17 réponses à ce sujet

[Volourn]

 This would be an awesome way to tie in the two previous games if we recruit our two previous PCs into our part 3 party. Imagine the stories and legends that can be made!

[David Gaider]

Volourn wrote...
 This would be an awesome way to tie in the two previous games if we recruit our two previous PCs into our part 3 party. Imagine the stories and legends that can be made!

We'll probably have enough problems with some folks chafing at any attempt by the writers to give the Warden or Hawke an actual place in the story ("why can't I choose it? Why can't you just write different versions of every conversation to accommodate all my previous choices as well as my headcanon?") despite them both now being NPC's... putting them in the party would only open up calls for the player to roleplay them just as they roleplay the Inquisitor. Three PC's, in other words.

So, no. HELL no. Despite how awesome that might seem in your head, it would not be that awesome in practice.

[David Gaider]

Taleroth wrote...
Is that a "We will probably have this problem because they're in the story as NPCs"
or
"We would have this problem if we even put them in the story as NPCs?"

It's a "no matter what we do with them in the story as NPC's". They've already "disappeared", so you already have some going "but my X wouldn't have disappeared! They went off to do Y!" Says who? "Says me!" Well, too bad. As of the end of the game, you are no longer playing that character. "But I don't like that! You should leave that character alone forever, and never bring up any other character as a cameo unless it's vitally important ot the story (and I approve of their usage)!"

Again: too bad, sorry. We'll do our best to respect the choices that were made, but take no responsibility for headcanon with regards to what you believe those choices led to after the end of the game in which those characters appeared.

[David Gaider]

ManchesterUnitedFan1 wrote...
Or...are you saying that the epilogue counts as headcanon?

Some people also headcanon the epilogues. If Hawke romanced Isabela in DA2, it's mentioned that they remained together afterwards... but doing what? For how long? Some people claim that means they went sailing off on Isabela's new ship, and why would Hawke ever leave her side for even a single minute? We contradict that by saying Hawke disappeared and suddenly it's a clash with headcanon-- despite "Hawke remains with Isabela forever" not being a choice we offered.

At any rate, I'm not going to get into a big discussion about it. We realize some people are very precious about their PC's, and we're not apt to go out of our way to have them do things that violate headcanon... but they obviously did something, and that involves a plot that may not be what someone had in mind. Just be aware.

Modifié par David Gaider, 12 août 2013 - 04:49 .

[David Gaider]

DesmondHume wrote...
Gaider, i want you to know that youre a pompous ass.

Since everything we do is so terrible, there's always an option: door's that way.

Here, let me help you.

[Allan Schumacher]

Is seeing Hawke and/or The Warden, ingame, out of our control, completely off the table??

I wouldn't say "completely off the table" as few things ever really are, but I would go into this with the mindset "Expect them not to show up" as there is a chance they may not show up, and if you're really hoping that they do then that circumstance will leave you disappointed.

[Allan Schumacher]

But surely we'll get some sort of resolution to their character arcs even if they don't actually appear in game right? It would be incredibly disappointing to have a bunch of good endings for the warden (albeit an unsatisfying ending for a Hawke who sided with the mages) that get overwritten by a mysterious "they disappeared" with no actual explanation, only to never have it addressed again. Simply making the protagonist of the past two games disappear is an incredibly disappointing conclusion to their story arcs -- and yes, I think story arcs that players invest 40+ hours in should be reasonably well concluded.

On advantage of "they disappeared" is that it's open ended. If you'd prefer, I could suggest that we bring back the warden, and have the Warden become deranged with taint so that he/she actually ends up killing a small village and feasting on their bodies before being struck down by a bunch of dwarves.

Extreme example used to illustrate that if we have ultimate control of those characters (which we now do, given that both of those games are over), there WILL be outcomes that people won't like because in their minds "it's not what their warden will do."

My statement is more along the lines of expectation: it's a land mine to deal with in a lot of cases and if you go into DAI with some high expectations for what to see from Hawke and the Warden, there's a good chance you're setting yourself up for disappointment because DAI's focus will be on the Inquisitor's journey.


I can understand disappointment about Hawke's being rather abrupt and disappointing, and in retrospect we could've done something different as the plan had a larger expansion pack coming out, but reality nixed that. As such, Hawke has perhaps more loose ends and would probably have greater consideration for having his/her plot wrapped up on that fact. But at the same time the story is still about the Inquisitor and the events surrounding Inquisition.

[Allan Schumacher]

The advantage doesn't exist if you go on to further define parts of the story that would realistically involve the protagonist (such as lifting their romance partner from one game and having them strolling around creation in sequels and through other media).

It's suddenly a lot less "open-ended" (which I don't feel is even an accurate term for what you've done so far), since you now have to accommodate and justify all this further information.

