366 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

LoonySpectre wrote...

Killing off characters just for the sake of it doesn't make narration "darker". It just makes it more ridiculous.

And usually we've got characters surviving ridiculous situations, would killing them off when anyone else would've died be considered ridiculous?

[Ryzaki]

Heh I'd like it if killed off all the known characters.(Alistair, Hawke, the Warden, Morrigan, Flemeth, so on and so forth). Leave some faceless mooks to pick up the pieces.

Just for the lulz.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juin 2013 - 10:39 .

[Killer3000ad]

Those people advocating darker narratives where you can't save them, why are you so indignant on forcing this on others and are so hostile to even the suggestion of making it a choice? I had enough of that in DA2 and ME3 and I do not want that in DAI.

All I am saying make it a choice and to each his own, you want your depressed tale where your main character is helpless, okay, I want my tale when I save the day against the odds, pick it then!

Modifié par Killer3000ad, 10 juin 2013 - 10:43 .

[Iakus]

Dave of Canada wrote...

What you're asking for isn't adding choice, what you're advocating for is making your story pathetically happy because you're unable to deal with a darker narrative. If you cared about roleplaying and choice, you'd roleplay during those dark segments and make choices.

And people can and do roleplay those out.  I imagine some people played through DAO And DA2getting absolutely everyone they can killed, playing out tragic Wardens and Hawkes

But people don't always want to do that.  And people certainly don't wnat to be forced into that.  What's the pont of making chocies if it's all going to turn to excrement in the end anyway?  

Darkness Induced Audience Apathy

DA2 suffered from it.  ME3 really suffered from it.  I'm not sure Bioware can take another dose.

Forcing darkness isn't' any more deep or "rpg" than forcing happy outcomes.  Allowing for both.  That's choice.

[KiwiQuiche]

Yeah they tried that with Carver and Leandra.

Too bad I didn't give a crap about that lot.

[xoxin]

JobacNoor wrote...

Killing off characters just for it's own sake and the shock value? Meh.

Killing off characters we've come to care about if the story calls for it in a shocking way that makes perfect sense once the initial shock wears off? Now we're talking.

this.

As long as it isn't a massacre (like the red wedding, from what I've heard).

I liked the way ME3 had it. Some character's deaths are inevitable, but you had the potential to kill so many more/have so many more die.

Considering Dragon Age has less squadmates/party members than Mass Effect this would be a good number(the amount ME3 had)

[Kabraxal]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

I've done it a few times in DAO... imagine that, actually ROLE PLAYING and choosing different things.  O but wait... we can't have that anymore so lets shut down choice and arbitrarily force the players to watch as their favourite NPC's dia all around just because...

What you're asking for isn't adding choice, what you're advocating for is making your story pathetically happy because you're unable to deal with a darker narrative. If you cared about roleplaying and choice, you'd roleplay during those dark segments and make choices.

Said choices doesn't have to be between "happy" and "unhappy", it could be "sacrifice your best friend" and "sacrifice your family" or "win the battle but lose your friends" and "lose the battle but have your friends by your side".

Seriously... this "let's force darkness" crap going on really needs to stop. 

Watch the disney channel.

Except I said when a game offers teh choice to avoid or go full steam ahead into darkness... *shock awe gasp* I've tried it!  Imagine that, actually talking about choice having conequence and seeing them because it's interesting to see how choices change outcome.

But of course, you have nothing else to offer other than insulting those that don't bow down to your "Make it all dark! ALL OF IT!" BS.  

[Shasow]

Lets not have "dark" as in the "dark" from DA2. That was a terrible kind of dark.

I'm fine with characters dieing as long as it's preventable from the player's decisions.

[Fallstar]

Lenimph wrote...

What if the dead person Varric is mourning over in the trailer is Hawke?

Actually I thought it might be Merril.

[devSin]

Ryzaki wrote...

Heh I'd like it if killed off all the known characters.(Alistair, Hawke, the Warden, Morrigan, Flemeth, so on and so forth). Leave some faceless mooks to pick up the pieces.

I'd be put out if they killed Hawke offscreen, to be honest (like others have mentioned, it was the first thing I thought when I saw that scene with Varric in the trailer); his story never even got a proper conclusion.

My Warden is dead, so nothing really to happen there. Alistair and Morrigan could die (I trust David to handle it right).

I really, really want Flemeth to live. I doubt she can be sustained indefinitely, but I'm fascinated by her character. And Kate Mulgrew managed to bring her to life in a way that is truly rare. Losing her will be a real tragedy.

Modifié par devSin, 10 juin 2013 - 10:49 .

[Melra]

I guess this is what happens when people watch too much Game of Thrones..

[Ryzaki]

devSin wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Heh I'd like it if killed off all the known characters.(Alistair, Hawke, the Warden, Morrigan, Flemeth, so on and so forth). Leave some faceless mooks to pick up the pieces.

I'd be put out if they killed Hawke offscreen, to be honest (like others have mentioned, it was the first thing I thought when I saw that scene with Varric in the trailer); his story never even got a proper conclusion.

