401 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...



You keep missing my point. It is not about what the character knows. It is about what the player knows. Player exist on a different level of... abstraction than the characters. That means they experience the story differently, They know more. They get involved differently. This has to do with players enjoyment of the game, not in character knowlegde. And if the extra materials is not required, then everything important from that material has to make it into the game. Else it affects the players ability to play the game in a enjoyable way.

Media has to do with quality. If you translate directly from one media to the next, the adaption will be of bad quality. It is not just control and pacing. It is everything, because nothing works in the same way. A comics visual does not move around, like dragon ages visual does, because they are standing still pictures. You do not write the character in the same way, it is not possible. Bad adaptation are the ones that think they can get away with only control and pacing when translating a game. You cannot.

How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about.
What about her thoughts, should they be avaiable in the comics?
How about how she moves? How she fights?
All these things have to be adapted to get a character that comes 'close to' Isabella, but a 1:1 is impossible.

And what the player know does not matter. The story is not made or written to take in part with what the player knows. It's written and made in consideration that the pc is ignorante. You not knowing about past event is not going to change the game. The fact that new players can come in any game proves that point.

And no media had nothing to do with quality. How media is made is what effects quality. And yes it is just control and pacing. The only differnce is the view is not interaction with the event in the comic and can't effect them. The only difference with how character is written with a comic and a game is that in a game the character wait around for you to interact with them and you choosing the pace while in a comic they don't. You can easily write the character the same way. The differnece is pacing and control.

"How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about."
Voice is not the only way to convye tone. It can be done with pure writing. Body lauguge can also be conveded with writing, even more so with an illustration. The fact that the production is differnet and how something is convey does not make one quality less or make it impossible for the say storytelling style to be used. The diffence in the end is still just pacing and control.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

Yes, it can be done with pure writing (Which btw is not a good idea in a comic). But it will never be the same as in game and a good change it will not be as effective. You have to understand: A book and a comic can for exmaple describe her voice. It can say thing like: 'Said Isabella flirtaously' But reading that is not the same as hearing. So when adapting you have to ask: 
How do I get flirtaous across best: Should I draw Isabella's speech bubble in a differnet shape/colours/text types - perhaps a heart form. Should I hope that  Isabella's body langue is powerfull enough on its own to get flirtatous across. How about those moment where she fight and flirts... how do I get that across? Ect, ect...

And what about non-Isabella character where body langue and tone does not match? What do I do with them?

Comics don't use the same 'langue' as games when giving information to
the consumer, so they have to translate the whole character not just
tidbit.

It does make the quality less if you go for the 1:1 translation. That is my point. You have to adapt everything to keep the quality consistent and then if you afterwards have to adapt back again into a game... Well, let's just say it is a lot of work. And since I don't think you are understanding what i am trying to say here. (That might just as well be my less than perfect english). I am not saying that a certain media have inherit quality in themselves, but certain types of narratives does make for a better quality story in certain media and if an adaptation is tried 1:1 it will drop the quality of the narrative.

A comic does not do it with pure writing. My point is there is more then one way to do the character tone and felling. One media is not better then another in doing that. The difference is how it's translated and the is up to the veiwers comperihention. Even animated media can do that badly. And translation is never 1:1, it's based on the understanding of the view and that is relative. Hearing her voice and imagining her voice is not a drop of quality. It's a form of translation.
And getting that across in a comic is easy being that word bubble is not the only tool the comic can use. Flirting is not just done with voice.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

I have already answered everything you argued against in the bolded part. What from those do you not understand? I am beginning to be at loss as to how I should write more clear:(

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Just because you don't know a character's full background doesn't make that character inconsistent. You work with what you know. In real life people will always keep some secrets from you, it's the same here. That doesn't make their feelings for you less, nor their guilt (if applicable). It's just silly to want to know everything about a character, their lives don't revolve around you. Isabela's less so than most.

It does if it's something that makes the experience of knowing the character in the game feel very different than otherwise. Part of my concern is on a meta level for the player. If the game presents something to you about a character then out of game materials should not turn it on it's head.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 17 septembre 2013 - 08:23 .

[d4eaming]

This brings to my mind Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. In Wizard and Glass, we see Roland, the "hero", more or less sacrifice everyone around him, including his friends. This is a major defining part of who he is, and shows the extremes he will go to in order to complete his mission.

If Wizard and Glass had not been part of the narrative, his shrug off of his friends in the final book might not have made sense. We already know Roland is kind of a jerk, but letting his friends die? He did it with Jake in the first book, and even King was reportedly very upset and shocked by it. Even then, we can assume Roland was very desperate, and wouldn't necessarily do it again. Then we find out in Wizard and Glass that no, Roland has always been an ****. A heroic ****, but an **** nonetheless.

At least Susannah gets to call him out on it before she flips off to another dimension, but we're not shocked by what he does or how he reacts. I can imagine the even greater uproar if fans didn't know about his past when those events occur.

Hawke doesn't ever really get to call Isabela out on her past. For me, it's souring a character I already had trouble identifying with to find out she commited a horror that, had I known, or my Hawke had known, she might not have ever been recruited, or she might have been handed off to the Qunari, because that act is just so despicable. Oh, she regrets it. Tell that to the slaves that died for her.

