139 réponses à ce sujet

[Urzon]

If it is optional I wouldn't mind, but personally, I could see this being one of those "Good idea in theory, but terrible idea in practice" type of things.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

The Warden and Oghren both have children.

[thebigbad1013]

As with everything else, if they were to actually do a thing where the main character of a game has a child, I'd want it to play a considerably bigger role in the game than simply just having the child mentioned from time to time.

[Knight of Dane]

bigbad1013 wrote...

As with everything else, if they were to actually do a thing where the main character of a game has a child, I'd want it to play a considerably bigger role in the game than simply just having the child mentioned from time to time.

Thank you!

Getting a kid should be a big deal, bot just a bonus wink.

Do something right or not at all is what I think of this case.

[Emzamination]

bigbad1013 wrote...

As with everything else, if they were to actually do a thing where the main character of a game has a child, I'd want it to play a considerably bigger role in the game than simply just having the child mentioned from time to time.

I'm curious as to why tho. Is it because it's the protagonist child? and what role could a child possibly play? as much as I loathe the whole this isn't the sims/fable argument, I have to say I don't want the game to adapt child care simulation like those two games.

[Knight of Dane]

Fable doesn't have a real child care simulator, anyway; it doesn't need one, Dragon Age doesn't either.

There wasn't a sister or mother simulator in DA2, why in the world do you think the protag child would need one?
It simply needs to appear important and not just be another over exagerrated element in the epilogue, it's worth more.

[Wulfram]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fable doesn't have a real child care simulator, anyway; it doesn't need one, Dragon Age doesn't either.

There wasn't a sister or mother simulator in DA2, why in the world do you think the protag child would need one?
It simply needs to appear important and not just be another over exagerrated element in the epilogue, it's worth more.

Why?  Children are for the happily ever after, not for the main body of the story.

[saMoorai]

Sure, I always wanted to have my Cousland start a family with Leliana, and my Hawke start one with Isabela or Merrill.

[Harle Cerulean]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fable doesn't have a real child care simulator, anyway; it doesn't need one, Dragon Age doesn't either.

There wasn't a sister or mother simulator in DA2, why in the world do you think the protag child would need one?
It simply needs to appear important and not just be another over exagerrated element in the epilogue, it's worth more.

Well, in part, a child needs more attention and care than a sibling or parent!  Unless you're talking a grown child, of course.  It's simply that it's one thing to go out killing demons and thugs on a week-long trip down the coast in seach of a particular flower when your family waiting alone at home for you to come back is your mother or adult sibling.  It's another thing entirely when it's a minor child that you are, at least in theory, responsible for.

[legbamel]

Because having a kid shoud be a big, fat, hairy deal? That's why I'm not interested in having them in the game. I think, to make the fact really have impact, they'd have to devote more time and resources to it that would then not be available for the actual story.

[Emzamination]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fable doesn't have a real child care simulator, anyway; it doesn't need one, Dragon Age doesn't either.

There wasn't a sister or mother simulator in DA2, why in the world do you think the protag child would need one?
It simply needs to appear important and not just be another over exagerrated element in the epilogue, it's worth more.

You obviously haven't played fable 2 & 3. This type of thing has never been exaggerated before. The only thing that's being requested is something that's been implemented in previous games, nothing more, nothing less.

Wulfram wrote...

Why?  Children are for the happily ever after, not for the main body of the story.

Thank you, and that's all they ever need to be. As blackrising put it, the white pickett fence ending.

[Emzamination]

legbamel wrote...

Because having a kid shoud be a big, fat, hairy deal? That's why I'm not interested in having them in the game. I think, to make the fact really have impact, they'd have to devote more time and resources to it that would then not be available for the actual story.

Edit: Hmm after reading this, It can be taken multiple ways, so I'll withdraw my reply.

Modifié par Emzamination, 25 janvier 2013 - 04:12 .

[thebigbad1013]

Emzamination wrote...

bigbad1013 wrote...

