safe, would you still be defending having only one outcome in the game?

I'm not in that situation and cannot answer the question adequately.

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...


They did that in ME2, with the suicide mission. Hence, every ME2 squadmate had to be unnecessary to the plot, and all but two only got cameos. You have to keep sequels in mind.

Again, make a canon. The sequels shouldn't limit the writers when they'll write a game plot. And again, you're fine with limiting the choice at the mage victory because it's what you want and it's (probably) the popular one. If popularity and narrative would suggest the templar option as the more safe, would you still be defending having only one outcome in the game?

I'm not in that situation and cannot answer the question adequately.

I doubt a lot of pro-mages players would want this, considering the fact that a lot of them (though I can include myself in that group) don't want to be forced to play a PC which is in an organization under the Chantry.

[Xilizhra]

I doubt a lot of pro-mages players would want this, considering the fact that a lot of them (though I can include myself in that group) don't want to be forced to play a PC which is in an organization under the Chantry.

Far too many people are accepting of a protagonist hammered into being Andrastian, unfortunately.

[AlanC9]

Vandicus wrote...

Tali, Legion, Mordin, (EDI arguably) all received pretty major roles. They also had "replacement NPCs" ready in the wings. Wrex from the original ME received a fairly minor role. The game does however have a limited development cycle and resources, meaning we can only have so many "full" companions. The only companion who was plot necessary for ME3 was Liara.

And of course, Liara can't die. Not until the final beam run, anyway. And EDI can only die if you pick Destroy (though you can get her body vaporized on the beam run).

Wing Commander fans may remember that wingmen could only be killed in WC3 when their plot lines were finished; before that they would always eject and get picked up by SAR. Not applicable to the ME2 SM, but fake branching is a useful technique when you can get away with it.

[Vandicus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

Tali, Legion, Mordin, (EDI arguably) all received pretty major roles. They also had "replacement NPCs" ready in the wings. Wrex from the original ME received a fairly minor role. The game does however have a limited development cycle and resources, meaning we can only have so many "full" companions. The only companion who was plot necessary for ME3 was Liara.

And of course, Liara can't die. Not until the final beam run, anyway. And EDI can only die if you pick Destroy (though you can get her body vaporized on the beam run).

Wing Commander fans may remember that wingmen could only be killed in WC3 when their plot lines were finished; before that they would always eject and get picked up by SAR. Not applicable to the ME2 SM, but fake branching is a useful technique when you can get away with it.

Making it impossible for plot central characters to die doesn't mean that characters that can die can't have plot relevant roles. Namely, Legion, Tali, and Mordin could all be killed in ME2 but all had major roles in ME3(though there were replacement NPCs available if they had died in ME2). Garrus as I recall did not have as major a role, but was fairly involved for a character that could die in ME2.

[Fast Jimmy]

ME3's answer to cloning important characters seems... weak. For lack of a better term.

Granted, the fact that you have to struggle immensely to get good endings if you have the "original" characters alive instead of the NPC carbon copies is an attempt at making this feel like it has weight, it still seems a little trite.

I mean... canon has been set before. Retcons have been done. Import choices have been ignored. Why not just give up the ghost and give us an interactive comic at the beginning of each game which lets us know what the canon for the vast majority of choices was and allow us, say, 2 or 3 choices to vary from previous games. Who was alive, who was romanced, who was sold into slavery... these are stupid details that offer nothing in the way of improved story-telling in later games.

The complaint is that "my warden/Hawke would NEVER do that..." but guess what? Its NOT your Warden/Hawke. Its Bioware's. And you're not even playing them in the next game (unlike Shepherd, where a romance option would be really important), so what they would or would not do is totally irrelevant. They are just footnotes in history, they aren't under your control any longer.

If you let go the fact that what your characters may or may not have done shouldn't dictate how future games and stories unfold, you may find that the story of them doing something different is way more exciting than you had ever thought.

[Foolsfolly]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Early on, way back in ye days of Dragon Age: Origins,  Gaider said that he wanted to circel/Mage/Templar/Chantry dillema to be grey. And the team did a pretty good job at it.

But with each new sequel/book/comic, the balance is getting more an more out of whack.
It is getting harder and harder to defend the Templar/Chantry side.
The templar abuse is getting ramped up the whazoo.
Meanwhile, the mages acting up is always handwaved as circumstantial (the veil was thin, they were pushed by circumstances...basicly it always boils down to "the Chantry/templars are to blame")

Now ever since ME2 I feared this is where it might end up...the Cerberus treatment, where Templars/Chantry will suddenly become incompetent, stupid and pure evil.
As it is I've seen no indication this won't be the case.

The question to you devs, is how do you  feel on this issue? Do you think the blance is great as is or that it need fixing?

And for everyone else - how would you deal with this if you were the writer?
What would you do to mantain the greyness?

How would I deal with it?

I'd fracture the two up into a billion pieces. Templars broke away from the Chantry but there's still Templars unsure of their job, role, and if they should have broken away. These guys are now shades of grey because they're not unifed to 'Kill All Mages' although such individiuals likely would exist within the Templars.