[leaguer of one]

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...



You keep missing my point. It is not about what the character knows. It is about what the player knows. Player exist on a different level of... abstraction than the characters. That means they experience the story differently, They know more. They get involved differently. This has to do with players enjoyment of the game, not in character knowlegde. And if the extra materials is not required, then everything important from that material has to make it into the game. Else it affects the players ability to play the game in a enjoyable way.

Media has to do with quality. If you translate directly from one media to the next, the adaption will be of bad quality. It is not just control and pacing. It is everything, because nothing works in the same way. A comics visual does not move around, like dragon ages visual does, because they are standing still pictures. You do not write the character in the same way, it is not possible. Bad adaptation are the ones that think they can get away with only control and pacing when translating a game. You cannot.

How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about.
What about her thoughts, should they be avaiable in the comics?
How about how she moves? How she fights?
All these things have to be adapted to get a character that comes 'close to' Isabella, but a 1:1 is impossible.

And what the player know does not matter. The story is not made or written to take in part with what the player knows. It's written and made in consideration that the pc is ignorante. You not knowing about past event is not going to change the game. The fact that new players can come in any game proves that point.

And no media had nothing to do with quality. How media is made is what effects quality. And yes it is just control and pacing. The only differnce is the view is not interaction with the event in the comic and can't effect them. The only difference with how character is written with a comic and a game is that in a game the character wait around for you to interact with them and you choosing the pace while in a comic they don't. You can easily write the character the same way. The differnece is pacing and control.

"How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about."
Voice is not the only way to convye tone. It can be done with pure writing. Body lauguge can also be conveded with writing, even more so with an illustration. The fact that the production is differnet and how something is convey does not make one quality less or make it impossible for the say storytelling style to be used. The diffence in the end is still just pacing and control.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

Yes, it can be done with pure writing (Which btw is not a good idea in a comic). But it will never be the same as in game and a good change it will not be as effective. You have to understand: A book and a comic can for exmaple describe her voice. It can say thing like: 'Said Isabella flirtaously' But reading that is not the same as hearing. So when adapting you have to ask: 
How do I get flirtaous across best: Should I draw Isabella's speech bubble in a differnet shape/colours/text types - perhaps a heart form. Should I hope that  Isabella's body langue is powerfull enough on its own to get flirtatous across. How about those moment where she fight and flirts... how do I get that across? Ect, ect...

And what about non-Isabella character where body langue and tone does not match? What do I do with them?

Comics don't use the same 'langue' as games when giving information to
the consumer, so they have to translate the whole character not just
tidbit.

It does make the quality less if you go for the 1:1 translation. That is my point. You have to adapt everything to keep the quality consistent and then if you afterwards have to adapt back again into a game... Well, let's just say it is a lot of work. And since I don't think you are understanding what i am trying to say here. (That might just as well be my less than perfect english). I am not saying that a certain media have inherit quality in themselves, but certain types of narratives does make for a better quality story in certain media and if an adaptation is tried 1:1 it will drop the quality of the narrative.

A comic does not do it with pure writing. My point is there is more then one way to do the character tone and felling. One media is not better then another in doing that. The difference is how it's translated and the is up to the veiwers comperihention. Even animated media can do that badly. And translation is never 1:1, it's based on the understanding of the view and that is relative. Hearing her voice and imagining her voice is not a drop of quality. It's a form of translation.
And getting that across in a comic is easy being that word bubble is not the only tool the comic can use. Flirting is not just done with voice.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

I have already answered everything you argued against in the bolded part. What from those do you not understand? I am beginning to be at loss as to how I should write more clear:(

And my awnser al ready covered your bold part.  Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.
It matter not that you have to do different things for an eefect to happen. What matters is the results. How you do thing and what they are made of does not effect quality , it's how they are made.

Like Leonardos lost supper mural. In it's day it was a master peice but it was made badly and it quality suffered and looks like mud today with out it's repainting.
It 's not what it's made of it's how it's made that defines quality.

[Fredward]

esper wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Just because you don't know a character's full background doesn't make that character inconsistent. You work with what you know. In real life people will always keep some secrets from you, it's the same here. That doesn't make their feelings for you less, nor their guilt (if applicable). It's just silly to want to know everything about a character, their lives don't revolve around you. Isabela's less so than most.

It is not about their lives revolving around the player character. It is about the player enjoying the story.

Yet clearly some people's enjoyment hinges off the character's relationship vis a vis the player. I enjoyed Isabela's story just fine. Learning about her drowning the slaves did not change my opinion of her because I know she regrets it. And even if it DID change my opinion of her that would still not be character inconsistency. That would be me getting another peace of the puzzle, I may hate the picture the puzzle has made but the picture didn't magically shift from a unicorn to the deathstar.

An example of character inconsistency would be showing Isabela gleefully hurling more slaves into the ocean after this whole exposition. That would be going directly against the lessons she has (apparently) learned during her stay with Hawke and the Qunari.