My Warden is dead, so nothing really to happen there. Alistair and Morrigan could die (I trust David to handle it right).

I really, really want Flemeth to live. I doubt she can be sustained indefinitely, but I'm fascinated by her character. And Kate Mulgrew managed to bring her to life in a way that is truly rare. Losing her will be a real tragedy.

Which to me would be no big loss. Hawke's story just felt like padding for the Mage/Templar war anyway.

Mine wasn't sadly

True but a wiping the slate completely clean for a sequel to DAI to me anyway could be interesting. Would have to be done right though no rocks fall everyone dies crap.

[Dave of Canada]

iakus wrote...

And people can and do roleplay those out.  I imagine some people played through DAO And DA2getting absolutely everyone they can killed, playing out tragic Wardens and Hawkes *snip*

But that's not roleplaying the character, that's roleplaying the world to fit a criteria which you've decided to fit. When I'm playing Dragon Age: Origins, I'm always ignoring the third choices which let me get away scot free but they're so goddamn stupid because they always rub it in that you're making the "wrong choice".

When the choice is between happy and unhappy, that's not a choice. You're either going for dark or going for light, you're just auto-defaulting to the option which you've pre-determined without thinking of the actual consequences of your decisions and how they could impact the world around you.

Look at how many people cried fowl when they discovered Bhelen was the "good" choice when they thought Harrowmont was the "good" one, they didn't even bother thinking of the consequences of their decisions and just want a linear story where they "win" with the illusion of choice.

It's like my one friend who praised Mass Effect's "choices" when his seven playthroughs had the same exact choices in all of them, what's the point? The player has to lose something to actually think about what they'd want to do. You shouldn't get a pass because you're the protagonist in a game.

Look at the general reactions to the Red Wedding from ASOIAF and Game of Thrones, everyone cries fowl because the idiot hero which they were rooting for got his come-uppance for being an idiot. They didn't want to think about it, it's the writ'ers goddamn fault for killing him!!!1

Perhaps trusting too much and having bite you in the ass, being too merciful and allowing enemies to escape and such has your soldiers overthrow you because they want someone competent in your position. Same could occur by being too ruthless and earning their ire.

That's the kind of "dark" I want, something which cannot be achieved when consequences don't exist.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 10 juin 2013 - 10:53 .

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I tend to enjoy darkish narratives but I really don't think we need Red Wedding esque levels of it in Dragon Age Inquisition. Sometimes it gets so dark and depressing it just starts to feel contrived or just there to mess with player's heads. Dragon Age 2 was pretty dark with the potential death of the protagonists entire family and some of his friends.

To be honest, I still liked both Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 but if it gets worse I might start to loose interest.

For example, Dragon Age 2 was pretty poignant for my first Hawke because he basically failed in his ultimate task to protect Kirkwall (more so because he failed explicitly because his friend betrayed him) but in the end there was still a personal victory to be won, which he did. But if Bethany hadn't been alive to rescue form the Circle he maybe might not have even had that.

The dead person in the trailer Varic seemed to be mourning was one of many. Many he was standing among the bodies of the entire Dragon Age 2 cast?

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 10 juin 2013 - 10:53 .

[King Cousland]

LoonySpectre wrote...

Killing off characters just for the sake of it doesn't make narration "darker". It just makes it more ridiculous.

You're missing the point spectacularly. 

It wouldn't be for the sake of it. There would be a logical narrative reason for a death, and the death itself could/would serve as a plot device. The entire point is that a war is a situation in which death happens on a large scale, and this provides an opportunity for Inquisition to be an emotional rollercoaster which deals with the death of those close to you. 

What I find more ridiculous is the idea that every single character we've come to know should be kept alive - why? For the sake of it?

[WhiteKnyght]

Jamesnew2 wrote...

 The game is about war, inevitably people are meant to die, however with the DA series seems to lack that grit and seems to come out somewhat cartoony. Perhaps take a leaf out of Game of Thrones "Red Wedding" and cause some shock the audience, it certainly got peoples attention. For example my LI for DA2 is Merril, who simply describing her, comes across as innocent, if someone like her was to die, it'd have a real impact on the game.

However just my opinions, interested to see how people respond to the idea...God i sound morbid XD

You mean Dragon Age isn't dark enough?

Leandra had a grisly end even by horror film standards.

[David7204]

Having certain characters always die, particularly love interests, in a game with heroic themes where choices supposedly matter is a betrayal of the core themes.It's essentailly the reason why the Mass Effect 3 ending is despised. Players expected Shepard's heroism to matter (and were absolutely justified in doing so.) It didn't.

Having characters die in meaningful ways that validate the themes of the story can be very compelling and emotional, such as with Mordin's death. Killing characters for shock value or holding them hostage to force 'moral ambiguity' is cheap, crappy storytelling.

Modifié par David7204, 10 juin 2013 - 11:01 .

[King Cousland]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

Jamesnew2 wrote...