And perhaps other Templars just dropped their swords and walked away the moment the Templars turned on the Chantry.

As for the mages I see great differing opinions within the fraternites. Dozens and dozens of highly educated men and women arguing about their path. They stick together because they're outnumbered but each group and sect grows angry with the other as they all try to figure out how they should get through this. And again there'd be some mages who just walk away, others who perhaps seek out the Chantry or Templars saying "I wanted nothing to do with this." And depending on who they turn themselves in to... they may still be alive.

The way I'd keep the issue grey is by making sure there isn't two sides. There's many different sides. Popular and unpopular opinions and individual leaders should exist on either side. As long as they don't strip humanity out of either side completely there'll be greyness... that's where they failed with Cerberus they were evil just because and then they didn't even have opinions, doubts, or motives anymore they were just faceless nameless stormtroopers.

Stay away from that and the issue'll be grey.

[AlanC9]

Vandicus wrote...

Making it impossible for plot central characters to die doesn't mean that characters that can die can't have plot relevant roles. Namely, Legion, Tali, and Mordin could all be killed in ME2 but all had major roles in ME3(though there were replacement NPCs available if they had died in ME2). Garrus as I recall did not have as major a role, but was fairly involved for a character that could die in ME2.

Sure. But this gets to be a big resource sink if you do it a lot. And note that ME3 gets tons of grief for the relatively small roles the ME2 companions play. Though when people say that they're usually talking about Miranda et al. rather than the ones you mention.

[Fast Jimmy]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Early on, way back in ye days of Dragon Age: Origins,  Gaider said that he wanted to circel/Mage/Templar/Chantry dillema to be grey. And the team did a pretty good job at it.

But with each new sequel/book/comic, the balance is getting more an more out of whack.
It is getting harder and harder to defend the Templar/Chantry side.
The templar abuse is getting ramped up the whazoo.
Meanwhile, the mages acting up is always handwaved as circumstantial (the veil was thin, they were pushed by circumstances...basicly it always boils down to "the Chantry/templars are to blame")

Now ever since ME2 I feared this is where it might end up...the Cerberus treatment, where Templars/Chantry will suddenly become incompetent, stupid and pure evil.
As it is I've seen no indication this won't be the case.

The question to you devs, is how do you  feel on this issue? Do you think the blance is great as is or that it need fixing?

And for everyone else - how would you deal with this if you were the writer?
What would you do to mantain the greyness?

How would I deal with it?

I'd fracture the two up into a billion pieces. Templars broke away from the Chantry but there's still Templars unsure of their job, role, and if they should have broken away. These guys are now shades of grey because they're not unifed to 'Kill All Mages' although such individiuals likely would exist within the Templars.

And perhaps other Templars just dropped their swords and walked away the moment the Templars turned on the Chantry.

As for the mages I see great differing opinions within the fraternites. Dozens and dozens of highly educated men and women arguing about their path. They stick together because they're outnumbered but each group and sect grows angry with the other as they all try to figure out how they should get through this. And again there'd be some mages who just walk away, others who perhaps seek out the Chantry or Templars saying "I wanted nothing to do with this." And depending on who they turn themselves in to... they may still be alive.

The way I'd keep the issue grey is by making sure there isn't two sides. There's many different sides. Popular and unpopular opinions and individual leaders should exist on either side. As long as they don't strip humanity out of either side completely there'll be greyness... that's where they failed with Cerberus they were evil just because and then they didn't even have opinions, doubts, or motives anymore they were just faceless nameless stormtroopers.

Stay away from that and the issue'll be grey.

Wait... you wouldn't make every mage a blood mage abomination, and every Templar a creepy sadist?

Hmmmm. I don't know. I don't know about that approach.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 22 octobre 2012 - 04:03 .

[Foolsfolly]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wait... you wouldn't make every mage a blood mage abomination, and every Templar a creepy sadist?

Hmmmm. I don't know. I dont know about that approach.

It's very risky. I have no idea if it'll work. Humanity and character in organizations to provde depth and moral complexity? I don't know, man.... it might ****** off a lot of people...

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...

I doubt a lot of pro-mages players would want this, considering the fact that a lot of them (though I can include myself in that group) don't want to be forced to play a PC which is in an organization under the Chantry.

Far too many people are accepting of a protagonist hammered into being Andrastian, unfortunately.

It seems that this'll not be a problem anymore.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...
Interesting, but I will not succumb to any corruption.

You already have.

And you're not even a mage.

It can only be resolved in one way, otherwise the world will diverge
too far to follow it in the next game. And as dedicated templar fans
are quite rare (the majority seems to be split between mage fans and
"everyone is dumb"), it's far safer and more narratively interesting for
the mage-leaning side to be the one that wins.

Them doing that would be idiotic in many ways, for reasons of
popularity, narrative and so on. I'm sure some sort of bone can be
thrown to anyone who might actually support the Circle system, I just
don't quite know what it is.

