310 réponses à ce sujet

[Foolsfolly]

From Chris Priestly's post:

The Mass Effect trilogy was always designed to be the story of Commander Shepard. Dragon Age has always been the story of the world of Dragon Age rather than one character within that world. In Origins you played the warden, in II you played Hawke, now in Inquisition you have to deal with the Inquisition. DAI (which I use instead of typing out Inquisition) is a new chapter in the world, so we changed the name to reflect this.

You know. I still haven't seen a single BioWare employee refer to the PC in DA3 as the Inquisitor.

...starting to wonder if we're fighting the Inquisition.

[Plaintiff]

Foolsfolly wrote...

From Chris Priestly's post:

The Mass Effect trilogy was always designed to be the story of Commander Shepard. Dragon Age has always been the story of the world of Dragon Age rather than one character within that world. In Origins you played the warden, in II you played Hawke, now in Inquisition you have to deal with the Inquisition. DAI (which I use instead of typing out Inquisition) is a new chapter in the world, so we changed the name to reflect this.

You know. I still haven't seen a single BioWare employee refer to the PC in DA3 as the Inquisitor.

...starting to wonder if we're fighting the Inquisition.

Jessica Merizan referred to the PC as the "Inquisitor" in an interview.

But maybe she picked up the habit from the forums and it's not actually accurate at all.

[Morty Smith]

Plaintiff wrote...

Too bad?

They made it perfectly clear from the onset that the series was never going to be about one person or group.

If someone states he made something perfectly clear and there is still confusion about it, what does that say about his statement?

[Angrywolves]

They're distainful of DAO and they're trying to distance themselves from the debacle that was DA2, even though they blame EA for that.
So no more numbers.

[Jerrybnsn]

Angrywolves wrote...

They're distainful of DAO and they're trying to distance themselves from the debacle that was DA2, even though they blame EA for that.
So no more numbers.

DA2 killed the numbering system for all rpgs.  Hence, Final Fantasy XV will now be know as "Final Fantasy: Yet another reboot of the Same Story and Characters".

[Angrywolves]

shrugs. Has nothing to do with FF .

[Meatbaggins]

Foolsfolly wrote...
You know. I still haven't seen a single BioWare employee refer to the PC in DA3 as the Inquisitor.

It says on the official Dragon Age website that you "lead the Inquisition", so that's close enough.

Modifié par Meatbaggins, 23 juin 2013 - 02:50 .

[Plaintiff]

Kroitz wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Too bad?

They made it perfectly clear from the onset that the series was never going to be about one person or group.

If someone states he made something perfectly clear and there is still confusion about it, what does that say about his statement?

That some of the people who heard it are really, really, really stupid. Or that they just refuse to believe it because they've deluded themselves.

[In Exile]

bEVEsthda wrote...
Further, I would argue that DA2 does not continue in the same universe as DA:O. Thedas was remade, to be cheaper, to better suit comics and animated movies, and to conform to the taste of current teenage fantasy fashion.

How do you deal with the unmitigated flop that was DA:A, by this standard? If we look at DA:O => DA:A => DA2 sales, you can easily argue that DA:O just didn't retain most of the audience that initially bough it. In contrast, you can see that ME1-ME2-ME3 basically put up the same numbers, despite Bioware's changes. 

[Sutekh]

Kroitz wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Too bad?

They made it perfectly clear from the onset that the series was never going to be about one person or group.

If someone states he made something perfectly clear and there is still confusion about it, what does that say about his statement?

If most people understand something and only a few don't, what does it say about the few?

Chris Priestly wrote...

Dragon Age has always been the story of the world of Dragon Age rather than one character within that world. 

(this very thread)

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

our intention is that for each major release of Dragon Age, you will take up the mantle of a new character. 

David Gaider wrote...

Neither the Warden nor Hawke will be the PC for DA3. If either of those characters appear, it will be as NPC's only. We've clearly said this several times, so I'm uncertain why it's still a question.

(social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/8035969#8040375)


DA2 forum, 1st page, posts were written 1 year ago, but I remember similar statements made way earlier than that.

So, really? You find those confusing?

Modifié par Sutekh, 23 juin 2013 - 02:57 .

[Morty Smith]

I did not write that I have mistaken those quotes. But I question how well they are advertised, if there is still confusion.

