233 réponses à ce sujet

[Uccio]

Sibu wrote...

Zobo wrote...

Phoenix_Fyre wrote...

I agree..... I feel the PC is too godlike in some BW games..... Warden, Hawke, Shepard....

Although what happened to Hawke's mom in DAII was pretty freakin' jarring.....

On a contrary I felt Hawke was too much of a loser in DAII. Got his brother killed, his mother killed, got his sister taken away to the Gallows for years (also got her back in the end, so a major victory for Hawke here, I give him that), got tricked by Corypheus and is responsible for unleashing that horror to the world of Thedas, went herp-derp with Tallis and gave her secret documents instead of killing off a dangerous Qunary spy, lost his estate and fleed some place unknown loosing all his comrades on the way except for the LI after siding with mages instead of staying as a revolutionary leader. Hawk's life mostly sucked and his story turned up to be a story of losses, failure and misery instead of a rise to power story as it has been advertised.

Then Shepard was a joke in ME3 final. At least before EC. EC gave him some of his guts and pride back, yet still he has ultimately lost no matter the ending.

Like i said before:

In other words, you want to play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worships and faps to...

Good Lord, i hope nobody in this forum is a writer... you people suck

Zobo has a point. Hawke was a major looser.

[AstraDrakkar]

Hawke was definitely a loser. He/She was simply carried along for the ride by circumstances and when it really counted, Anders was the one who made the important decision.

[The Elder King]

AstraDrakkar wrote...

Hawke was definitely a loser. He/She was simply carried along for the ride by circumstances and when it really counted, Anders/Vengeance was the one who made the important decision.

fixed, since in rivarly path Anders tried to take the bomb/reagents away from the Chantry, and Vengeance blocked him.

[Rorschachinstein]

I like playing as people that fail sometimes. Makes it seem like there is more at stake.

[Nerevar-as]

Problem with having the PC fail in a RPG, where player agency is supposed to be significant, is we can get the idea the game is cheating. Hawke wasn´t allowed to do things that were basic common sense, or Kai Leng´s Villain Sue´s power to the max in Thessia. Compare with Virmire, where Shepard did all s/he could and still wasn´t enough to get everybody out alive.

[AstraDrakkar]

hhh89 wrote...

AstraDrakkar wrote...

Hawke was definitely a loser. He/She was simply carried along for the ride by circumstances and when it really counted, Anders/Vengeance was the one who made the important decision.

fixed, since in rivarly path Anders tried to take the bomb/reagents away from the Chantry, and Vengeance blocked him.

My point is that the only thing Hawke accomplished in DA2 was kicking the Arishok's butt...or not.

Actually I want a true hero in DA3 where my decisions count. I really don't want another loser like Hawke.

Modifié par AstraDrakkar, 09 décembre 2012 - 10:55 .

[BigEvil]

I'd be cool with this, some of the best bits of DA:O and DA2 were things like the Human Noble origin, City Elf origin and Leandra's death, because they provoked a reaction and did something that a lot of other games don't, i.e. show the player their character isn't godlike and untouchable. But I'd also say that they should come up with a different way of breaking the PC, as both DA:O and DA2 have a fair bit of family death.

Also, got to add my support to the people saying no cutscene incompetence. I hated Kai Leng because of that and not in the way I should hate an antagonist. That's why the Cauthrien fight was so great, I actually felt I legitimately lost on my first playthrough, rather than feeling cheated out of a clear victory.

[vortex216]

Yes. Oh my godness, yes. Fantastic idea OP, could not love it more.

[Wynne]

Wulfram wrote...

If they do this, they should give the player a choice as to what exactly they lose and what they can salvage from the ruins.

Firstly, because making the player lose always risks taking away "agency". So maintaining some element of choice is important.

Secondly, it'll add to the sense of despair by adding guilt over what you didn't choose to save. If it's purely out of your hands, then it doesn't hurt so much.

Precisely. I could not agree more emphatically than I do. 

Leandra's death wasn't what it should've been. It broke my immersion by taking away my sense of responsibility, unlike the Virmire choice in Mass Effect. And even that could've been more effective if one character had been more charismatic (or arguably, both.) 