That's what you think. My friend, you lack creativity.
Also who put you in charge of deciding what makes a good narrative and who gave you statistics - and even then who sez the writers must follow the popular trend?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 22 octobre 2012 - 06:02 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

As to what to do. Off the top of my head:

TEMPLARS:
- show off just how dangerous abominations and blood mages can be. The game really fails at showing this.
- show how tempting and corrupting blood magic is
- show the problems of other, non-Cirlce systems. Show why they wouldn't work.


MAGES:
- don't make them insane for no reason


CHANTRY:
- Show the chantry doing more for the poor and needy


Other than that, suddenly being free of all restrictions and flying the high of the rebellion, I suspect many mages would let loose and loose many inhibitions and start abusing their power left and right.
I wouldn't be surprised to se see mages raping (after being denied for so long) and pillaging.

Without the Chantry the tempalr may loose much of their restraint. But in their case it would probably more strict mage-hunting and interrogation methods.

[Lotion Soronarr]

nightscrawl wrote...
Saying "I will not succumb to any corruption" has no bearing on anything, unless you were the only mage in Thedas, which is not the case.

Actually it has some bearing, since that statement implies thinking onself uncorruptable. The sin of pride.
A Pride demon would be omnomnoming on his/her soul in record time.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

People have stated the theory that at the end of DA3, Sandal's prophecy will become true and "the magic will come back... all of it" means that everyone will be a mage.

At which point you can't put the whole world into a Circle and the issue resolves itself.

I don't buy that theory. And I hope it isn't true.
With everyone being a mage, the number of abominations would skyrocket up the whazoo.

[Lotion Soronarr]

nightscrawl wrote...
This doesn't necessarily have to apply to blood magic of course, that just happens to be what is discussed. Wynne has a whole discussion with you about being a Grey Warden and having power over others that states basically those same points. This applies to any wielder of power whether it be a king who is a tyrant or a mage who uses blood magic to do harm.

And going by your other statements about freely using mind control, I would say that you and David (and me too for that matter) probably have a fundamental disagreement about power and its influence over a person.

Power is corruptingbecause it is tempting and not all power is equally tempting.

In the world of DA, as it is now I see no greater temptation than mind control and blood magic.
It is personal power. Subtle. So easily abusable and hidden.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Foolsfolly wrote...
How would I deal with it?

I'd fracture the two up into a billion pieces. Templars broke away from the Chantry but there's still Templars unsure of their job, role, and if they should have broken away. These guys are now shades of grey because they're not unifed to 'Kill All Mages' although such individiuals likely would exist within the Templars.

And perhaps other Templars just dropped their swords and walked away the moment the Templars turned on the Chantry.

As for the mages I see great differing opinions within the fraternites. Dozens and dozens of highly educated men and women arguing about their path. They stick together because they're outnumbered but each group and sect grows angry with the other as they all try to figure out how they should get through this. And again there'd be some mages who just walk away, others who perhaps seek out the Chantry or Templars saying "I wanted nothing to do with this." And depending on who they turn themselves in to... they may still be alive.

The way I'd keep the issue grey is by making sure there isn't two sides. There's many different sides. Popular and unpopular opinions and individual leaders should exist on either side. As long as they don't strip humanity out of either side completely there'll be greyness... that's where they failed with Cerberus they were evil just because and then they didn't even have opinions, doubts, or motives anymore they were just faceless nameless stormtroopers.

Stay away from that and the issue'll be grey.

Ohh... very, very good one Foolsfoly.
Your name is deceptive for you speak words of wisdom.

[MichaelStuart]

I don't think any writer should try to influence a readers perception.
Either something is grey or it isn't.

[Wulfram]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

- show the problems of other, non-Cirlce systems. Show why they wouldn't work.

Should be show why the Templars think they wouldn't work, or why they might not work.  I don't think the game should take the point of view that locking up mages is the only possible solution.

[The Elder King]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...




Other than that, suddenly being free of all restrictions and flying the high of the rebellion, I suspect many mages would let loose and loose many inhibitions and start abusing their power left and right.
I wouldn't be surprised to se see mages raping (after being denied for so long) and pillaging.

Without the Chantry the tempalr may loose much of their restraint. But in their case it would probably more strict mage-hunting and interrogation methods.

Templars had somehow the same restraint of the mages in term of sex. The Chantry is against templars forming families (though they're not forbidden) and mages couldn't form faimilies at all. The mages, actually, had probably more freedom in having sex than the templars.
Though it doesn't mean much anyway. In this war, there'll be people of both groups who will be involved in rape, pillage and torture. Those are given in any war.

[MisterJB]

hhh89 wrote...
Templars had somehow the same restraint of the mages in term of sex. The Chantry is against templars forming families (though they're not forbidden) and mages couldn't form faimilies at all. The mages, actually, had probably more freedom in having sex than the templars.
Though it doesn't mean much anyway. In this war, there'll be people of both groups who will be involved in rape, pillage and torture. Those are given in any war.

So long as the game shows that both sides are human and with faults.
I don't want to see all templars pillaging villages for money for lyrium while mages do nothing but heal the sick and wounded.
How about a group of templars pillage a village for money for lyrium to fight the mages while a group of mages enslaves a village through blood magic to fight the templars?