148 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Felya87 wrote...

thanks, Lob

I just read it...well, maybe is my poor english, but I don't see anything really bad about the chance of playable races...and I have read far worse about the racicled places, than about the people demanding playable races (most, me incluse, people who ask for the mext game) usually are the people who don't care or like only the Human protagonist, thar are more aggressive...but It can just be me understand wrong...

I didn't came back in the BSN form some time, so I can have lost something...

No problem, Felya!

Well, I think discussions can get heated sometimes on BSN. There have been discussions and debates between people who agreed with the Chantry controlled Circles and the Order of Templars, and those who felt that mages should be given their autonomy from the Chantry and the templars specifically. We also had some recent debates about allowing the protagonist to express atheism again in Dragon Age. Sometimes, people disagree strongly, and the debates can become heated, but I've found BSN to have plenty of really nice people, even among people who I disagree with about a plethora of issues.

Personally, I would have preferred having racial options return, because I liked that element in Origins. I liked my Surana Warden, and I enjoyed being able to shape the character's personality and worldview. I wasn't keen on Hawke or his story, or my lack of options with that character, and I'm really not interested in playing as a human protagonist in a fantasy setting. I would have preferred playing as a Dalish elf. I know some feel the same way about learning about the 'human only' approach to Inquisition, while others don't.

If some people really feel that strongly about the lack of racial options in Inquisition, perhaps they should simply not purchase the game, since the developers made it clear they aren't going to change this aspect of the third Dragon Age game.

[Emzamination]

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

[WardenWade]

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

As you mentioned, it sounds like Bioware thinks this will lend itself to a tighter story.  Do you think it's possible for Andrastian-raised city elves and Circle mages, or surface dwarves like Varric who may have been brought up in a more human culture, to have a real stake in the conflict as well?  It has always seemed to me that non-Dalish elves for example (such as Iona) had much fellow-feeling, religiously and socially, with humans.

Modifié par WardenWade, 04 janvier 2013 - 06:48 .

[FieryDove]

LobselVith8 wrote...


Well, I think discussions can get heated sometimes on BSN. There have been discussions and debates between people who agreed with the Chantry controlled Circles and the Order of Templars, and those who felt that mages should be given their autonomy from the Chantry and the templars specifically. We also had some recent debates about allowing the protagonist to express atheism again in Dragon Age. Sometimes, people disagree strongly, and the debates can become heated, but I've found BSN to have plenty of really nice people, even among people who I disagree with about a plethora of issues.

I don't think the issues like that are what drives people away. Some of these debates show how well loved or just thought of to make people think twice. Look at all the Loghain threads for example. Great debates (for the most part).

I think some are just sick of DA2 sucks! DA2 is awesome! Your opinion sucks! No yours is WRONG! This is going on again...right now. I took several months off from the forums. It's just toxic, here and the ME/Tor forums. Just ugh.

[Addai]

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

So this is why Fiona is a leader in the mage rebellion? 

[Emzamination]

WardenWade wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

As you mentioned, it sounds like Bioware thinks this will lend itself to a tighter story.  Do you think it's possible for Andrastian-raised city elves and Circle mages, or surface dwarves like Varric who may have been brought up in a more human culture, to have a real stake in the conflict as well?  It has always seemed to me that non-Dalish elves for example (such as Iona) had much fellow-feeling, religiously and socially, with humans.

I personally wouldn't prefer it and It would be unusual but it's certainly possible if the right circumstances line up.

[Emzamination]

Addai67 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

So this is why Fiona is a leader in the mage rebellion? 

Oh here is this argument again   This exact response is why I used the word "completely". The protagonist has to be able to fill either side of the conflict. When you can show me an elven knight commander, grand cleric, high cleric, seeker or really any elf in a position of political power in the chantry and its sub organizations, I'll retract my statement.

[LobselVith8]

FieryDove wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Well, I think discussions can get heated sometimes on BSN. There have been discussions and debates between people who agreed with the Chantry controlled Circles and the Order of Templars, and those who felt that mages should be given their autonomy from the Chantry and the templars specifically. We also had some recent debates about allowing the protagonist to express atheism again in Dragon Age. Sometimes, people disagree strongly, and the debates can become heated, but I've found BSN to have plenty of really nice people, even among people who I disagree with about a plethora of issues. 

I don't think the issues like that are what drives people away. Some of these debates show how well loved or just thought of to make people think twice. Look at all the Loghain threads for example. Great debates (for the most part).