Savber100 wrote...

Mass Effect 3 tried this with Kai Leng defeating Shepard. In Dragon Age 2, they killed off Leandra with some random mage dude. 

And you know what? It was lame. 

The key is to not cheat the player through some cutscenes or some magical McGuffin but to have the antagonist beat not only your character but the player himself so that he can sit back and go "damn this is my fault." 

YES. The responsibility must be on the player in order for the defeat to matter. 

Otherwise, you're punched in the feels somewhat, but you're probably also thinking, "This is cheap. I should've had more options. This is the game's/Hawke's fault, not mine," and there you become disconnected. That's not what a writer wants.

Make ME feel like the stupid bastard. ME. That's what I want, Bioware. Make me hate myself and I will love you for it! Although, now that I've typed that, it looks pretty unfortunate... *lol*

DarkSpiral wrote...

Lord Issa wrote...

-Don't make it due to 'cutscene incompetence'. Simply make the AI and skills of the foe too powerful to be outmatched. This way, the player gets a taste of what they'll be like when they get tougher and also the foe seems credible.

This, right here can't stressed enough.  In the aforementioned Kai Leng scene, I was owning his cybernetic keister on hardcore, I would like to add), and then suddenly CUTSCENE and I lost.  Bah.

All that Remians would have had more impact, I think if the conclusion was effected by player choices.  For example, if you'd gotten there under the proper circumstances, instead of dying leandra could have been paralyzed.

Man that sounded cold, even to me.  But the point of the scene, as devs have posted, was to give the player a reason to feel personally victimized by magic.  Saving Mom would actually have defeated the purpose of the scene, so...paralyzed.  In some ways, that might even be worse.

I've segued from the point.  Cutscene icompetence is bad, and destroys most of the emtional tension, replacing it with annoyance at my inability to have any effect on the situation.

Wow, I love this thread! So many people are saying things I agree with, and on BSN no less. I... I think I have something in  my...  

Anyway, YES!!! Oh my. I think paralysis would've been more impactful--bittersweet, because then you have to see this vital woman suffer, but you still have a connection to her. I would've felt more for both Leandra and Hawke in that scenario. But that should've been the "good" option, the deal with a blood mage option. Then the player gets to make the choice, whether meta or in-the-moment. Either you choose which you feel is a more fitting plotline, or you choose what your character would do. Both are more meaningful than, "She dies. The end."

DarkSpiral wrote...

Redwardz wrote...

Easy... Give females the Cullen LI... And then kill him. Not sure how you'd destroy us males though. Maybe if Empress Celene was under your protection and you'd form a bond with her and then she'd somehow die tragically.

Sweet Divinity, the screams of the raging fangirls would be heard in orbit!

It must happen!

Eh, maybe you overestimate his fangirls. I mean, sure, I'd cry, but then I'd be like, "at least I got to hit that and he didn't have to die a virgin." Unless he resisted my advances, in which case, "you should've let me hit it while it was still warm, boy! Then you would've died a happy man!" 

[Rorschachinstein]

Breaking the player character followed by some redemption tasks is the way to go IMO

Modifié par Rorschachinstein, 09 décembre 2012 - 11:05 .

[AstraDrakkar]

It's ok if the player starts out the game at a total loss, but I would like the opportunity to overcome those obstacles. I prefer to become a hero in my games. Thats why I disliked Hawke so much. No matter what decision He/She made the end result was the same.

That kind of story doesn't support multiple playthroughs.

Modifié par AstraDrakkar, 09 décembre 2012 - 11:08 .

[LolaLei]

OP, that would be awesome! When similar happened in JE I was like "woah!" Totally didn't see it coming lol.

[DarkSpiral]

Wynne wrote...

DarkSpiral wrote...

It must happen!

Eh, maybe you overestimate his fangirls. I mean, sure, I'd cry, but then I'd be like, "at least I got to hit that and he didn't have to die a virgin." Unless he resisted my advances, in which case, "you should've let me hit it while it was still warm, boy! Then you would've died a happy man!" 

Do I?

Parmida wrote...

DarkSpiral wrote...

Redwardz wrote...