[Han Shot First]

wcholcombe wrote...

Good grief people, she is a pirate living in a middle/dark ages world with magic. Money is what motivates her. I like her character, but I like her because she is dark. She is realistic. Seriously a female pirate captain at that time? This isn't the dread pirate roberts will talking about. There are few if any lines that Isabella won't cross. Does she regret crossing them? Sure. Like most people does it eventually reach a point where she can't do it anymore? Possibly. Heck, the man who wrote the song "Amazing Grace" was a captain on a Slave ship for most of his life and so regretted what he had done he became a preacher who couldn't stand to be in the dark.

Well said.

That Isabela murders slaves in one moment and frees them the next is not an inconsistency. People sometimes change, and the murder of the slaves is shown to be linked to Isabela's later decision to free them. It is character development and it isn't unrealistic.

Another real world example would be Ernest Thompson Seton.

Seton had been hired by ranchers to hunt down the last remaining 'outlaw' wolf pack remaining in the Currumpaw Valley of New Mexico. It was the 1890s and wolves were not seen as noble creatures worthy of conservation, but  rather as vicious pests standing in the way of civilization and the taming of the West. The natural prey of wolves had already been depleted by settlers and the wolves turned to hunting rancher's livestock. The ranchers had tried multiple times without success to hunt or trap the pack, but led by a cunning alpha named Lobo, the pack always managed to escape or evade efforts to hunt or trap them.

Seton initially faced the same difficulties and a planned two week hunt lasted months, without success. Finally he succeeded by exploiting a weakness of Lobo: his devotion for his mate Blanca. Seton managed to trap and kill Blanca, and use her body to lure Lobo into a trap. When Seton went to finish off Lobo in his trap however, he couldn't do it. Over the course of those months he had grown to admire his cunning adversaries and their bravery and devotion to each other. Rather than kill Lobo Seton took him back to his ranch, but it was too late, and Lobo died of his injuries.  (Though according to Seton, the wolf simply gave up the desire to live out of a broken-heart)

Despite having helped eliminate wolves from the American Southwest, the few months spent hunting Lobo and his band had a profound impact on Seton and he came to regret it, and mourn the vanishing wilderness. He would go on to write a short story about his hunt called Lobo the King of the Currumpaw, portraying himself as the villain and Lobo as the protagonist. It became a world wide hit and helped change people's attitudes towards natural conservation. Seton wrote, "Ever since Lobo my sincerest wish has been to impress upon people that each of our native wild creatures is in itself a precious heritage that we have no right to destroy, or put beyond the reach of our children."  He also lobbied for some of the first environmental legislation in the United States protecting animals, and played a role in the creation of America's national parks.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 17 septembre 2013 - 08:31 .

[Ironic Discordia]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Just because you don't know a character's full background doesn't make that character inconsistent. You work with what you know. In real life people will always keep some secrets from you, it's the same here. That doesn't make their feelings for you less, nor their guilt (if applicable). It's just silly to want to know everything about a character, their lives don't revolve around you. Isabela's less so than most.

It does if it's something that makes the experience of knowing the character in the game feel very different than otherwise. Part of my concern is on a meta level for the player. If the game presents something to you about a character then out of game materials should not turn it on it's head.

But that's obviously subjective. Some players listened to what Isabela was saying, looked at what she was and how she acted, and decided that a pirate in a 'dark fantasy' setting who lived a life that included regrets and mistakes had probably done some awful things. Those people not so surprised to learn she'd saved herself by throwing slaves overboard. Other people seemed to interpret her as a Jack Sparrow, romanticized concept of a pirate and were thus surprised by the comcis.

[esper]

Ironic Discordia wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Ironic Discordia wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

This discussion raises another point...

Gamers complain that games talk down to them and that games assume people are idiots, but we clearly here have people that think the game lied to them yet others (myself included) think everything revealed was more than hinted at by the game itself...

So what is a developer to do?

(I am not personally shocked by this revaltion, but I still feel the need to comment on this).

DO NOT MAKE THESE BOOKS/COMICS.

Some information should be in the game or not be at all.

Sorry but I don't get why it's a problem if it's done in a comic. It's not an issue of quality it more of an issue of effert of the fan to read said comic.

I don't even have these things avaiable to me in my country. And I refuse to touch them even if I did because we have been told that these books/comics are:

Non-canon (yes I know they happen anyway, if they can, but not in the same way, and I am not going to make the excerise of how would this comic take place if AListair is dead for example).

We have been told they are not necessary to read.

Because of the two above limitation, everything the writer deems important about and event/character/you name it, needs to be in the game in some form or else it simply should not affect anything the player is asked to make choices about.

The second thing is Isabella in comic is not Isabella in game, she simply cannot be the same character because no matter how good a writer you have the writing style is differnet and you can only 'come close'.

There is a reason that adaptations are hellish to make.

dgaider.tumblr.com/post/60455326879/valerie1972-myrandacousland

According to the lead writer of the series, they are canon. The information presented is factual within the game world, even if the event don't play out the same way. (Much like the Dark Ritual. That's a factual thing that happens in game but will not play out in every playthrough, because it didn't happen in every playthrough.) They aren't required reading, because the creative team can't assume
anyone has read them. Any information they want to bring out of the
novels, comics, or World of Thedas book will have to be reintroduced in
game, but that doesn't change the fact that the information in the
comics is factual within the game world.

