215 réponses à ce sujet

[philippe willaume]

If race has an impact on game play (ie different reactions according to the race). I would say race.
if race is just eye candy, I would prefer origins.

phil

[ioannisdenton]

I would say origins any day.

[Sandy]

Origins, without a doubt. If they are playble origins, that's gravy, but I think that even backgrounds/origins that are being implemented in DA3 are better than just having different races. To me races is pretty much only cosmetics with a few "elf!" or "dwarf" instead of "you there!" in dialogues from time to time. I know people want and like the 'feel' of playing another race, but the bottom line is that it rarely has any real impact on the story or the gameplay. Headcanon isn't as important to me as actual gameplay and actual story-content.

[NUM13ER]

I'd care more about story than my characters race, so origins.

[fchopin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

If you were given the choice in a hypothetical future Dragon Age game between origins (defined as separate and distinct playable prologues that provide a background and context for your protagonist's journey) and racial choice (defined as being able to select from a variety of fantasy races in the character creator) which would you prefer, and why?

For me it would have to be origins as i loved to play a human mage from the circle and then a rogue in DAO, both origins could be played completely different and both viewed the world with different eyes and it was great.
 
That is what i miss in DA2, Hawke is the same character in all the plays i did as i could not make Hawke in to a different person whatever i did so the character became just an observer in the end.
 
For me the character back story is what makes a character special and unique and not if i am playing a different race unless you combine different origins to the races.


Edit: Nice thread by the way.

Modifié par fchopin, 24 octobre 2012 - 09:42 .

[Dean_the_Young]

The one that gives more player character response and reaction. Which is to say, it depends.

Mass Effect as a trilogy is an example of Origins done poorly. ME1 had a modest differential, with a unique mission and a backstory-affected mission, as well as a few dialogue points from companions, but that was extensive compared to ME2 (which had two news reports and a throw-away mention in the shuttle with Jacob and Miranda) and ME3 (where Hackett gives a line in Cerberus station). As a whole, the origins had no difference and the game played the same regardless.

DAO was a case of races done passably. While the origins certainly gave perspective of various events, they in and of themselves didn't have much reactivity.. while at least you got the occasional 'you are an elf!' comment from people across the game. Not great, but certainly reactive across the experience.


But the difference between DAO and ME isn't innate. It's very possible to have a race (or gender) difference be unacknowledged: no one in the Bioware series has commented on your skin tone, for example, and think of those people who hacked their ME2 games to play as other character avatars, whether as a squadmate or as the other gender in order to sneak in a same-sex romance. If the game only responds to the characters in one way, then character avatar differences are ignored.

Likewise, it is possible for origins to be a much bigger part of a story experience, if they are consistently and regularly relevant. It isn't common in RPGs, but the possible effects of backstory on a narrative is apparent in non-RPG mediums and isn't fundamentally different from other RPG characterization tools.

[Little Queen]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Origins without a doubt. For me the origins increased the level of...intimacy? there's a better word here...between myself and my player character much more than what race I was did. It makes the PC's struggle more unique and personally grounded.

This. I would always choose Origins, eventhough i really like playing as an elf. 

[Arppis]

plnero wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

This thread has a simple premise:

If you were given the choice in a hypothetical future Dragon Age game between origins (defined as separate and distinct playable prologues that provide a background and context for your protagonist's journey) and racial choice (defined as being able to select from a variety of fantasy races in the character creator) which would you prefer, and why?

Probably races.

Because human women are always shorter than human men, but sometimes there will be races where the women are taller than human men. Given as humans tend to be the most abundant race, that means I'll probably be taller than the majority of NPCs I interact with, as opposed to the default where I'm shorter.

And no, body types don't help. I've played TOR and the tallest woman is the same height as the shortest man.

And there was no "beefed up" female bodytype either. Or was it the fat bodytype that was removed? I forgot. But the TOR female bodytypes were very similar. Anyhows, tall women are quite hot.

