406 réponses à ce sujet

[Jerrybnsn]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

 I see no reasons to waste resources on recreating Hawke and/or the Warden as NPCs. .

Wrong post.  This isn't the Hawke/Warden NPC post.

They need not show up in any capacity as far as I am concerned. Like the rest of my post said I have no problem with a codex entry saying how they did or the new portagonsist finding their bodies which would bring closure.

The I'll put you down as "prefer reading codexes to gameplay".

[Sanunes]

I think this thread alone proves to me any role they have in the game should be minor at best because no matter what they are going to do there will be pitchforks involved, so why not take the route that is easier for them if the outcome will be the same either way.

I think this quote is really the best way to approach them and just like the situations with the Warden and Hawke play out according to BioWare's plans.  I remember what happened with Mass Effect 3 and what the community expected and The Warden and Hawke situation is headed in that direction fast.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

Source

Modifié par Sanunes, 14 août 2013 - 05:28 .

[Zu Long]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Zu Long wrote...

Given that Morrigan and Varric matter, that Lilianna matters, that Sten the Arishok probably matters, that Alistair may very well matter depending on whether he's king or not, and that Hawke mattered a great deal to the church the last time we saw him or her, it doesn't really make any sense that the Warden and Hawke just disappear without anyone caring.

"These two people who played pivotal roles in the two crises immediately preceding our current crises no longer matter. Let us speak no more of them." Sorry, it just doesn't ring true for me.

Well first off, I don't get how Varric matters. Unless by matters you're merely referring to the fact that he's in DA I--but that's kind of backwards.

As for the rest, they matter not because of some event in the past, but because of the present. Morrigan matters because she has a plan in the present. Leliana matters because she is a Seeker NOW. Sten matters because he is NOW the Arishok (though I don't know if that is true or not). Alistair matters because he is king NOW.

Loghain's tenure as "acting king" doesn't matter anymore, because it's over. The Warden's journeys as the Hero of Ferelden, defeater of the Blight don't matter anymore--because the Blight is over. Hawke's story of his "rise to power" doesn't matter anymore, because it's over--if he was still in power, i would say it still matters. For a Warden that were somehow king , I would agree that it matters.

Why is saying Varric matters because he's in the game backwards? He's in the game as a major party NPC. Ergo, he matters.

Current status puts Hawke as "Person who single handedly stopped the Qunari from overrunning Kirkwall three years ago, and was at the center of the event that split the Circle and Chantry."

The Warden, as I pointed out previously, can be King or Queen of Ferelden, and at the very least is a Commander of the Grey Wardens, which while not the greatest of movers and shakers, is still kind of important. Oh, and the last time someone had to gather an army from a wasteland of divided and warring factions, the Warden totally did it. Since we need someone like that now, it makes sense that people look for him or her, assuming she's still alive. The fact that the Warden is connected to all of these other potentially powerful people just makes it more important that she be found.

The funny thing about succeeding in a crises is that people tend to look to you when further crises pop up. The fact is, Bioware's own story kind of demands they figure out what the Warden and Hawke are doing right now, and the OPs suggenstion for how to handle that is a legitimate idea. You don't have to agree that's how it should happen, but claiming Hawke and the Warden can just vanish from the stage with out leaving a gaping mile-wide void doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

[o Ventus]

EntropicAngel wrote...

You're right, it does--but it is not the plot of the game. It is, as you said, a continuation. An extension. It is not the Blight, but what happens after the Blight. Not DA:O's plot.

Now you're splitting hairs. If it continues the story, then it is, by definition, the same story. It isn't teliing a totally new story, it's continuing what came before.

Were you around for ME2's dlc? Do you recall the (minor) outrage when it was discovered that Arrival would be a canon DLC? There was (minor) outrage because the rest of the DLC were not canon.

I'm working off of the assumption that Bioware is continuing the trend of DLC not being "canon." And if DLC are not canon, they are not the story, like I mentioned in the first post you responded to.

Of course, that could be false.

Every major past ME DLC is canon.

BtDS occurs even if you don't play it -- only Balak crashes the asteroid into the planet and the colonists are all killed.

LotSB still occurs if you don't play it. Liara directly mentions this. She hires a team of mercs to go in, and Feron is killed.

Overlord still happens, only instead of Shepard's intervention, Cerberus nukes the whole place, killing David.

[Palidane]

Zeldrik1389 wrote...
2, Since DA games aren't about them, but about the world of Thedas, I think let's just move on. Since there are bunch of potential tales, and characters in DA world that BioWare could explode in future games, I don't see any reasons for them to keep dwelling on the past instead of moving on to a new adventure.