That is Isabela in the comic, whether people like that or not. The comics were written by the lead writer of the Dragon Age series, who probably consulted with Isabela's writer but is still the lead writer.

Read it again.
"You say “canon” and some people take it as “this will override all the decisions I’ve made in my game” — which is not true. It’d be nice if the comics and novels could adapt to fit the choices the reader made in their game, but they can’t. Because they’re not videogames. This means that one version of the possible timelines must be selected for the given piece of fiction, one which may not match your own.If it doesn’t match your own, does that mean it didn’t happen in “your” world? Possibly. The events of the comics couldn’t have happened, for instance, if Alistair died during the events of DAO. Or they may have happened slightly differently, if Alistair wasn’t King of Ferelden."
Yes it is there stories but they do not undo what you did in your game. It matter not if it's factual or not.  Reguardless, knowing about the info or not does not effect the game.

I have already answered that in the bolded.


The comics are non-canon to the game, because they do not happen the same way in the game world unless the game world fullfill specific requirements.

Similair events happen, yes, but it is not the same. And I am not going to play the game of 'How does Alistair goes to find his father if he is dead' - that is bioware's job.

"But is what’s presented in the comics and novels otherwise canonical?
Yes. This means that the characters and information presented is all
factual and true, and could conceivably play into future Dragon Age
titles if we wanted to— particularly the things that don’t
depend on your personal game’s timeline. That really is Bianca. That
really is Isabela’s backstory. Maevaris Tilani really does exist, and
Sten of DAO really is the new Arishok (presuming he’s alive).How can that be? Because it’s not fanfiction. It’s official, and I am
the Lead Writer of the Dragon Age franchise and have a great deal of
sway in determining its narrative direction (as well as the direction of
all its characters).Someone might not like what I’ve done with the comics or novels (and
I’m sorry if that’s the case— I try my best, as does all of my team… who
I always consult, incidentally, when their pieces of the lore intersect
with what I’m working on), but there’s no reason to disregard the
legitimacy of the works insofar as how they add to the existing canon
beyond being an a**hole about it.Which some people like to be, when they don’t like something. Me too, sometimes. In this case, however, it’s simply incorrect."

 

I think you're missing the point. All of the information presented in the comics and books is factual. Everything they present about Maric, the tease about Bianca, Isabela's backstory. That's what canon means here. At this point, I'm pretty sure we're arguing semantics.
Granted, the events that transpire may not happen in the same way. If Alistair's dead, he doesn't find his father. End of story (except for whatever awful things Aurelian Titus gets up to that may cause problems down the line). If Alistair's not king? Things might play out differently. In that sense, there's some leeway. The events themselves are subject to change, but all of the facts behind why those events transpire are still there. That's still Isabela's backstory. The fact that the comics' plots may play out differently or not at all based on the player's world state doesn't change the legimitacy of the other information.

No I think you are missing the point of what I am saying:

If a game has exactly the same 'plot flags' as the story the comic happens as read. If not, the story of the comic changes - this makes the comic non-canon.

Now this doesn't means that the event don't happens, but they happens differently and thus the story as presented in comic is not canon.


If any of these events is important to future da-narratives then it is bioware's job, not mine, to tell the 'what if' versions on the comic in game. Just as it is bioware's (since it is stresses that each installment is standalone) to convery the important information of the comics to the games.

Either a story is canon or it isn't. If it is important for the story to have certain events, such as Marrics fate, canon in game. Then it is bioware's job to present it. Of course if the fate of Marric isn't important to the game, then wherever it is canon or not is completely irrellevant (at least ot me).

[leaguer of one]

d4eaming wrote...

This brings to my mind Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. In Wizard and Glass, we see Roland, the "hero", more or less sacrifice everyone around him, including his friends. This is a major defining part of who he is, and shows the extremes he will go to in order to complete his mission.

If Wizard and Glass had not been part of the narrative, his shrug off of his friends in the final book might not have made sense. We already know Roland is kind of a jerk, but letting his friends die? He did it with Jake in the first book, and even King was reportedly very upset and shocked by it. Even then, we can assume Roland was very desperate, and wouldn't necessarily do it again. Then we find out in Wizard and Glass that no, Roland has always been an ****. A heroic ****, but an **** nonetheless.

At least Susannah gets to call him out on it before she flips off to another dimension, but we're not shocked by what he does or how he reacts. I can imagine the even greater uproar if fans didn't know about his past when those events occur.

Hawke doesn't ever really get to call Isabela out on her past. For me, it's souring a character I already had trouble identifying with to find out she commited a horror that, had I known, or my Hawke had known, she might not have ever been recruited, or she might have been handed off to the Qunari, because that act is just so despicable. Oh, she regrets it. Tell that to the slaves that died for her.