Easy... Give females the Cullen LI... And then kill him. Not sure how you'd destroy us males though. Maybe if Empress Celene was under your protection and you'd form a bond with her and then she'd somehow die tragically.

Sweet Divinity, the screams of the raging fangirls would be heard in orbit!

It must happen!

NOOOOOOOO! HOW DARE YOU SUGGEST THAT!?

Fourmites reactions are predictable.  I've been the screamin all-caps myself one or twice.  Because it was fun.

Modifié par DarkSpiral, 09 décembre 2012 - 11:27 .

[Pelle6666]

I like that idea, at least I hope that they will give us a personal reason to want to fight. In DA2 Hawk HAD to fight because Anders was being an A-hole and blew up the chantry, what I liked about DA:O was that the blight was such a huge threat and (as human noble) Howe, Logain's right hand, was the arch nemesis of the warden. I never felt as invested in the plot of DA2 as I did in DA:O.

[JamieCOTC]

The death of Leandra just didn't work for me for a number of reasons. First and foremost, was that I didn't know her that well as a character. But also there was no choice involved and choice fuels angst. For her death to have really meant something, there had to have been a way to save her. I'm not saying make it cut and dry like Virmire in Mass Effect, but had Hawke done something differently, s/he could have saved her. Also, having a forced death makes me feel less involved in the game and it is a game, not a movie. Mass Effect did this wonderfully w/ both Virmire and later w/ Rannoch, but totally tanked it w/ Thessia. This is supposed to be a low point for Shepard and it's terrible. It's very badly done, even the aftermath, because its forced. Contrast that w/ the aftermath of Leandra's death, the confrontation between Hawke and Aveline. It's great because there are so many directions it can go.

So, yeah, I'm all for putting a hurting on the DA3 character, but it can't be forced or it means nothing.

[iOnlySignIn]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

A Mary Sue is someone who is loved by almost everyone and their flaws are always ignored.

A mage/elf/dwarf is hardly loved and discriminated left and right. The only true Mary Sue is a Cousland.

Only thoroughly unsympathetic characters dislike the elf/mage/dwarf warden, so it if anything enhances their sueishness

Loghain is sympathetic and he dislikes you. The dalish elves are sympathetic in the forest and they dislike a non-dalish warden.  Cullen is sympathetic character and he dislikes you if you side with the mage.

(1) Loghain likes my Wardens eventually

(2) I don't find the Dalish sympathetic

(3) Cullen is one of the least synpathetic characters ever

[Saibh]

I felt sufficiently attached to my second sibling and my mother. Not to the first sibling that died in the beginning (that felt like a really pointless waste of emotion--had the whole Lothering level lasted an hour or two longer and been more detailed, it would have been a lot more moving to have your sibling die at the end), but later, in the Deep Roads.

When Leandra died, I remember immediately doing a wild Google search to see if I had somehow failed to save her and if there was any way to fix what just happened.

But the companions in DAII were altogether too detached from the main story line. I do feel like BioWare could suffice to make your party members more important and separate from the player's will. Complete control over the events around you lowers the stakes and lessens emotional impact.

[Allan Schumacher]

For her death to have really meant something, there had to have been a way to save her.

I disagree with this concept. I won't begrudge anyone that feels that Leandra's death didn't resonate with them (I think that's perfectly fair, and I'd say that BioWare is likely not the only entity that has failed to make an emotional event click), but for there to be a get out of jail free card doesn't make it more interesting IMO.

All it does is turn Leandra's death into a failure metric for the player. You could have saved her, but since you choose poorly, you couldn't. This is somewhat mitigated if done in a way that saving Leandra requires the death of someone else (or some other entity), but ultimately that still means the player is forced to make some sort of unwanted choice.

Player agency does NOT have to mean "the player can drive the narrative in whatever way the player wishes." Even the examples you use, Virmire and Rannoch, are still situations that are forced (although Rannoch does allow a get out of jail free card. Virmire does not). One of Ashley or Kaiden are forced to die. For people like me (that preferred Ashley and Kaiden over the other party members), it's a great choice. If anyone finds one of Ashley or Kaiden annoying, it's a trivial choice with no real impact.