I agree about the debates. Even though Origin came out years ago, Loghain is still an interesting and complex character who can dominate a discussion. I recall people strongly disagreeing with Gaider when he made his comments about The Warden sparing Loghain in this forum.

FieryDove wrote...

I think some are just sick of DA2 sucks! DA2 is awesome! Your opinion sucks! No yours is WRONG! This is going on again...right now. I took several months off from the forums. It's just toxic, here and the ME/Tor forums. Just ugh. 

There's certainly a divide between people who like the current direction of Inquisition, and people who are deeply disappointed about the paraphrasing, the atheist issue, and/or the lack of racial options. Sometimes, it's difficult for people to keep their composure. It's understandable that some people have no interest in engaging in these types of discussions, especially when the discussions turn into arguments.

[WardenWade]

Emzamination wrote...

WardenWade wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

As you mentioned, it sounds like Bioware thinks this will lend itself to a tighter story.  Do you think it's possible for Andrastian-raised city elves and Circle mages, or surface dwarves like Varric who may have been brought up in a more human culture, to have a real stake in the conflict as well?  It has always seemed to me that non-Dalish elves for example (such as Iona) had much fellow-feeling, religiously and socially, with humans.

I personally wouldn't prefer it and It would be unusual but it's certainly possible if the right circumstances line up.

I agree, for my part I think there are possibilities and I'll be interested to see how non-human companions in Inquisition react to the conflict as well.  Thanks for the discussion.

Modifié par WardenWade, 04 janvier 2013 - 08:22 .

[Addai]

Emzamination wrote...
Oh here is this argument again   This exact response is why I used the word "completely". The protagonist has to be able to fill either side of the conflict. When you can show me an elven knight commander, grand cleric, high cleric, seeker or really any elf in a position of political power in the chantry and its sub organizations, I'll retract my statement.

My Andrastian elf mage would be as likely to be on the other side of the conflict as on the mage rebellion side.  Unless you've seen a statement that we're going to be playing a Chantry official- maybe they've said that, I haven't been paying much attention- your statement is silly.  Elves and dwarves live in Thedas and have to deal with a problem of this magnitude as much as humans.

It's far more likely that human-only protagonist is a matter of resources and priorities.  I can buy that it is too difficult to represent a range of backgrounds and perspectives in a cinematic story where they have to position the PC in all those dreary cutscenes.  Not that humans are the only race that matter in the mage-templar rebellion.  You'd have to be very lacking in imagination to not be able to come up with a non-human PC who has a stake.

Modifié par Addai67, 04 janvier 2013 - 08:27 .

[Emzamination]

WardenWade wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

WardenWade wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

No thanks, only humans completely fit within the context of Da3 overall theme of chantry politics/ mage vs templars.

As you mentioned, it sounds like Bioware thinks this will lend itself to a tighter story.  Do you think it's possible for Andrastian-raised city elves and Circle mages, or surface dwarves like Varric who may have been brought up in a more human culture, to have a real stake in the conflict as well?  It has always seemed to me that non-Dalish elves for example (such as Iona) had much fellow-feeling, religiously and socially, with humans.

I personally wouldn't prefer it and It would be unusual but it's certainly possible if the right circumstances line up.

I agree, for my part I think there are possibilities and I'll be interested to see how non-human companions in Inquisition react to the conflict as well.  Thanks for the discussion.

No problem 

[LobselVith8]

krul2k wrote...

you know sometimes i wonder what the original dragon age game wouldve been like if the story was just centered around the couslands an all energy was put into that instead of all the diversified origins wee got, then i just go play DA2

Perhaps the people who became fans because of the Elven, Dwarven, and Magi origins wouldn't have become fans in the first place?

I think the racial options and backstories are part of the reason why some fans liked Origins. It's the reason why some fans dislike the lack of racial options in Inquisition. Considering that humans share the world of Thedas with elves and dwarves, I don't see any reason why the protagonist couldn't be an elf or a dwarf, especially when the protagonist can be a mage.