Which brings it to the point that this only effect how youfeel about the character. You knowing about them does not effect her character, it effect how you react to the character. Isabela of now will stay the same reguardless of if you know about her past or not. It does not define the person, it effect how you feel about that person.

This is not an inconsistancy.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

The argument about whether it's in or out of character is subjective, I suppose. But the game itself never implied that she did. The fact that it happened and she persistently hides it makes the events of DA 2 seem different. Not only is there secret atrocity in her past where there wasn't before, but now she decieves Hawke ans company when she hadn't before.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 17 septembre 2013 - 08:34 .

[d4eaming]

leaguer of one wrote...

d4eaming wrote...

This brings to my mind Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. In Wizard and Glass, we see Roland, the "hero", more or less sacrifice everyone around him, including his friends. This is a major defining part of who he is, and shows the extremes he will go to in order to complete his mission.

If Wizard and Glass had not been part of the narrative, his shrug off of his friends in the final book might not have made sense. We already know Roland is kind of a jerk, but letting his friends die? He did it with Jake in the first book, and even King was reportedly very upset and shocked by it. Even then, we can assume Roland was very desperate, and wouldn't necessarily do it again. Then we find out in Wizard and Glass that no, Roland has always been an ****. A heroic ****, but an **** nonetheless.

At least Susannah gets to call him out on it before she flips off to another dimension, but we're not shocked by what he does or how he reacts. I can imagine the even greater uproar if fans didn't know about his past when those events occur.

Hawke doesn't ever really get to call Isabela out on her past. For me, it's souring a character I already had trouble identifying with to find out she commited a horror that, had I known, or my Hawke had known, she might not have ever been recruited, or she might have been handed off to the Qunari, because that act is just so despicable. Oh, she regrets it. Tell that to the slaves that died for her.

Which brings it to the point that this only effect how youfeel about the character. You knowing about them does not effect her character, it effect how you react to the character. Isabela of now will stay the same reguardless of if you know about her past or not. It does not define the person, it effect how you feel about that person.

This is not an inconsistancy.

I'm not claiming it's inconsistent. I can totally see her doing it.

It's still souring, for me, and makes me dislike her character more than I already do, and feel perhaps a bit betrayed for having information withheld. I don't have a single Hawke that would just merrily accepted her "I changed" spiel if they knew what she'd really done. I could perhaps find a Hawke who would, but I don't generally play characters that I dislike.

[Dutchess]

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Just because you don't know a character's full background doesn't make that character inconsistent. You work with what you know. In real life people will always keep some secrets from you, it's the same here. That doesn't make their feelings for you less, nor their guilt (if applicable). It's just silly to want to know everything about a character, their lives don't revolve around you. Isabela's less so than most.

It is not about their lives revolving around the player character. It is about the player enjoying the story.

And the player does not need to know every detail going on to enjoy the story. A person can enjoy da:o with out reading stone throne and enjoy DA:A with out reading DA: THE CALLING. They can enjoy DA2 with out playing DAO.

It's not just a detail, okay? It's not like what's her favorite food or her favorite color or which position she likes best. It's about a very important, gruesome event that stains the entire character for me and the experiences I've had with her. For me, this changes everything about her, and the game. It feels like the game has actively deceived me. I have already devoted a long post to explain why, and still people throw nonsense around like that it's "a detail" and that "the character's life doesn't revolve around you". I know all that. I don't think it's fair to dismiss this as a trivial thing, because I honestly feel that it's not.

[AngryFrozenWater]

leaguer of one wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

@leaguer of one: What is that supposed to mean? You mean I have to buy the merchandise because DA2 also relies on the story of DA:O and that DA:I relies on both? As in you have to buy other products to enjoy the latest? It's obvious to me that previous titles are the building blocks for the next titles. I bought them. And maybe I'll buy DA:I, because it finally includes bow strings (pun intended). I just do not want to buy anything outside of these games. I am gamer, not a stockholder, not a milk cow, and not a comic reader.

No, what I mean is the what ever story is in the comic will be retold to the player in game reguardless. The difference is with the comic you witness it as a 3rd person reading a story. In game it's just told to you  by a 3rd person.
You don't need to buy the comic to know what happens, it will be retold to you later.

It will not need to be retold in the game. It needs to be told in the game. For all intents and purposes that merchandise does not exist to me. If it drops into the game in a non-intrusive way then that's fine. If not then I am not willing to buy whatever merchandise is required to get the missing information. But I won't derail the topic any longer. I don't mind if you do not comprehend my point, BTW.

[esper]

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...



You keep missing my point. It is not about what the character knows. It is about what the player knows. Player exist on a different level of... abstraction than the characters. That means they experience the story differently, They know more. They get involved differently. This has to do with players enjoyment of the game, not in character knowlegde. And if the extra materials is not required, then everything important from that material has to make it into the game. Else it affects the players ability to play the game in a enjoyable way.

Media has to do with quality. If you translate directly from one media to the next, the adaption will be of bad quality. It is not just control and pacing. It is everything, because nothing works in the same way. A comics visual does not move around, like dragon ages visual does, because they are standing still pictures. You do not write the character in the same way, it is not possible. Bad adaptation are the ones that think they can get away with only control and pacing when translating a game. You cannot.

