104 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Vaeliorin wrote...
They have allowed this, but never in a way that is meaningful to you.  After all, I don't think Bioware had in mind my DA mage character whos agenda was to use Alistair to eventually gain control of the throne of Ferelden.  All that Darkspawn/Grey Warden stuff was just what she had to do to get in good with Alistair.

But that's like saying that in DA2, Hawke's plot was to secretly run a Thedas wide slave distribution, and that's why Hawke (a) stayed in Kirkwall and ( acted all heroic (as a cover, and to build underworld contacts). Varric was his slave peddler, and that's where the business contacts came in. The Deep Roads expedition was just to afford their initial human capital, so to speak.

If the game doesn't ever react to it, it can't be meaningfully called an in-game choice. Don't make me break out my PC is a shapeshifting alien preparing Thedas for the invasion trope.

[xsdob]

Do people even understand what I was asking for?

[Fredward]

It kills me that this thread title is searching desperately and hopelessly for a "want."

[SamaraDraven]

It does kind of suck not to have an option to choose a middle ground to end a conflict. To me, that's what a hero does: saves lives, makes peace, stands against all odds for what's right... In my opinion, both sides had points that were right and points that were wrong.

Averting a war seems to be like the best ending but since we're often presented with picking sides of an extreme situation in most video games, I'd like to have those choices matter. It still bugs me that we had to fight both Meredith and Orsino. I'd have, at least, liked my choices to have determined who the final boss was and how the game ended. Just two different endings, that's all I'm going to realistically wish for. They don't even have to be that different. There could still be a war but who you wind up fighting would change based upon who you sided with. Kind of like who fought along side you in DAO based on the sides you picked during the core quests like Broken Circle, Nature of the Beast, etc... Each one gave you an ally but who, was determined by which faction you sided against. It's a small thing in that example but in a bigger picture - like in DA2 - it left me feeling like "Why bother playing again?" 50% of the reason I buy these games is for the replay value. Shagging a new companion each time through doesn't count as meaningful variety, IMO.

But it is what it is. At least DA2 had some side quests that differed based on the lean of your decisions in previous quests. How about we have more of that? It'd be even sweeter if the strength of your allies was affected by how well you helped them throughout the game.

Modifié par SamaraDraven, 23 novembre 2012 - 09:53 .

[xsdob]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

It kills me that this thread title is searching desperately and hopelessly for a "want."

Whoops, lol. How did I not notice that.

Fixed now.

[xsdob]

I just don't want the mages and templars in this conflict to be extremist, that's it.

So that when a final choices does come down, I just question why I should even bother and shut down the game.

MAKE THE TWO SIDES LIKABLE IS SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM DAMNIT!

[Quething]

You're asking for writing with more subtlety than a Mac truck full of burning tires? I'm sorry, that's only available for "Character" here in Thedas. "Plot" subtlety is no longer on offer.

[Vit246]

Unfortunately, you ask too much of Bioware. Its too used to a black-and-white mentality. Or in this case, black-and-black. What's the word I'm looking for... grimdark?

Modifié par Vit246, 24 novembre 2012 - 12:33 .

[Pelle6666]

I hope there will be more depth to the story than that. Thedas is not one country and to have the ending of the game effect the entire continent is not realistic at all. I hope they will focus on the fate of the main characters and offer several ways to resolve the mage/chantry crisis.

[Plaintiff]

 If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future, then they're not going to give you any world-changing choices.

So you're fine.

[Adanu]

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

[TJPags]

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

[xsdob]

I'm more talking about the choice in generally, make it an actually hard choice for good reasons, make there be an appeal to side with either mages or templars.

Don't make it just a choice between stupid evil A or stupid evil B, with the results being that if either one wins, thedas, or maybe even just orleas, is forever made the ****hole of the continent.

Modifié par xsdob, 24 novembre 2012 - 03:50 .

[draken-heart]

TJPags wrote...

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

Hawke's Story was a framed narrative. Linear line with minor decisions to determine how it happened. Circles rebelled by the time the story was being told. It was just about how that happened.

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

 If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future, then they're not going to give you any world-changing choices.

So you're fine.

Yeah. No rpg producer does that.....except loads of them.

[Rawgrim]

draken-heart wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

Hawke's Story was a framed narrative. Linear line with minor decisions to determine how it happened. Circles rebelled by the time the story was being told. It was just about how that happened.

The only thing we get to decide is wich dialogue options to use. None of these options affects the story at all, though. Everything ends up exactly the same in the end, anywyay. Its more like an interactive movie, really. Not one decision mattered in the end.

[Herr Uhl]

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

 If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future, then they're not going to give you any world-changing choices.

So you're fine.

Yeah. No rpg producer does that.....except loads of them.

Not if they carry over. The point is that it is hard to account for two incredibly different worlds. If we were to use Witcher as an example (Edit: Mainly because a lot of people hold it up as the paragon of choice and consequence), you hardly change anything in the first game, and the second game is pointless because fantasy national socialists invade anyways. 

Can't really think of any game that has let you carry through world-changing decisions. If they exist and there is a sequel, they go the canon route.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 24 novembre 2012 - 01:17 .

[Rawgrim]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

 If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future, then they're not going to give you any world-changing choices.

So you're fine.

Yeah. No rpg producer does that.....except loads of them.

Not if they carry over. The point is that it is hard to account for two incredibly different worlds. If we were to use Witcher as an example, you hardly change anything in the first game, and the second game is pointless because fantasy national socialists invade anyways.

Can't really think of any game that has let you carry through world-changing decisions. If they exist and there is a sequel, they go the canon route.

I doubt the author of the Witcher books would have agreed to his world being changed in a video game.