Ehhhh, in many ways I frankly see this as an unreasonable expectation by many people.

That you ended up with Leliana in DAO doesn't mean she suddenly stops being her own character. Problems DO lie with "Warden has disappeared" since, as Maria says, it suddenly makes her think about it. But Leliana's presence? Mostly leaves me going "meh."


I disagree with the mandate that some have that because they liked the character in the first game, we should keep shoe horning extra stuff for the character (or even that the game *must* be about the first game's character). I actually *liked* that KOTOR 2 wasn't about the player controlling Revan. For each "the Warden would have been a perfect vehicle" type of comment, I can just as easily say "but he doesn't need to be. Thedas is a big place with lots of people and lots of stories" Never mind the continuity issues that arise unless we make every campaign become increasingly high level campaigns (I find it jarring to reset back to low levels from a narrative point of view, though as a game creator I'll always have a bias to easing players into the game, as well as maintaining entry points for new players).

It seems pretty clear, however, that we're looking on doing different stories for each of our games with a focus on a different character. As such, people would probably be better served placing their expectations for Warden/Hawke stuff as "Nice to haves" as opposed to "Must haves" simply for the purpose of mitigating your risk of disappointment.

One problem with that line of thinking is that a potential DAI customer
should have no confidence that the Inquisitor won't disappear at the end
of DAI-after all, you've done it with the two previous heroes. I'd
rather rent it myself.I'm not even sure I'll have any interest in future
DA games.

If you find this to be a signficant enough of an issue that you will abstain from purchasing the game when you otherwise would have, then that is your choice to make.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 août 2013 - 08:32 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Addendum to my above post: I understand that not everyone wants to know about the Warden and Hawke because they just want to know about them, but rather because of the ending of DA2.

I just want to know... Why is it "impossible" to make Hawke come back as the Inquisitor (optional origin)?

It's not impossible. Doing it to make sense, however, may mean that the narrative ideas we have in place would need to change, however.

Plus there's just the idea of "doing new stuff with new characters" which is where my bias lies.

[Allan Schumacher]

Twisted Path wrote...

Edit:

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Addendum to my above post: I understand that not everyone wants to know about the Warden and Hawke because they just want to know about them, but rather because of the
ending of DA2.

Yeah, I think this is definitly the case. If it weren't for the weird quasi-cliffhanger ending of DA2 I think there would be a lot less speculation about or desire to see the mysteriously disapeared protagonists.

I think it's less the case, however.  If Hawke/Warden had neatly gone off into retirement, you'd still get people clamouring for more.  A lot of them.  There's no shortage of people that conjure up justifications when it mostly just comes across as "I really like this character and want to continue on because I have the expectation that because I enjoyed being this character in a prior game, I am reasonably assurred I'll continue enjoying the character in a new game."  Though it's definitely the cynical side of me.

It's easy to say "Yeah I would have been okay with that" when that isn't what a person is actually faced with.  People still clamoured for more Revan long before people learned that Revan was effectively not a part of KOTOR 2, and they continued to do so once they learned he disappeared.  It's frankly a tough spot, however.

It's evident, however, that fanbases in general clamour for what is familiar, because they have those emotional attachments (I feel this is also why sequels, movies or otherwise, often struggle because they lose the novelty factor that the original had).  If you ever ask a fanbase what they'd like from their favourite developer, very rarely is it "something new that has never been done before."  Some may, but the loudest voice is always "Sequel to a game I really liked, because the implict assumption that comes with that is that I'll enjoy it just as much as the prior game."


It's a HUGE risk though, for the player's impressions.  DA2 is a pretty divided game.  I'm not convinced that if we had effectively just replaced Hawke with the Warden, the people that found the game frustrating and so forth would have been happier because at least it was the Warden.

[Allan Schumacher]

I can see what the point would be in shunting them all into one situation, to give a single starting point for the next game. But to make them all disappear, when not all of them would have chosen to do so, and then not being able to play them, just strikes me as a colossal waste.

Well, unless the game didn't actually have all that much choice at the end, you'll still run into "not all of them would have chosen to be shunted into the same situation, so I think it's still 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

As for why "they disappeared" came into play, I don't really know for sure (especially for the Warden). Hawke's is much more of a "we wanted to expand on it in the expansion pack" pooch screw since, well, it was canceled and now we need to roll with that. Which IS a valid criticism.

I personally like to think that the Warden, however, went on a giant donair binge and couldn't be arsed to be disturbed. >.>

There may have been some idea on bringing the characters back, but as the expansion pack shows us, plans can change. Especially if it was more just an idea at the time. I mean, looking at DAO I definitely get a greater picture of "this was a stand alone game that was maybe not really written to have a sequel" given the more elaborate epilogues.