How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about.
What about her thoughts, should they be avaiable in the comics?
How about how she moves? How she fights?
All these things have to be adapted to get a character that comes 'close to' Isabella, but a 1:1 is impossible.

And what the player know does not matter. The story is not made or written to take in part with what the player knows. It's written and made in consideration that the pc is ignorante. You not knowing about past event is not going to change the game. The fact that new players can come in any game proves that point.

And no media had nothing to do with quality. How media is made is what effects quality. And yes it is just control and pacing. The only differnce is the view is not interaction with the event in the comic and can't effect them. The only difference with how character is written with a comic and a game is that in a game the character wait around for you to interact with them and you choosing the pace while in a comic they don't. You can easily write the character the same way. The differnece is pacing and control.

"How do you represent Isabella's tone of voice in a comic for example. With different fonts, types of writings, body gestures - This is important to think about."
Voice is not the only way to convye tone. It can be done with pure writing. Body lauguge can also be conveded with writing, even more so with an illustration. The fact that the production is differnet and how something is convey does not make one quality less or make it impossible for the say storytelling style to be used. The diffence in the end is still just pacing and control.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

Yes, it can be done with pure writing (Which btw is not a good idea in a comic). But it will never be the same as in game and a good change it will not be as effective. You have to understand: A book and a comic can for exmaple describe her voice. It can say thing like: 'Said Isabella flirtaously' But reading that is not the same as hearing. So when adapting you have to ask: 
How do I get flirtaous across best: Should I draw Isabella's speech bubble in a differnet shape/colours/text types - perhaps a heart form. Should I hope that  Isabella's body langue is powerfull enough on its own to get flirtatous across. How about those moment where she fight and flirts... how do I get that across? Ect, ect...

And what about non-Isabella character where body langue and tone does not match? What do I do with them?

Comics don't use the same 'langue' as games when giving information to
the consumer, so they have to translate the whole character not just
tidbit.

It does make the quality less if you go for the 1:1 translation. That is my point. You have to adapt everything to keep the quality consistent and then if you afterwards have to adapt back again into a game... Well, let's just say it is a lot of work. And since I don't think you are understanding what i am trying to say here. (That might just as well be my less than perfect english). I am not saying that a certain media have inherit quality in themselves, but certain types of narratives does make for a better quality story in certain media and if an adaptation is tried 1:1 it will drop the quality of the narrative.

A comic does not do it with pure writing. My point is there is more then one way to do the character tone and felling. One media is not better then another in doing that. The difference is how it's translated and the is up to the veiwers comperihention. Even animated media can do that badly. And translation is never 1:1, it's based on the understanding of the view and that is relative. Hearing her voice and imagining her voice is not a drop of quality. It's a form of translation.
And getting that across in a comic is easy being that word bubble is not the only tool the comic can use. Flirting is not just done with voice.

Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.

I have already answered everything you argued against in the bolded part. What from those do you not understand? I am beginning to be at loss as to how I should write more clear:(

And my awnser al ready covered your bold part.  Media does not effect quality. It effect effort and production.
It matter not that you have to do different things for an eefect to happen. What matters is the results. How you do thing and what they are made of does not effect quality , it's how they are made.

Like Leonardos lost supper mural. In it's day it was a master peice but it was made badly and it quality suffered and looks like mud today with out it's repainting.
It 's not what it's made of it's how it's made that defines quality.

The media does affect the quality of a narrative. Depending on the narrative some media's is inferior, some narratives can be 'translated' with good people in control, some narratives even benefit from a transion to a new media. But the media is important, because each media tells a narrative differently and have different tools at their disposal.

Lenardos lost mural is not suddenly rewritten as a book. There in lies the difference.

[esper]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

The argument about whether it's in or out of character is subjective, I suppose. But the game itself never implied that she did. The fact that it happened and she persistently hides it makes the events of DA 2 seem different. Not only is there secret atrocity in her past where there wasn't before, but now she decieves Hawke ans company when she hadn't before.

Exactly, thank you for saying it in simpler words than me.:happy:'

It is not how the in characters experience the events of the game. It is how the player does. And if something is likely to affect the players experience of the game, it needs to be told in game.

[leaguer of one]

renjility wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

esper wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Just because you don't know a character's full background doesn't make that character inconsistent. You work with what you know. In real life people will always keep some secrets from you, it's the same here. That doesn't make their feelings for you less, nor their guilt (if applicable). It's just silly to want to know everything about a character, their lives don't revolve around you. Isabela's less so than most.

It is not about their lives revolving around the player character. It is about the player enjoying the story.

And the player does not need to know every detail going on to enjoy the story. A person can enjoy da:o with out reading stone throne and enjoy DA:A with out reading DA: THE CALLING. They can enjoy DA2 with out playing DAO.

It's not just a detail, okay? It's not like what's her favorite food or her favorite color or which position she likes best. It's about a very important, gruesome event that stains the entire character for me and the experiences I've had with her. For me, this changes everything about her, and the game. It feels like the game has actively deceived me. I have already devoted a long post to explain why, and still people throw nonsense around like that it's "a detail" and that "the character's life doesn't revolve around you". I know all that. I don't think it's fair to dismiss this as a trivial thing, because I honestly feel that it's not.