I misunderstood the second part. thought he meant world-changing choices in general, not that carry over. Chosing a king here and there, and stuff like that can be world changing.

[Herr Uhl]

Rawgrim wrote...

I misunderstood the second part. thought he meant world-changing choices in general, not that carry over. Chosing a king here and there, and stuff like that can be world changing.

They included the slate-wiper, i.e Nilfgaard invading. Most of the changes you make are on a personal level, and I'm not complaining about how they did it, in fact they did a brilliant job in letting the player feel like they changed things.

I think that is the point raised by "If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future". If they made the last one they could make the endings as different as they please.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 24 novembre 2012 - 01:31 .

[Adanu]

TJPags wrote...

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

Ah, I see what you mean... you're talking about changes within Hawkes story, not the overall arc of the stories result. There are some of those, such as the sibling thing and how you came into your starting fame... but I understand what you mean now.

[TJPags]

Rawgrim wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

Hawke's Story was a framed narrative. Linear line with minor decisions to determine how it happened. Circles rebelled by the time the story was being told. It was just about how that happened.

The only thing we get to decide is wich dialogue options to use. None of these options affects the story at all, though. Everything ends up exactly the same in the end, anywyay. Its more like an interactive movie, really. Not one decision mattered in the end.

Indeed, and my point exactly.  Framed narrative works fine in a movie or a book.  In a video game, for me, didn't work at ALL.

[In Exile]

Herr Uhl wrote...
They included the slate-wiper, i.e Nilfgaard invading. Most of the changes you make are on a personal level, and I'm not complaining about how they did it, in fact they did a brilliant job in letting the player feel like they changed things.

I think that is the point raised by "If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future". If they made the last one they could make the endings as different as they please.

It was very obvious that Bioware, when making DA2, responded to what it thought players wanted after DA:O re: choices (too see their consequences in-game). The problem is that Bioware doesn't do the whole different world-state thing. But gamers (or at least Bioware fans) totally expect it, and built it up quite a lot in their heads.

It's why ME2-3 were nothing but pure dissapointment for anyone who expected widely different world-states, and why DA2 is pegged as not having any choice, even though Bioware offered players what they always offer them at the end of quests, witht he difference that they included the payoff in the same game (i.e., no difference based on what you do).

Not that we as gamers shouldn't fight for TW2-like variance, but Bioware has never seriously done branching content and gamers keep expecting it, and there's just a serious disconnect here.

[Helena Tylena]

In Exile wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...
They included the slate-wiper, i.e Nilfgaard invading. Most of the changes you make are on a personal level, and I'm not complaining about how they did it, in fact they did a brilliant job in letting the player feel like they changed things.

I think that is the point raised by "If Bioware intends to keep producing Dragon Age games in future". If they made the last one they could make the endings as different as they please.

It was very obvious that Bioware, when making DA2, responded to what it thought players wanted after DA:O re: choices (too see their consequences in-game). The problem is that Bioware doesn't do the whole different world-state thing. But gamers (or at least Bioware fans) totally expect it, and built it up quite a lot in their heads.

It's why ME2-3 were nothing but pure dissapointment for anyone who expected widely different world-states, and why DA2 is pegged as not having any choice, even though Bioware offered players what they always offer them at the end of quests, witht he difference that they included the payoff in the same game (i.e., no difference based on what you do).

Not that we as gamers shouldn't fight for TW2-like variance, but Bioware has never seriously done branching content and gamers keep expecting it, and there's just a serious disconnect here.

This, basically.
Name any BioWare game that uses save-imports that had massively different endings.

Hell, I'll even go as far as to say that ME3 had the most varied endings of them all, in regards to long-term 'world' impact. And they could do that because it was the end of a series.

Modifié par Helena Tylena, 24 novembre 2012 - 08:57 .

[LinksOcarina]

TJPags wrote...

Adanu wrote...

TJPags wrote...
bold 2 - the entire game WAS pointless.  No decision in DA2 changed anything, let alone the end.

L.O.L


Just because you're too blind to see it doesn't mean you don't change things.

Oh?  Enlighten me.  What, and how, does Hawke change?

Help Anders collect his ingredients, or don't - he blows up the Chantry.

Romance Anders, or ignore him - he blows up the Chantry.

Side with Meredith throughout the game, or not - she goes nuts and tries to kill you in the end.

Side with Orsino at the end, he goes Harvester.  Side with Meredith, Orsino goes Harvester.

Side with mages, circles rebell, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

Side with Templars, circles rebel, templars revolt, DA2 ends.

What changes?

Don't know yet, well found out in Dragon Age III. Because let's face it, those choices will refelct something important regarding Hawke and his role in the ongoing inquisition. 

Plus, you forgot other plot elements, such as if Anders is alive or not in the end, if Sebastian goes back to Starkhaven, if Fenris is enslaved again, if Varric keeps that bit of the lyrium idol, if the Arishok is alive or dead, if the Tome was returned, how Isabela is handeled, Fenryel's entire sub-line, your surviving sibling's fate...

Of couse, these apparently don't matter too much at all in the grand scheme of things, right? 

[Herr Uhl]

Helena Tylena wrote...

Name any BioWare game that uses save-imports that had massively different endings.

Name me any game that uses save imports that have massively different endings (and actually take them into account). I'll wait.

In the meantime, I hope they can do more to make it seem like things change depending on what you do in game. This wasn't conveyed very well in DA2, as the three acts don't really influence eachother past the odd letter here and there.

Edit: In DAO, the second act at least interacts with the final battle re:armies and the Origin has an influence on one of the questlines in the second act. There is more of a callback.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 24 novembre 2012 - 09:12 .