[Jerrybnsn]

You say that Dragon Age isn't about one person, no one disagrees, you say that it is about "the World of Dragon Age". Well, what makes "the World of Dragon Age"? Is it like TES world that has this huge sand box to go have fun it for each game? Or, is it about an over arching-story that gives the name Dragon Age to it? I say it is the later. And using one protagonist is just a "vehicle" because every story needs a hero in which to explore and interact with the story or in this case "the World of the Dragon Age".  For it is called Dragon "Age" and not Dragon "Land".

Seriously, let's hear what makes the "Dragon Age World" to you.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 23 juin 2013 - 04:58 .

[Silfren]

[quote]bEVEsthda wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

On the contrary, DA2 WAS a sequel to DA:O.  It astounds me that people don't think it was.  <SNIP>  It is the second story put out by Bioware for its Dragon Age franchise.  That alone makes it a sequel.  But to drive the point home further, here:

Per Wikipedia: A sequel (also called a follow-on or follow-up) is a narrative, documental, or other work of literature, film, theatre, or music that continues the story of, or expands upon, some earlier work. In the common context of a narrative work of fiction, a sequel portrays events set in the same fictional universe as an earlier work, usually chronologically following the events of that work.

Given that DA2 actually begins in the earliest stages of the previous story and follows the life of a Blight refugee--all the while referencing events from the previous story--it qualifies well enough.
[/quote]

So, John Boorman's Excalibur is a sequel to Disney's The Sword in the Stone ?[/quote]

No, I'm not wrong.  You can't seriously be using that as your attempt to discredit my point?  Obviously Excalibur is not a sequel to Sword in the Stone.  Those two works occupy two different fictional universes, and I KNOW you're aware of this.  DA2 is set within the same universe as Origins and takes place immediately following the story of Origins, hence it is a sequel.

You personally thinking that the quality of DA2 is radically different from Origins has no bearing on this whatsoever.  Your dislike of DA2 does not stand as evidence that it is not set within the same universe or setting.
[/quote]

Modifié par Silfren, 23 juin 2013 - 05:34 .

[Silfren]

Kroitz wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Too bad?

They made it perfectly clear from the onset that the series was never going to be about one person or group.

If someone states he made something perfectly clear and there is still confusion about it, what does that say about his statement?

Given that these boards indicate that the vast majority of people understood it quite well and that what's happening is less that a handful of people misunderstood than that they have stuffed their ears and covered their eyes and refused to accept the reality, well...

Modifié par Silfren, 23 juin 2013 - 05:05 .

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

You say that Dragon Age isn't about one person, no one disagrees, you say that it is about "the World of Dragon Age". Well, what makes "the World of Dragon Age"? Is it like TES world that has this huge sand box to go have fun it for each game? Or, is it about an over arching-story that gives the name Dragon Age to it? I say it is the later. And using one protagonist is just a "vehicle" because every story needs a hero in which to explore and interact with the story or in this case "the World of the Dragon Age".  For it is called Dragon "Age" and not Dragon "Land".

Seriously, let's hear what makes the "Dragon Age World" to you.

What's so hard about this?  We are exploring the world of Thedas during the hundred-year time period known as the Dragon Age.

[Jerrybnsn]

Silfren wrote...

What's so hard about this?  We are exploring the world of Thedas during the hundred-year time period known as the Dragon Age.

But what makes it the age of the dragon?  No over-arching story? Nothing to you?

[Jerrybnsn]

Filament wrote...

A blight, a mage war, a tear in the veil, return of the dragons.

The logic you use to get from "overarching story" to "one hero plz" is incomprehensible.

There's never been a series in any media that used a single protagonist along with same fellow companions and that had an overarching story?  What's with the "plz"?

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

What's so hard about this?  We are exploring the world of Thedas during the hundred-year time period known as the Dragon Age.

But what makes it the age of the dragon?  No over-arching story? Nothing to you?

It's called the Dragon Age because the Divine said so.  In the 99th year of each Age, the Divine looks for omens and gives the upcoming Age its name based on what she sees.

Dragon Age was set to be called the Sun Age in celebration of the Orlesian Empire, but this was changed because a High Dragon was sighted, and the Divine took this as a bad omen, taking it to mean that the upcoming age would be a time of violent change. Hence the name, Dragon Age.  NOT, just so we're clear, "The Age of the Dragon."  And no, it isn't meant to mean that dragons are supposed to be here,there, and everywhere (even though they are).  It's JUST meant to symbolically refer to the violence and upheaval bit.

What do you mean by "nothing to you?" anyway? 