The different origin stories were fun, especially the Dwarven Noble, and I enjoyed the Surana Warden overall as my canon Warden. I could chose his backstory as an elf from the Denerim Alienage, I could decide that he liked the viewpoint of the Libertarian Fraternity, I could shape what type of friendship I had with Jowan, I got to tell the Knight-Commander that I stood by my decision to help Jowan, and I was able to chose that my protagonist didn't worship the Maker. The freedoms I had in Origins to really define my Warden are the reasons why I became a fan; I don't think I would be as invested as I am in Dragon Age if it was simply the story of the Cousland protagonist, because it didn't interest me like the other backstories did.

krul2k wrote...

That aside i dont think there going to ever put the time into a game like they did with origins development so i think sticking to one race ie the humans is probably the best course of action, origins was still no bad but if im truly honest the majority of my play throughs in that game were as a human so i honestly couldnt care about playing as another race

You're entitled to your opinion. I feel differently. We had the same explanation from the developers for the "only human" approach in Dragon Age II, when the developers said it was so that they could focus primarily on the character, and I don't think that turned out for the best. Aside from the Amell mansion, Hawke could have been elven or dwarven in the same storyline with minor differences in dialogue.

[Emzamination]

Addai67 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...
Oh here is this argument again   This exact response is why I used the word "completely". The protagonist has to be able to fill either side of the conflict. When you can show me an elven knight commander, grand cleric, high cleric, seeker or really any elf in a position of political power in the chantry and its sub organizations, I'll retract my statement.

My Andrastian elf mage would be as likely to be on the other side of the conflict as on the mage rebellion side.  Unless you've seen a statement that we're going to be playing a Chantry official- maybe they've said that, I haven't been paying much attention- your statement is silly.  Elves and dwarves live in Thedas and have to deal with a problem of this magnitude as much as humans.

It's far more likely that human-only protagonist is a matter of resources and priorities.  I can buy that it is too difficult to represent a range of backgrounds and perspectives in a cinematic story where they have to position the PC in all those dreary cutscenes.  Not that humans are the only race that matter in the mage-templar rebellion.  You'd have to be very lacking in imagination to not be able to come up with a non-human PC who has a stake.

The overall conflict is mage <circle> vs Templar <Chantry>.   The protagonist must be able to join up with either side, not just the circle, and not everyone plays a mage. Since the chantry is basically human dominated with the exception of some elven sisters, it would be unnatural and out of context to have a elven hero championing the chantry since elves don't typically rise to positions of power in the chantry. I'm not saying it's impossible to do it but it would seem like pandering, and we must avoid that.

[LobselVith8]

Addai67 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...
Oh here is this argument again   This exact response is why I used the word "completely". The protagonist has to be able to fill either side of the conflict. When you can show me an elven knight commander, grand cleric, high cleric, seeker or really any elf in a position of political power in the chantry and its sub organizations, I'll retract my statement. 

My Andrastian elf mage would be as likely to be on the other side of the conflict as on the mage rebellion side.  Unless you've seen a statement that we're going to be playing a Chantry official- maybe they've said that, I haven't been paying much attention- your statement is silly.  Elves and dwarves live in Thedas and have to deal with a problem of this magnitude as much as humans.

According to Gaider, the protagonist isn't going to be forced to work for the Chantry:

David Gaider wrote...

Okay, so. Without going into specifics on the plot of DA3, because I can't do that, I will say the following:

You aren't going to be forced to serve the Chantry or even think it's a good thing. You aren't forced to express belief in the Maker. I said previously we would try to allow options to actively express doubt, if that's your thing, so long as it works in context. You of course will also have the option to do the opposite.

Ultimately, the ability to determine the personality and/or feelings on your own character is one of the fundamental strengths of an RPG, and one that DA is sticking with. Yes, it must also work within the context of the setting and the plot-- you can't do anything-- but that's always been the case with any game, and in the case of DA3 it is not required that you be forced into a certain set of beliefs in order to make it work. 

Based on Gaider's comment, the protagonist isn't going to be working for the Chantry.

Addai67 wrote...

It's far more likely that human-only protagonist is a matter of resources and priorities.  I can buy that it is too difficult to represent a range of backgrounds and perspectives in a cinematic story where they have to position the PC in all those dreary cutscenes.  Not that humans are the only race that matter in the mage-templar rebellion.  You'd have to be very lacking in imagination to not be able to come up with a non-human PC who has a stake.

The developers are going to allow the player to be a mage as one of the options for the protagonist, so they already used their imagination to accomodate that option into the narrative.

[Noviere]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Aside from the Amell mansion, Hawke could have been elven or dwarven in the same storyline with minor differences in dialogue.