As with everything else, if they were to actually do a thing where the main character of a game has a child, I'd want it to play a considerably bigger role in the game than simply just having the child mentioned from time to time.

I'm curious as to why tho. Is it because it's the protagonist child? and what role could a child possibly play? as much as I loathe the whole this isn't the sims/fable argument, I have to say I don't want the game to adapt child care simulation like those two games.

Honestly I just can't see the point of there being a child if it's just mentioned every now and then and nothing more. Why even add it into the story in the first place if they are not going to go anywhere with it?

Also, just for the record, I'd be perfectly fine with them never having one of the protagonists have a child,  I'm just saying that IF they were to do it, I'd want it to actually mean something and not just have it be a throwaway mention every now and then.

That is all.

[Emzamination]

bigbad1013 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

bigbad1013 wrote...

As with everything else, if they were to actually do a thing where the main character of a game has a child, I'd want it to play a considerably bigger role in the game than simply just having the child mentioned from time to time.

I'm curious as to why tho. Is it because it's the protagonist child? and what role could a child possibly play? as much as I loathe the whole this isn't the sims/fable argument, I have to say I don't want the game to adapt child care simulation like those two games.

Honestly I just can't see the point of there being a child if it's just mentioned every now and then and nothing more. Why even add it into the story in the first place if they are not going to go anywhere with it?

Also, just for the record, I'd be perfectly fine with them never having one of the protagonists have a child,  I'm just saying that IF they were to do it, I'd want it to actually mean something and not just have it be a throwaway mention every now and then.

That is all.

I think you misunderstand. The child doesn't need to be added to the story at all, it's just something mentioned at the end, like in the viconia vid. When I regard it being mentioned, I'm talking about a line in a expansion pack or something, not in the base game. and that mention need be nothing more than a few lines on the childs welfare or how their personality reminds <Insert LI> of their mother/father <insert protagonist>.

[legbamel]

To clarify, I was agreeing with Bigbad. I don't care if it's a choice for the ending "happily ever after" card but I don't want them to include it in the game because, to do it well, it would take away from the main thrust of the story which should be the Inquisition, not nappies and telling your companions to keep it down because you just got the baby to sleep.

[unbentbuzzkill]

but we don't know what the story is even about? and I personally don't see anything wrong with the idea just do what many others have said and just make it optional problem solved.

[Knight of Dane]

Emzamination wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fable doesn't have a real child care simulator, anyway; it doesn't need one, Dragon Age doesn't either.

There wasn't a sister or mother simulator in DA2, why in the world do you think the protag child would need one?
It simply needs to appear important and not just be another over exagerrated element in the epilogue, it's worth more.

You obviously haven't played fable 2 & 3. This type of thing has never been exaggerated before. The only thing that's being requested is something that's been implemented in previous games, nothing more, nothing less.

Obviously? I played Fable 3 and the only thing close to anything was just the same boring interaction all other npc's had with random greetings and static easy approval.

Emzamination wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Why?  Children are for the happily ever after, not for the main body of the story.

Thank you, and that's all they ever need to be. As blackrising put it, the white pickett fence ending.

We'll just have to disagree.

[legbamel]

Small things, yes. Side quests and optional content? Great! The issue for me is that I din't think a child is or should be a small thing if he or she is a part of the game and I don't want my herioc protaginist to spend time worrying about a little one instead of adventuring and saving Thedas from itself.

[Emzamination]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

You obviously haven't played fable 2 & 3. This type of thing has never been exaggerated before. The only thing that's being requested is something that's been implemented in previous games, nothing more, nothing less.

Obviously? I played Fable 3 and the only thing close to anything was just the same boring interaction all other npc's had with random greetings and static easy approval.

See here (bolded) we're simplifying things. Those static easy approvals come from picking your kid up & playing with them, taking them on walks, buying them toys, food, ect, thus you are  engaging in a child care simulation. That is why I questioned whether you had played the game or not, it's should be pretty common knowledge for anyone who had kids in-game.