 The game is about war, inevitably people are meant to die, however with the DA series seems to lack that grit and seems to come out somewhat cartoony. Perhaps take a leaf out of Game of Thrones "Red Wedding" and cause some shock the audience, it certainly got peoples attention. For example my LI for DA2 is Merril, who simply describing her, comes across as innocent, if someone like her was to die, it'd have a real impact on the game.

However just my opinions, interested to see how people respond to the idea...God i sound morbid XD

You mean Dragon Age isn't dark enough?

Leandra had a grisly end even by horror film standards.

It was a cliched and rather corny end to a character we had little opportunity to become attatched to, in no way helped by the art style. 

When I saw Un-Leandra stumble to her feet, I wanted laugh more than I did cry. The perfect example of where Dragon Age II tried to be dark and fell flat on its face. 

[Nefla]

Personally I'm sick of the ever increasing gloom and doom in games, movies, tv shows, etc...shows like Game of Thrones and Spartacus are so tragic and often frustrating, it's like "who will die/be crippled/maimed/raped next?" Games where you don't win in the end, whatever enemy or evil is still out there, your character and/or loved ones die one by one and you can't stop it, I'm getting tired of it.

Games are fantasy, sometimes I want to angst and cry, but usually I want to experience ups and downs and come out feeling triumphant, beating my fist in the air and going "hell yeah!" I don't want to feel depressed or horrified or frustrated. After all the media in the current trend of dark, I watched Star Trek: Into Darkness and to me it was a refreshing change. It had sad and emotional moments but in the end most of the characters were alive, the good guys won, and didn't sacrifice their morals or who they were as people. I left feeling giddy and excited.

Shows and movies get you attached to characters, but not in the same way games do. With a game, the PC is basically you, and you shape people's lives and it's almost as if your friends die, or you die, or you suffer, rather than a character. I love a tragic ending if it's one of many, and several of my wardens did the US. If tragedy is the only possible outcome though, I wont play more than once or buy DLC no matter how good the game was(ex:Walking Dead) It's too depressing knowing that's all there is.

I would enjoy choices that have you choosing between winning a battle and saving a friend, or choosing who to save like in ME1 because I can play again and experience the other side.

[David7204]

From what I've heard about Game of Thones, it's filled with rather pointless and gratuitous random murder and rape and unlikeable characters not worth caring about.

Is this what 'maturity' is?

[Lord Gremlin]

Make it a possibility. Ability to get ultra dark evil ending where everyone important dies and MC sides with demons and become something monstrous.

[Blackrising]

No thanks, ME3 pretty much covered my longing for dark and gritty for the next few years. Ugh. *shudder*

[Ryzaki]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Perhaps trusting too much and having bite you in the ass, being too merciful and allowing enemies to escape and such has your soldiers overthrow you because they want someone competent in your position. Same could occur by being too ruthless and earning their ire.

That's the kind of "dark" I want, something which cannot be achieved when consequences don't exist.

One problem with this.

Usually the neutral or a compromising solution is one our players can not pick.

For instance in Redcliffe? My Warden would've gone to the circle tower...but would've left half her group at Redcliffe to kill Conner if he got out of hand. (or would've sent Alistair and Leliana to go to the tower and get aid while she stayed in Redcliffe in case Conner got out of hand).

I'm not allowed to do this. Instead it's EVERYONE leaves or I stay and kill the kid.

So yeah I can see why game developers don't put consequences in the good choices because it quickly becomes a "So why can't I just mix the good and neutral choice?" and there's no *true* reason you'd be able to do that other than the devs not putting in the option.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juin 2013 - 11:06 .

[RandomSyhn]

A few unexpected deaths here and there might raise the stakes a bit. Pull a Whedon, create a character everyone loves and kill em. Which is why I think LI's from the previous games are fair game. Also because I wanted to kill some of them myself.

[Dave of Canada]

Ryzaki wrote...

One problem with this.

Usually the neutral or a compromising solution is one our players can not pick.

For instance in Redcliffe? My Warden would've gone to the circle tower...but would've left half her group at Redcliffe to kill Conner if he got out of hand. (or would've sent Alistair and Leliana to go to the tower and get aid while she stayed in Redcliffe in case Conner got out of hand).

I'm not allowed to do this. Instead it's EVERYONE leaves or I stay and kill the kid.

So yeah I can see why game developers don't put consequences in the good choices because it quickly becomes a "So why can't I just mix the good and neutral choice?" and there's no *true* reason you'd be able to do that other than the devs not putting in the option.

For those situations, I'd recommend something along the lines of the Geth / Quarian solution. Certain decisions give +3 rebellion, etc. Reach a certain threshold and it's inevitable. Thus the true way of being legitimate is not being too heavy handed and not being too trusting, you have to be moderate and selective.

Then when the rebellion occurs, you've got tons of ways to try and repair your reputation like being even more heavy-handed and cementing your reputation or trying to make amends. Etc.

You "play" your character and deal with things as they occur, a "happy" route isn't one decision.