There does not have to BE an overarching story.  Clearly a single overarching story is NOT the kind of story that Bioware wants to tell.  There's nothing at all wrong with this, and it is their prerogative.  A better question is why does it upset you so much, especially since you CANNOT claim that Bioware didn't tell us all this right from the beginning.

ETA the bit about the Sun Age, thanks to Filament.

Modifié par Silfren, 23 juin 2013 - 06:22 .

[Silfren]

double post sorry oops

Modifié par Silfren, 23 juin 2013 - 06:03 .

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Filament wrote...

A blight, a mage war, a tear in the veil, return of the dragons.

The logic you use to get from "overarching story" to "one hero plz" is incomprehensible.

There's never been a series in any media that used a single protagonist along with same fellow companions and that had an overarching story?  What's with the "plz"?

Er.  In regards to the underlined bit, nobody ever made such a claim, and it's got nothing to do with the price of tea in China.

Again, the problem seems to be that you think this is the only way it can or should be done.  Bioware has made the decision that this is NOT how they are going to handle their Dragon Age stories, and they were clear on this from the start.  It's kind of long past time for you to get over it.

Modifié par Silfren, 23 juin 2013 - 06:11 .

[Cigne]

In Exile wrote...


...  I miss the Bio boards. 

Me too. I've four books on my shelf, that I purchased as a result of following various reoccuring arguments about 'how things really were in the Middle Ages'. Well presented arguments, but contradictory.

Not that good arguments aren't present on the BSN, but there's a lot more static. I blame it on a change in how trolling is percieved; nowadays, if one is really, really good at it, it earns one respect.

Or maybe it's simply that there are a whole lotta more people here, now.

bEVEsthda wrote...

In Exile wrote...

I came
in via E3 (I think it was E3) promos, back when they used the Aurora
engine to render Ostagar and the Sacred Ashes templte. 

Well,
I don't remember the details exactly the same way as you. But yes. I
was here long before, actually. I was here during the buildup for Throne
of Bhaal, then again for the buildup to NWN. And that disaster with the
NWN OC. So it's not like Bioware haven't been through the 'DA2
experience' before. That time their ass was saved by the tool kit and
DM-tools.

You've been here much longer than I; NWN
was first Bioware game. I vaguely remember a trailer for NWN on my BG2
disc stating that you could import characters from BG2. That obviously
changed.

I do recall Gaider stating that the OC was kinda/sorta
last minute; that NWN was all about the toolkit, and they realized late
that they needed to included a 'mod' to show what the toolkit was
capaple of (this is my interpretation of his comments).

Sooo.... I suppose my takeaway is that Bioware had PR issues long before EA, right?

Jerrybnsn wrote...

You say that Dragon Age isn't about one
person, no one disagrees, you say that it is about "the World of Dragon
Age". Well, what makes "the World of Dragon Age"? Is it like TES world
that has this huge sand box to go have fun it for each game? Or, is it
about an over arching-story that gives the name Dragon Age to it? I say
it is the later. And using one protagonist is just a "vehicle" because
every story needs a hero in which to explore and interact with the story
or in this case "the World of the Dragon Age".  For it is called Dragon
"Age" and not Dragon "Land".

Seriously, let's hear what makes the "Dragon Age World" to you.

Change that to over arching-stories and we agree. And if by "one protagonist" you mean throughout all the games, then no; you'd need to find an excuse to re-level the protagonist, explain why... well really, isn't that a good enough reason? And if DA is successful enough to go 10, 15 games, wouldn't the same protagonist get stale?

Hey, you could just play as DC's Deadman, you know.:happy:

[Jerrybnsn]

Filament wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Filament wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote..
 And using one protagonist is just a "vehicle" because every story needs a hero in which to explore and interact with the story or in this case "the World of the Dragon Age".

The logic you use to get from "overarching story" to "one hero plz" is incomprehensible.

There's never been a series in any media that used a single protagonist along with same fellow companions and that had an overarching story?  What's with the "plz"?

So according to your logic, because there are games, movies, books etc that follow one protagonist in an overarching story (which no one disputed, ever), that's the only way it can be done? Ace.

So if it is done, and you admit that you are not disputing it, why are you calling my logic incomprehensible?  I was just using it as an example of how a single protagonist can be used as a vehicle in an overarching story that spans many series.  I love stories like that.  I'm not suggesting that the series be like Tarzan, Conan the Barbarian or James Bond. 

More like this series

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 23 juin 2013 - 06:45 .