And anyone saying size doesn't matter is full of crap!

https://encrypted-tb...N1gxDKCkm93tsqB

Nope.

Race.

Yeah, but that's a big dwarf.

[KAM12780]

Origins of course! Without the origins, we'd have no background story and no emotional attachments to our character

[Rune-Chan]

Origins, as long as they are playable like in the first Dragon Age game. I think they'd need to be diverse like they were as well, though.

For example the human noble has a personal grudge against Howe, whereas the other origin stories did not. The dwarf noble is related to one of the potential dwarven kings, and it makes that story a lot more personal.

[Leonia]

Icinix wrote...

In the event that I was forced to choose between the two - I would choose Origins.

Unique content based on a class is more interesting than slight variation in dialogue due to race.

Sums up my feelings as well. Races just aren't different enough to actually mention their being different (and that has potential to introduce racism which is a whole different kettle of fish, fictional or not).

[Cutlasskiwi]

If they're working as in DAO then I would pick origins. Picking a race never felt like a big deal, so skipping that is no skin off my back. The origins was a nice touch though. Oh, if only they had influenced the game more.

[TheRealJayDee]

Icinix wrote...

In the event that I was forced to choose between the two - I would choose Origins.

Unique content based on a class is more interesting than slight variation in dialogue due to race.

Basically this. Ideally of course there would be a mix of the two, but whatever is done it must be done well.

[TheJediSaint]

Can I choose neither and say I would rather have more content in the main game?

If not: Origins.

[esper]

Origins.Prefereably playable and involved in the future of the plot.

[Felya87]

I think I would prefer the race, if it has an impact to the game/story. i think I can make up the origins of my character in my mind, relating it to the class.

[LobselVith8]

Both would be ideal, but I would lean towards racial options over human only origins. I prefer the non-human protagonist in a fantasy setting. I think Inquisition would have been a great point for the return of racial options, to explore Thedas with non-human protagonists who would see societies in a way that a human protagonist never could. The "human only" approach doesn't really appeal to me in a fantasy setting where you have a plethora of other races to chose from.

[Maclimes]

Aw, by the ancestors, why do you force me to choose?

Despite my love of dwarves, I would have to say "origins" is the better pick. Though I would love to pick my race, I admit that the multiple origin/background stories makes a better game. Stone take you!

[KR4U55]

Races, since you'd have to play a diferent origin for every race. Besides, playing a human would be kind of lame for "poor and opressed" backround.

[Wulfram]

I prefer backgrounds to stay in the background, so that there's plenty of room for the player to fill in their own details.

So, races.

[jackofalltrades456]

Honestly, as disappointing as it is, we all knew that they weren't going to bring back race options due to the cinematic focus and the voiced character. It's just too expensive to have that many characters to voice acted for an PC.

Origins though....

This was what really grinds my gears. One of my favorite features of DAO was the playable character Origins. How you were able to begin in areas and meet the important npcs before you began the treaty questline. I felt more connected to that area as result. If I played the human Noble Origin, I knew how Rendon Howe murdered my family. If I played a dwarven commoner, then I already knew who Rica, Leske, and Jarvia were. If I played a Dwarven Noble, than I knew how and why Bhelen betrayed me and who Trian was. What if they made these Orgins non-playable? I would feel less eager to rush my dwarven noble/commoner back to Orzammar to get revenge on Bhelen or help him gain throne to give my sister and all Casteless a better life. I wouldn't feel an satisfied with killing Howe later on during the questline for my noble.

It's really silly for them to fight us on bringing that latter feature back, since unlike the former, they have little excuse for it other than time constraints/being lazy. Playable origins would be a much better compromise for the removal of race options than just giving us a non-playable one where we'd meet random npc's half way through the questline claiming to be our cousin or suddenly have this random person appear at the end claiming to have been my pc's best friend for years...

Modifié par jackofalltrades456, 24 octobre 2012 - 02:52 .

[Joy Divison]

Race.