And that still does not effect who she is now. She does not becaome a different person when you learn about this. How you react to her changes. 

[Ironic Discordia]

esper wrote...

No I think you are missing the point of what I am saying:

If a game has exactly the same 'plot flags' as the story the comic happens as read. If not, the story of the comic changes - this makes the comic non-canon.

Now this doesn't means that the event don't happens, but they happens differently and thus the story as presented in comic is not canon.


If any of these events is important to future da-narratives then it is bioware's job, not mine, to tell the 'what if' versions on the comic in game. Just as it is bioware's (since it is stresses that each installment is standalone) to convery the important information of the comics to the games.

Either a story is canon or it isn't. If it is important for the story to have certain events, such as Marrics fate, canon in game. Then it is bioware's job to present it. Of course if the fate of Marric isn't important to the game, then wherever it is canon or not is completely irrellevant (at least ot me).

We are, in fact, arguing semantics here. The definition of 'canon' I'm using is "a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works." In that sense, and per the lead writer of the series, the comics are canon. I don't personally see a point in continuing to debate the semantics here when neither of us is going to change our opinion.

[leaguer of one]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

@leaguer of one: What is that supposed to mean? You mean I have to buy the merchandise because DA2 also relies on the story of DA:O and that DA:I relies on both? As in you have to buy other products to enjoy the latest? It's obvious to me that previous titles are the building blocks for the next titles. I bought them. And maybe I'll buy DA:I, because it finally includes bow strings (pun intended). I just do not want to buy anything outside of these games. I am gamer, not a stockholder, not a milk cow, and not a comic reader.

No, what I mean is the what ever story is in the comic will be retold to the player in game reguardless. The difference is with the comic you witness it as a 3rd person reading a story. In game it's just told to you  by a 3rd person.
You don't need to buy the comic to know what happens, it will be retold to you later.

It will not need to be retold in the game. It needs to be told in the game. For all intents and purposes that merchandise does not exist to me. If it drops into the game in a non-intrusive way then that's fine. If not then I am not willing to buy whatever merchandise is required to get the missing information. But I won't derail the topic any longer. I don't mind if you do not comprehend my point, BTW.

But you don't need to know about it . Your pc will be ignorant of it. Reguardless it you know about it or not, your pc will hear about the first tiem with the retelling.

[esper]

Ironic Discordia wrote...

esper wrote...

No I think you are missing the point of what I am saying:

If a game has exactly the same 'plot flags' as the story the comic happens as read. If not, the story of the comic changes - this makes the comic non-canon.

Now this doesn't means that the event don't happens, but they happens differently and thus the story as presented in comic is not canon.


If any of these events is important to future da-narratives then it is bioware's job, not mine, to tell the 'what if' versions on the comic in game. Just as it is bioware's (since it is stresses that each installment is standalone) to convery the important information of the comics to the games.

Either a story is canon or it isn't. If it is important for the story to have certain events, such as Marrics fate, canon in game. Then it is bioware's job to present it. Of course if the fate of Marric isn't important to the game, then wherever it is canon or not is completely irrellevant (at least ot me).

We are, in fact, arguing semantics here. The definition of 'canon' I'm using is "a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works." In that sense, and per the lead writer of the series, the comics are canon. I don't personally see a point in continuing to debate the semantics here when neither of us is going to change our opinion.

Well, as I study narratives, the semantics are quite important, so I am curious what do you do when you have the 'what if' scenerious. Those are often sanctioned or accepted by the creators. Yet they are strictly non-canon in universe.

[wcholcombe]

Ok, are we seriously arguing it is inconsistent because Isabella didn't completely open up that yes she had murdered hundreds of slaves? Seriously?

Even if you were in love with someone, how willing would you be to just throw that out there.

She obviously lives with a lot of guilt, but from the game standpoint, there was no reason for her to just throw out there-"Hey before you knew me I killed hundreds of slaves to save my life. Lets get some breakfast love." Good grief, even if you romance Isabella, it isn't like ya'll live happily ever after, she has killed one husband already, I don't see her sticking with Hawke long term either. Especially sense, guess what Hawke dissappears.

[Ironic Discordia]

esper wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

The argument about whether it's in or out of character is subjective, I suppose. But the game itself never implied that she did. The fact that it happened and she persistently hides it makes the events of DA 2 seem different. Not only is there secret atrocity in her past where there wasn't before, but now she decieves Hawke ans company when she hadn't before.

Exactly, thank you for saying it in simpler words than me.:happy:'

It is not how the in characters experience the events of the game. It is how the player does. And if something is likely to affect the players experience of the game, it needs to be told in game.

Maybe it's the fact that I've never had Isabela stick around that colors my opinion of her. The character I experienced was a self-centered pirate who had no trouble lying to a so called friend and leaving a city to burn so she could save herself. She admitted to having her husband assassinated in Origins and expressed some level of having a past she regretted in 2. The only thing that would've surprised me if she'd told Hawke about the first slave incident would be the simple fact that she told Hawke at all. That's not who she is. I never got the impression that she was the type to openly discuss the things that manage to make her uncomfortable.