Could it be have been handled better? Sure I guess. I'm a bit out of my element as I'm not a writer and certainly have not contributed much to the lore.

Clearly we recognize "people enjoyed the characters from the first games" since we've shown that we're open to bringing them back (I'd argue Morrigan and Varric are their respective game's most popular characters). I do think, however, it's possible (and plausible) for both of them to be involved in some ways without requiring extensive references to either Hawke or the Warden, however.

It's that tricky spot of balancing what the player is keen on wanting to know more about, and recognizing that these characters are effectively interacting with a new entity.


I think there's also a degree of extreme analysis that comes with fandom (which isn't meant as a pejorative. Just that people that get invested start to go over things with a fine tooth comb). I remember when Michael Biehn came to Edmonton to promote a movie. There was a Q&A session with him and someone asked him about some detail that they had noticed in the movie Aliens, and in that person's mind this detail was some super cryptic nod that was meaningful. You could see his body language sag when Michael responded that he doesn't recall and that it was probably just something that people didn't pay much attention to or didn't bother thinking it was significant one way or another.

I will full on defer to the fanbase if anyone were to ever ask me about finer details of Dragon Age lore, because there's much better chance that you guys would actually know those answers.

[Allan Schumacher]

But I think it was a mistake to end DA2 with a tease for such a plan.

I agree.

[Allan Schumacher]

Something like this logically leads to people believing/hoping their beloved character still has a role to play and might return.

I think people do themselves a disservice with this, however. People love our characters (I do too!) but if you fixate on wanting something specific from a previous game, you compromise your ability to fully appreciate and enjoy the new experiences because you're always measuring it.

It's part of the issue with "spiritual successors" as well, and game companies (BioWare included) should probably be more wary of drawing such analogues. There are many that were let down with DAO because it wasn't the BG2 successor they wanted. There are many that are already let down with Project Eternity because they contributed hoping for a specific type of game and now feel as though the guys at Obsidian are doing something else instead and they feel let down.

I actually enjoyed BioShock less than I otherwise would have, simply because I was told it was a successor to System Shock 2, by which it failed to deliver for me. It's in part why I try to media blackout myself once I decide I want a game.


Anyways, it's late and I should get to sleep. I'm not sure if this post even really has a point at this moment... but I figure "I've been deleting and retyping what I was writing for the past 5 minutes or so, so I should probably stop."

Good night.

[Allan Schumacher]

Isn't it kinda bizarre that the higher-ups would've authorised a cliffhanger/teaser ending for DA2 without being absolutely sure that the expansion would exist and Hawke would get a proper ending?

Nothing is absolute, though. When DA2 shipped, no one on the team would have believed that there wouldn't have been an expansion for it.


And while I'm not privy to the reasoning why, stuff like sales probably had an impact (both of DA2 as well as Awakening)

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 août 2013 - 10:10 .

[Allan Schumacher]

If that's the way you wish to look at it, then fine. Feel free to hate us for it as being all money grubbing, if you like, as well.

There's a very large difference in the way that DAO ends in terms of "lets keep making games in this setting" as well. Which is why you find dozens of topics that crop about about people being worried that future games will crap all over their epilogues they received in DAO.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 août 2013 - 11:08 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Baldur's Gate didn't conclude the Bhaalspawn's story either, however.  Never mind the ending of Baldur's Gate 2.

Yes, we had intended to have more content for Hawke after DA2. Although the rise of the champion was, as far as I'm concerned, the plot of DA2 which was resolved.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 17 août 2013 - 12:17 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Remember back when expansions and DLCs felt like they added to the full game and not like pieces cut from it? It wasn´t that long ago.

Well, Tales of the Sword Coast was pretty much entirely cut content. Given that I rarely feel that expansions or DLC "feel like they are pieces cut from games" (and felt this way even before working at BioWare), then just as gamers, we're at a pretty fundamental disconnect at this point. If you feel we intentionally cut stuff out to milk money from you, and this annoys you, I don't expect you to reward us for this behaviour.

Are you saying we'll never find out what happened to the Warden and Hawke?

No, I am not saying that. Neither am I saying that you will.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 17 août 2013 - 12:31 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Surely as the person who leads an international organisation dedicated to resolving many of Thedas' most intractable problems, the Inquisitor is far more influential than Hawke ever was? Far more powerful, too, if they command armies and castles instead of a few companions in one city.

Or was Hawke meant to have a more important role in the expansion pack?

I actually don't know for certain. Aside from the events of Kirkwall being seen as the Catalyst for the Mage-Templar crisis which helped put the world in a state it is now in. It's also probably a symptom of aiming for a smaller focus with the story.