Well, Hawke's father and sister are both mages, so the dwarf thing wouldn't have worked. They could have made changes to the story, of course... But it wasn't just the Amell mansion.

Modifié par Noviere, 04 janvier 2013 - 09:06 .

[LobselVith8]

Noviere wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Aside from the Amell mansion, Hawke could have been elven or dwarven in the same storyline with minor differences in dialogue.

Well, Hawke's father and sister are both mages, so the dwarf thing wouldn't have worked. They could have made changes to the story, of course... But it wasn't just the Amell mansion.

Minor differences, as I said. The templars don't care that Leandra fled Kirkwall with an apostate; no one bothers Hawke and his (or her) sibling for being the progeny of an apostate, so the narrative never properly addresses the fact that Hawke is the child of a known apostate.

Since Hawke being an apostate is only occassionally mentioned, I see it as a minor difference if it wasn't mentioned at all. The story would basically be the same: An elven or dwarven family could have fled from Lothering to Kirkwall, earned their way into the city through the mercenaries or the smugglers through a family member already in the city-state, had the protagonist meet Varric a year later, and eventually go with a small crew into the Deep Roads to earn a fortune.

Hawke's nobility really doesn't play a role, except for earning the Amell mansion story that's a minor part of the narrative. The Arishok requests Hawke's presence, which has nothing to do with Hawke's nobility. Hawke will become Champion, even has an apostate, so I don't see why the same wouldn't be true if he was an elf or a dwarf. Hawke being human really doesn't impact the story; even having apostate Hawke with Merrill (who is not only an elf, but follows an entirely different religion) only merited occassional mention, and the human/elf controversy was limited to a codex entry.

[Addai]

Emzamination wrote...
The overall conflict is mage <circle> vs Templar <Chantry>.   The protagonist must be able to join up with either side, not just the circle, and not everyone plays a mage. Since the chantry is basically human dominated with the exception of some elven sisters, it would be unnatural and out of context to have a elven hero championing the chantry since elves don't typically rise to positions of power in the chantry. I'm not saying it's impossible to do it but it would seem like pandering, and we must avoid that.

More unnatural than it was to have a human or elven PC decide on the dwarven king?  You don't have to be rah rah Chantry to believe that mages need to be controlled by someone and it might as well be the Chantry.

[HiroVoid]

Also, we still have no idea what the actual story is. From what I can gather, it seems most likely to revolve around an ever growing demon threat started by what seems to be a person that the Inquisition needs to find as well as finding a way to stop demons from growing in numbers.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Minor differences, as I said. The templars don't care that Leandra fled Kirkwall with an apostate; no one bothers Hawke and his (or her) sibling for being the progeny of an apostate, so the narrative never properly addresses the fact that Hawke is the child of a known apostate.

That Bioware completely (in your view) failed in executing the plot doesn't mean that being human wasn't still crucial to the plot they wanted to tell.

Since Hawke being an apostate is only occassionally mentioned, I see it as a minor difference if it wasn't mentioned at all.

First of all, given that you value the very shallow race choice that DA:O gave you, I can't understand how you could use this argument to dismiss anything. But it doesn't matter. Because Bioware wanted a clear connection with your sibling on the opposite side of the conflict:

Hawke is the mage, then Carver is on the other side. Hawke is a mundane, then Bethany is the mage.

That structure simply does not work with the dwarves. The very nature of the sibling Act I relationship (and beyond) is magic.

The story would basically be the same: An elven or dwarven family could have fled from Lothering to Kirkwall, earned their way into the city through the mercenaries or the smugglers through a family member already in the city-state, had the protagonist meet Varric a year later, and eventually go with a small crew into the Deep Roads to earn a fortune. 

No, it isn't. It isn't for the very clear family centric reason I gave above. Not to mention that Malcom can't exist, and the entire plotline of Legacy is impossible.

The Arishok requests Hawke's presence, which has nothing to do with Hawke's nobility. Hawke will become Champion, even has an apostate, so I don't see why the same wouldn't be true if he was an elf or a dwarf. Hawke being human really doesn't impact the story; even having apostate Hawke with Merrill (who is not only an elf, but follows an entirely different religion) only merited occassional mention, and the human/elf controversy was limited to a codex entry.

Kirkwall is an incredibly racist city. The lives of the elves are so horrid,and the most they can aspire to are merchants whose children are killed by a serial killer while the guards do absolutely nothing. An elven protagonist only works if the same thing as an apostate happens: Bioware completely ignores that you are an elf.