[esper]

wcholcombe wrote...

Ok, are we seriously arguing it is inconsistent because Isabella didn't completely open up that yes she had murdered hundreds of slaves? Seriously?

Even if you were in love with someone, how willing would you be to just throw that out there.

She obviously lives with a lot of guilt, but from the game standpoint, there was no reason for her to just throw out there-"Hey before you knew me I killed hundreds of slaves to save my life. Lets get some breakfast love." Good grief, even if you romance Isabella, it isn't like ya'll live happily ever after, she has killed one husband already, I don't see her sticking with Hawke long term either. Especially sense, guess what Hawke dissappears.

First of Isabella don't have to tell Hawke. Someone has to inform the player.

Say someone like Castilion (wasn't that his name?) going 'What right do you have to free my slaves, considering you drowned yours'.

See - the player is now informed.

[Fredward]

esper wrote...
It is not how the in characters experience the events of the game. It is how the player does. And if something is likely to affect the players experience of the game, it needs to be told in game.

No. It. Does. Not.

Really what this seems to boil down to is that ya'll want ALL the meta-knowledge. It is not okay for you to deal with the info you currently have on hand. Which is fine, we're all entitled to our preferred playstyle. It is not, however, a flaw in the writing or a flaw in characterization to not grant you all your preferred meta-knowledge. The writers can choose to let a character comfortably stagnate and let them remain in the neatly labelled boxes they have been placed in by the players or they can choose to evolve and develop that character further. Whether these revelations please you in that they make for a more realistic and evolving person or disgust you because the character no longer meshes with how you want them to be is all up to you. Feel whatever you want.

As long as we can agree that it's not a mistake to choose not to drop a character's development because the direction it takes might make someone uncomfortable.

Seriously. DG needs to add "inconsistency" to his list of words fans misuse. Inconsistency ≠ "my opinion of the character changed because they did something I didn't like and no one told me beforehand."

[leaguer of one]

esper wrote...

Ironic Discordia wrote...

esper wrote...

No I think you are missing the point of what I am saying:

If a game has exactly the same 'plot flags' as the story the comic happens as read. If not, the story of the comic changes - this makes the comic non-canon.

Now this doesn't means that the event don't happens, but they happens differently and thus the story as presented in comic is not canon.


If any of these events is important to future da-narratives then it is bioware's job, not mine, to tell the 'what if' versions on the comic in game. Just as it is bioware's (since it is stresses that each installment is standalone) to convery the important information of the comics to the games.

Either a story is canon or it isn't. If it is important for the story to have certain events, such as Marrics fate, canon in game. Then it is bioware's job to present it. Of course if the fate of Marric isn't important to the game, then wherever it is canon or not is completely irrellevant (at least ot me).

We are, in fact, arguing semantics here. The definition of 'canon' I'm using is "a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works." In that sense, and per the lead writer of the series, the comics are canon. I don't personally see a point in continuing to debate the semantics here when neither of us is going to change our opinion.

Well, as I study narratives, the semantics are quite important, so I am curious what do you do when you have the 'what if' scenerious. Those are often sanctioned or accepted by the creators. Yet they are strictly non-canon in universe.

You who thinks media effects quality study narratives? If your going to argue on sematics, understand that it can be relative.
 You seem to argue on the term that it's subjective only.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 17 septembre 2013 - 08:57 .

[esper]

Ironic Discordia wrote...

esper wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

The argument about whether it's in or out of character is subjective, I suppose. But the game itself never implied that she did. The fact that it happened and she persistently hides it makes the events of DA 2 seem different. Not only is there secret atrocity in her past where there wasn't before, but now she decieves Hawke ans company when she hadn't before.

Exactly, thank you for saying it in simpler words than me.:happy:'

It is not how the in characters experience the events of the game. It is how the player does. And if something is likely to affect the players experience of the game, it needs to be told in game.

Maybe it's the fact that I've never had Isabela stick around that colors my opinion of her. The character I experienced was a self-centered pirate who had no trouble lying to a so called friend and leaving a city to burn so she could save herself. She admitted to having her husband assassinated in Origins and expressed some level of having a past she regretted in 2. The only thing that would've surprised me if she'd told Hawke about the first slave incident would be the simple fact that she told Hawke at all. That's not who she is. I never got the impression that she was the type to openly discuss the things that manage to make her uncomfortable.

Ohh.. We can definitly agree that I am personally not suprised. I always found her sudden stance slaves weird. But considering that her whole story arc was about the consequence of her freeing those slaves, the fact that it was an act of guilt and not just a sudden attack of morale is important, espically because she does have weird attacks of morality in game when it comes to freedom. So while I don't think it is inconsistent with her character, it is an information that should be avaiable for the players in game, to understand Isabella's story arc.

And there is still nobody saying Isabella have to out her own lie. Why did the slaver whose slaves she freed and who we meet up with in act 3 not throw it in her face? It would be an easy way?