Jerrybnsn wrote...
David Gaider also said in this latest article that Inquisition is essentially Morrigan's story.  And my Warden you see before you stepped through the mirror with her to face the future together.  So the Inquisition, if they allow for player agency, will be essentially my story as well, whether my part is small or larger.  Am I the stay-at-home Warden?

I agree with you Zeldrik. We are not asking for Bioware to drag the Warden kicking and screaming into Inquistion if he doesn't belong. I'm not looking for a power triumvirate of past, past-er, and present heroes to go on a huge campaign. If they decided to have DA3 be about Rivain and the conflict between the Qunari and Chantry there, I would have zero problems with only a passing reference to the Warden or Hawke.

But they haven't. Bioware has decided have at least part of DAI be set in Ferelden, and have decided to continue the Mage-Templar War. I think my Warden and Hawke have a place in that storyline based on the choices and conclusions Bioware has previously offered me. I'm only asking for them to be consistent in their universe and storytelling.

[o Ventus]

EntropicAngel wrote...

That's not true for Arrival. Bioware explicitly said that Shepard does that, regardless of whether you choose to do it or not.

And the point of all that was, if they are NOT canon, Bioware should not be obligated to provide canon-level "closure" for non-canon content.

Except ME3 itself directly contradicts this statement TWICE. "Normally", the reason Shepard is locked up on Earth is because of Arrival. If Arrival is never played, Anderson mentions that it is because of Shepard's affiliation with Cerberus. Later on, you can learn that Hackett sent in a team of marines to free Dr. Kenson. The marines manage to destroy the relay, but are all killed along with Kenson.

[Zu Long]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

 I see no reasons to waste resources on recreating Hawke and/or the Warden as NPCs. .

Wrong post.  This isn't the Hawke/Warden NPC post.

They need not show up in any capacity as far as I am concerned. Like the rest of my post said I have no problem with a codex entry saying how they did or the new portagonsist finding their bodies which would bring closure.

Speaking for myself, I would have a huge problem with my warden, who waded through oceans of darkspawn bodies with a giant flaming hammer of Justice and emerged out the other side bloodied but unbowed, being killed off screen because Bioware wrote themselves into a corner. To a lesser extent, my Hawke as well.

[Palidane]

EntropicAngel wrote...
That's not true for Arrival. Bioware explicitly said that Shepard does that, regardless of whether you choose to do it or not.

And the point of all that was, if they are NOT canon, Bioware should not be obligated to provide canon-level "closure" for non-canon content.

Uhh, either you're misremembering or something changed down the line. If you didn't buy Arrival, you're Shepard did not go on the mission in Mass Effect 3. We knew that as far back as the demo, where you got different reasons for why you were locked up.

EDIT: Here, the 103rd Marines war asset takes a hit if you didn't play it.

UPDATED (Only if the layer has not completed the Arrival DLC for Mass Effect 2)Military Strength
Admiral Hackett dispatched marines to the planet Aratoht to rescue a deep cover agent, Dr. Amanda Kenson. The teams were killed in an explosion that wiped out both the colony and the system's relay. The Alliance spent weeks piecing together scattered radio transmissions, learning that the marines felt they had no choice but to send an asteroid into the relay to prevent invasion by the Reapers. While it bought the Alliance some time, the men and women lost on the mission were a severe blow to the 103rd Marine Corps.

Modifié par Palidane, 14 août 2013 - 05:38 .

[Zeldrik1389]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

The way I see it is:

3. Bringing up Hawke and The Warden again is, imo, like walking in a field full of landmines. They are both heavily customized by players, both in physical appearance, personalities, and decisions during their "adventure". And since players created and played them differently, .

Doesn't anyone read my original post?   You guys are killing me with this argument that wouldn't exist under my suggestion.

I did, and I did mention in my post.

Like I said, with your suggestion, it means that they will need to put a huge amount of work into these 2 characters. If players only control them for a short period of time, it not worth it. (it's like creating another protagonist but only serve the purpose of a support character). Hench, I said "too much work, too risky, for too little gain."

Another possibility is that they became protagonist in new game, which as I said, is unlikely since "there are a lot of potential tales, and characters in DA universe." there are little to no reasons for them to keep dwelling on old protagonist instead of moving on to a new adventure.

Modifié par Zeldrik1389, 14 août 2013 - 05:40 .

[Palidane]

EntropicAngel wrote...
And the point of all that was, if they are NOT canon, Bioware should not be obligated to provide canon-level "closure" for non-canon content.

Ok, fair enough. Bioware isn't forced to, but I don't think my explanations required huge leaps of logic. Somebody has to be the Warden-Commander after all, and somebody has to go see what happened at Amgerrak.