I don't want to indicate any spoilers, but The Walking Dead is the only game that has ever successfully made me cry, and it involves a plot point that ultimately forces the player down a particular path. No amount of metagaming or hindsight knowledge can have the player avoid it. Despite this, it's probably one of the most emotionally engaging (and I suppose overwhelmingly so) endings I have ever experienced.

As such, I think there's a different element that is important rather than simply the idea that it's forced.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 10 décembre 2012 - 12:16 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

For her death to have really meant something, there had to have been a way to save her.

I disagree with this concept. I won't begrudge anyone that feels that Leandra's death didn't resonate with them (I think that's perfectly fair, and I'd say that BioWare is likely not the only entity that has failed to make an emotional event click), but for there to be a get out of jail free card doesn't make it more interesting IMO.

All it does is turn Leandra's death into a failure metric for the player. You could have saved her, but since you choose poorly, you couldn't. This is somewhat mitigated if done in a way that saving Leandra requires the death of someone else (or some other entity), but ultimately that still means the player is forced to make some sort of unwanted choice.

Player agency does NOT have to mean "the player can drive the narrative in whatever way the player wishes." Even the examples you use, Virmire and Rannoch, are still situations that are forced (although Rannoch does allow a get out of jail free card. Virmire does not). One of Ashley or Kaiden are forced to die. For people like me (that preferred Ashley and Kaiden over the other party members), it's a great choice. If anyone finds one of Ashley or Kaiden annoying, it's a trivial choice with no real impact.

I thought about this concept from time to time. What makes a choice actually mean something is exclusivity + balance of the results. When given an option and one is clearly better than the other, then it's really not much of a choice at all. That's what makes the Virmire choice (and game-changing choices like Radiata Stories' choice, or the Witcher 2's end-of-act 1 choice) more compelling - you've got roughly equally balanced results, but mutually exclusive content if you go down either of those paths.

The main problem comes from trying to make this work from a gameplay perspective. Leandra doesn't present a significant amount of content, or do anything significant aside from plot purposes. It's really hard to find something compelling to balance the equation of her death... if you have to sacrifice something significant *for* her survival, then it would be a choice worth considering. But there really isn't anything like that in the game, and you can't make the player sacrifice something that makes the game unfun or unfinishable.

Perhaps if Hawke's sibling had been on the other side of the equation, it would have balanced out. Mother or sibling? That's more of a choice, or at least it would be if the characters had more to do/say in Act 3 of the game.

[Sable Rhapsody]

simfamSP wrote...
Not that I don't mind consequences, I just think the actual choice is more vital to my character's development. Having the PC devastated by default is as bad as auto-dialogue, and we all know how bad auto-dialogue is.

I'm fine with "forced" plot elements.  Games are riddled with those.  The Baldur's Gate series had a set backstory, co-op multiplayer (for the main campaign), default import condition into BG2, and a set of pretty tough railroad tracks for the main plot.  Some events of the main plot are traumatic and unavoidable.

Here's the thing--there's a difference between a set plot event vs. a set PC reaction to it.  I don't mind that Thessia falls in ME3 no matter what.  What I DO mind is that Shepard is always devastated at Thessia, regardless of Paragon, Renegade, dialogue options taken, or the character's previous opinions on the asari.  Should there be the option to be devastated?  Absolutely.  But there should also be the option to be callous, or handle it with humor, or be zen about it or something other than "You are always sad over Thessia."  

[In Exile]

Foolsfolly wrote...
Jade Empire gave us a similar point after arriving at the Palace and it was well done enough.

Not really.

But the game industry is so much more sophisticated these days. Such scenes can be so much more powerful now. (KOTOR had a smaller scale version on the Leviathan where the world was turned upside down).

Only if it mattered to you. But you can easily dismiss that as meh, no, wasn't me. Not relevant to my identity at all.

I'd just personally enjoy this a lot. Far too often in RPGs you are a god. There are no real set-backs and everything can be overcome by gameplay. Throwing the PC through a ringer (especially if it's possible for the PC to be responsible for their suffering depending on your prior choices) would be a breath of fresh air.

ME3 tried that. It failed. Quite badly.