[Emzamination]

krul2k wrote...

am i the only one that thinks small things can be added to games an well they dont need to have big plots or really have to mean anything, there just there for a feel good factor or just plain something else to do.

Not everything has to make sense or abide by a set of rules, its a game, side things from the main plot or ideas like this tagged on at the end can make , what i play games for, more enjoyable in a fussy way, it would be optional an the great thing about that is it is optional, just like the romance's in themselfs

Nope, I'm totally with you there.

[Knight of Dane]

Emzamination wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

You obviously haven't played fable 2 & 3. This type of thing has never been exaggerated before. The only thing that's being requested is something that's been implemented in previous games, nothing more, nothing less.

Obviously? I played Fable 3 and the only thing close to anything was just the same boring interaction all other npc's had with random greetings and static easy approval.

See here (bolded) we're simplifying things. Those static easy approvals come from picking your kid up & playing with them, taking them on walks, buying them toys, food, ect, thus you are  engaging in a child care simulation. That is why I questioned whether you had played the game or not, it's should be pretty common knowledge for anyone who had kids in-game.

It's not a child care simulation unless it applies to the child only, the exact same form of interaction is used with all characters in Fable III, the same way you interact a greeting, hand a gift, insult etc.

But I don't care about Fable anyway, it's a dead francise, this is Dragon Age.
And I already said I don't want a simulator in Dragon Age.

IF there is going to be a protag child I want it to at least have the apperance in your castle like Leandra, Dog and Sandal does in Dragon Age 2 at the least, scheduled interactions - and if the game takes place over several years, the child grows and you will be able to branch your relationship with it just like the companions.

Or ignore it, remember that it's supposed to be optional, if you don't want to interact, you don't have to.

[H. Birdman]

Not sure I understand the "no in-game kids" rule.

It could be a powerful roleplaying tool. In particular, it could force extremely difficult choices. When I play an RPG character who is basically good (which is most of the time), I almost never run into scenarios in which it's hard for me to make the "good" choice. Even if there is some significant cost--loss of a love interest, loss of some tangible perk--it's never enough to make me think, "Yeah, under these circumstances, this guy/girl would say, 'Screw it' and do the bad/selfish thing." So, even though I don't mean to, I almost always end up a paragon of virtue.

Kids change that. You can absolutely envision a paragon of virtue turning his back on countless innocent people to save his child. Or slaughtering otherwise decent folks because they threaten the child somehow. And then having to live with the guilt or rationalize it, which makes the "good guy" far more nuanced, morally grey, realistic, etc.

Just a thought.

Modifié par H. Birdman, 25 janvier 2013 - 08:42 .

[esper]

H. Birdman wrote...

Not sure I understand the "no in-game kids" rule.

It could be a powerful roleplaying tool. In particular, it could force extremely difficult choices. When I play an RPG character who is basically good (which is most of the time), I almost never run into scenarios in which it's hard for me to make the "good" choice. Even if there is some significant cost--loss of a love interest, loss of some tangible perk--it's never enough to make me think, "Yeah, under these circumstances, this guy/girl would say, 'Screw it' and do the bad/selfish thing." So, even though I don't mean to, I almost always end up a paragon of virtue.

Kids change that. You can absolutely envision a paragon of virtue turning his back on countless innocent people to save his child. Or slaughtering otherwise decent folks because they threaten the child somehow. And then having to live with the guilt or rationalize it, which makes the "good guy" far more nuanced, morally grey, realistic, etc.

Just a thought.

Because my character don't have time to care for the child, this is not Rune Factory or Harvest Moon where your spouse is nice enough to stay home (most of the time) and where the is a lovely community to take care of the child should the player character and lover be absent.

There is a good change that a both player and lover will be out fighting for weeks at a time. They also led violent lives that likely leads to an far too early death.

Simply speaking, getting a child in the state of life where we are likely to be when we play an RPG, is irressponsible and can border on neglect.

Most often it is simply not the time and better something to be waited for in the future after the end of the game, when the player characters life has a change to be somewhat settled.