Modifié par Palidane, 14 août 2013 - 05:42 .

[Realmzmaster]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

 I see no reasons to waste resources on recreating Hawke and/or the Warden as NPCs. .

Wrong post.  This isn't the Hawke/Warden NPC post.

They need not show up in any capacity as far as I am concerned. Like the rest of my post said I have no problem with a codex entry saying how they did or the new portagonsist finding their bodies which would bring closure.

The I'll put you down as "prefer reading codexes to gameplay".

I also said could find their dead bodies which would be gameplay.

[Zu Long]

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

The way I see it is:

3. Bringing up Hawke and The Warden again is, imo, like walking in a field full of landmines. They are both heavily customized by players, both in physical appearance, personalities, and decisions during their "adventure". And since players created and played them differently, .

Doesn't anyone read my original post?   You guys are killing me with this argument that wouldn't exist under my suggestion.

I did, and I did mention in my post.

Like I said, with your suggestion, it means that they will need to put a huge amount of work into these 2 characters. If players only control them for a short period of time, it not worth it. (it's like creating another protagonist but only serve the purpose of a support character). Hench, I said "too much work, too risky, for too little gain."

Another possibility is that they became protagonist in new game, which as I said, is unlikely since "there are a lot of potential tales, and characters in DA universe." there are little to no reasons for them to keep dwelling on old protagonist instead of moving on to a new adventure.

But as I've pointed out, you can't just ignore them. They were pivotal players in previous crises, and given their connections to key players in the new crises, you have to address them in some form. Dwelling on them isn't necessary, but a quick scene dealing with what they're doing now is hardly unfeasible or impossible.

[Palidane]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...
The I'll put you down as "prefer reading codexes to gameplay".

I also said could find their dead bodies which would be gameplay.

And you don't think that would be a disservice to your characters? To be unceremoniously killed off so they can't interfere?

[Palidane]

Filament wrote...
They've said consistently that you won't be getting control of old protagonists back. Perhaps not as explicitly "in any capacity" as I thought, if you're trying to find a technical way it can still work with them as "NPCs," given that I'm not willing to dredge up all the other topics asking for their Warden back that a dev may have posted in. Still, it seems contrary to what they've been implying with their insistence on this matter, at the very least. And, those NPCs we could control before were also companions, and we know that's out. (The only exception is Irving.)

They also said a while ago that they don't favor DLCs where you're not controlling the main character, such as Leliana's Song, if that's another thing you might be hoping for.

In any case, it's easy to perceive that what you're asking for is directly contrary to what the devs have consistently stated-- "it's about Thedas" is the common response everyone knows-- and that perception is still relevant even if it's not accurate, if you're actually confused about how many have responded to your thread.

They also said that we would only be able to play a human in DAI. Times change.

[Han Shot First]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I have to say at this point, that this reminds me about a year and a half ago when I was pushing for Morrigan to return and was receiving just as much negativity on the matter. And now here we are, with an article coming out that quotes David Gaider as saying that essentially, Inquisition is Morrigan's story.

That is a little bit different, as Morrigan was a party member and not a player character. Her personality and motivations were from the start entirely defined by Bioware, whereas with Hawke and the Warden their personality and motivations are at least in part, determined by the player.

Having player characters return as NPCs greatly risks canonizing a version of those characters that was not necessarily your own.

[Zeldrik1389]

Zu Long wrote...


But as I've pointed out, you can't just ignore them. They were pivotal players in previous crises, and given their connections to key players in the new crises, you have to address them in some form. Dwelling on them isn't necessary, but a quick scene dealing with what they're doing now is hardly unfeasible or impossible.

Yeah. I didn't say they should ignore them completely. As I said in my original post, since having them in a game for more than a brief cameo is too complicated, I think they would just play it safe and mentioned them in quests or somekind of off screen cameo. It's not so challenging, not require too much work, and a lot less risky for them imo.

[o Ventus]

EntropicAngel wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Except ME3 itself directly contradicts this statement TWICE. "Normally", the reason Shepard is locked up on Earth is because of Arrival. If Arrival is never played, Anderson mentions that it is because of Shepard's affiliation with Cerberus. Later on, you can learn that Hackett sent in a team of marines to free Dr. Kenson. The marines manage to destroy the relay, but are all killed along with Kenson.

Where did this happen? Then Bioware must have changed things--I distinctly recall them saying when it came out that it was something that Shepard did regardless of whether you played the DLC or not.

The intro. The second one is in the description for one of the Alliance war assets (Spec Ops Team Zeta, I think).