So I can't understand this. You complain all the time about how poorly the apostate aspects were done, and your solution is that DA2 fails to portray race entirely as well?

If you want to play DA2 as an elf with no impact whatsoever of being an elf, well, there's a mod for that.

[Drasanil]

In Exile wrote...

Kirkwall is an incredibly racist city. The lives of the elves are so horrid,and the most they can aspire to are merchants whose children are killed by a serial killer while the guards do absolutely nothing.

 

Actually what let the serial killer get away with it for so long was that his father was a powerful magistrate and managed to cover most of it. Not like powerful humans haven't or wouldn't do the same to other humans.  That the killer targetted elves made it easier, but it wasn't the be all and end all of it.

Then you have counter examples like Orsino actually being a somewhat respected public figure, or Fenris somehow managing to squat in a mansion for 7 years with out any one ever noticing. Aveline can divert all the guard patrols she wants, but if Kirkwall was that racist you'd think once those rich and powerful neighbours noticed something would be done about it, whether she wanted to or not.  

Then there's also the fact that the Alienage isn't actually the worst part of town, rather that distinction goes to dark town and where both humans and elves are freely tossed to rot. 

An elven protagonist only works if the same thing as an apostate happens: Bioware completely ignores that you are an elf. 

I'd say it's a lot easier to justify a mundane elf becoming the champion after saving the city from the Qunari, and no harder to justify an Apostate elf  than it is to justify Hawke who's the son of a known apostate who runs around blood magicking all over the place. 

Humans are perfectly willing to go with hypocracy and double-standards when it suits their purposes. Just because that specific elf is ok and the champion, doesn't mean elves aren't second class trash. Before DAO Garahel was the last warden to stop a blight, despite being widely acknowledged as a hero it still didn't buy the elves much from the looks of things. 

Modifié par Drasanil, 04 janvier 2013 - 11:41 .

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

That Bioware completely (in your view) failed in executing the plot doesn't mean that being human wasn't still crucial to the plot they wanted to tell.

It didn't seem pertinent to me since the mage and templar dichotomy was pretty much ignored in favor of hack and slash against one-dimensional mages and templars who contributed nothing to the schism between mages and templars; in my eyes, it's unimportant. Even the ultimatum Meredith makes at the end doesn't focus on the debate between mages and templars. You're welcome to disagree, of course.

If being a noble is unimportant except for the Amell mansion, then I don't see why the protagonist couldn't be an elf or a dwarf.

In Exile wrote...

First of all, given that you value the very shallow race choice DA:O gave you, I cant understand how you could use this argument to dismiss anything.

Since my Warden's race as an elf was addressed, as well as being a mage, I disagree. Since Carver and Hawke only have minimal discussions in the first Act about his status as a mage, it doesn't seem important to me. The first Act is about gaining a fortune in the Deep Roads, and Carver (as well as Bethany) are gone for almost all of the second Act, which is about dealing with the Qunari.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree.

In Exile wrote...

No, it isn't.

As I said previously, minor differences. The minimal plot of Carver/Bethany and Hawke is a minor plot that doesn't change the story arcs. Legacy is a DLC that can't even be consistent with either Malcolm's backstory or Anders' Andrastian characterization in Awakening and the main game.

In Exile wrote...

Kirkwall is an incredibly racist place.

And yet, the anti-mage sentiment in Thedas doesn't prevent Hawke from being Champion of Kirkwall as a mage.

In Exile wrote...

So I can't understand this.

I'm saying the story of Dragon Age II didn't necessitate a "human only" protagonist as it was. Could it have been done better for an apostate? Yes. Could the racial options in Origins have been more reactive for different Wardens? Yes. Do I think it's disappointing that Inquisition isn't going to provide racial options for the protagonist? Yes.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

I think Dragon Age 2 could work so well with multiple race options to the point that eliminating the player character entirely could still get the plot in motion. Anders destroying the chantry, tension between the parties, war, etc. can all follow in a natural manner without any player input if you wanted to tell the story without the player.

Hawke's family are all part of very minor subplots. You don't even get to see Carver or Bethany again until the ending. This whole aspect of Hawke having to be a human because Bethany is a mage, is ridiculously unessential to the game's overall plot. Both characters could be killed off at the start of the game and the plot could go on just as well.