161 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Killdren88 wrote...
Just remember Dave. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get buthurt.

People expect their decisions to stick and not be overriden by something later? Madness, I say.

While I never personally did this (mainly for a sense of necessity - unless you're a rogue, you have to wait for Zevran and level him up a few times to get the proper lockpicking skills) I can see exactly why it's so frustrating to people who offed Leliana only to see her rise from the grave in DA2.

Perhaps it just requires a more smartly written scene, so it's not completely out of nowhere when it happens in the sequel.

I don't know how smartly written you can make

"Yeah I got my head chopped off, 'twas only a scratch"

[The Elder King]

I doubt that they're going to adress the decapitation. They're going to consider that Leliana was 'killed' without a finishing move, probably.

[DonaldFwump]

It never showed her getting her head chopped off unless you happened to get the kill animation that did so. In which case, that is completely random and has no bearing on whether or not a character actually got decapitated. Now, LOGHAIN getting decapitated is something different as it was a cinematic. Regardless of writing, you may not want to spoil the fact that she's alive (you could have left her bleeding to death but she made it). But your warden wouldn't know that.  So I'm assuming unless there's an actual cinematic, showing your warden stab her in the heart, slit her throat, put her on the chopping block and lop off her head, show her being pull apart by horses etc etc that, Bioware can kind of say anything. Because at that point it's head cannon as to what happens to them. It can be a bummer to a lot of people but...well...tough?

Modifié par DonaldFwump, 10 décembre 2013 - 05:25 .

[Killdren88]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Killdren88 wrote...
Just remember Dave. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get buthurt.

People expect their decisions to stick and not be overriden by something later? Madness, I say.

While I never personally did this (mainly for a sense of necessity - unless you're a rogue, you have to wait for Zevran and level him up a few times to get the proper lockpicking skills) I can see exactly why it's so frustrating to people who offed Leliana only to see her rise from the grave in DA2.

Perhaps it just requires a more smartly written scene, so it's not completely out of nowhere when it happens in the sequel.

Isn't leaving her for dead enough? People like to think their wardens are slick experts who can see through any ruse when they aren't. They are recurits who know little in these regards.

Human nole/Dwarf Noble- Yeah you know how to fight but in a controled enviroment.

City Elves- You were taught how to defend yourself by your mothers not trained to fight bards or Assaians.

Dalish Elves- You were taught how to hunt game and fight off bandits. You have never came across a bard before.

Mages- Show me a book in that tower that gives a detailed description on Bards.

Modifié par Killdren88, 10 décembre 2013 - 05:24 .

[Paul E Dangerously]

Steelcan wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Killdren88 wrote...
Just remember Dave. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get buthurt.

People expect their decisions to stick and not be overriden by something later? Madness, I say.

While I never personally did this (mainly for a sense of necessity - unless you're a rogue, you have to wait for Zevran and level him up a few times to get the proper lockpicking skills) I can see exactly why it's so frustrating to people who offed Leliana only to see her rise from the grave in DA2.

Perhaps it just requires a more smartly written scene, so it's not completely out of nowhere when it happens in the sequel.

I don't know how smartly written you can make

"Yeah I got my head chopped off, 'twas only a scratch"

Deathblow animations don't technically count. There are any number of scenes where you can chop a person's head off during the fight, even if it's only "fight until you disable them".

[Steelcan]

Killdren88 wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Killdren88 wrote...
Just remember Dave. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get buthurt.

People expect their decisions to stick and not be overriden by something later? Madness, I say.

While I never personally did this (mainly for a sense of necessity - unless you're a rogue, you have to wait for Zevran and level him up a few times to get the proper lockpicking skills) I can see exactly why it's so frustrating to people who offed Leliana only to see her rise from the grave in DA2.

Perhaps it just requires a more smartly written scene, so it's not completely out of nowhere when it happens in the sequel.

Isn't leaving her for dead enough? People like to think their wardens are slick experts who can see through any ruse when they aren't. They are recurits who know little in these regards.

Human nole/Dwarf Noble- Yeah you know how to fight but in a controled enviroment.

City Elves- You were taught how to defend yourself by your mothers not trained to fight bards or Assaians.

Dalish Elves- You were taught how to hunt game and fight off bandits. You have never came across a bard before.

Mages- Show me a book in that tower that gives a detailed description on Bards.

you can tend to notice when someone is dead...  I don't think bards can play possum

[Steelcan]

fine I'll alter it

"Yeah I got lacerated/mauled/burnt/frozen/etc... 'twas only a scratch"

[DonaldFwump]

The black knight merely had a flesh wound. Don't hate

[David Gaider]

Killdren88 wrote...
Just remember David. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get butthurt.

Decisions are included because they affect the game they're in. They're not created specifically to carry into future games--we could have had no decisions carry over between games, and that still wouldn't affect their relevance to the game in which they appeared.

In this case, as I've said many times before, decisions from earlier games will have varying levels of impact in DAI. The decision to kill Leliana (which, incidentally, is not the decision you're offered, but rather a reaction to it) is not disregarded as it did happen and will be reacted to.

Is that not what some people wanted? Sure, obviously, but that doesn't change the fact that it still happened, and doesn't mean there still aren't other decisions which cause more divergent reactivity (including character deaths). If some want to harp on this particular piece of reactivity as if it unravels all reality, that's fine. I get why they want what they want--fans tend to want every decision they've made to cause completely divergent effects on the story, regardless of the feasibility of us doing so--but this is how it is.

[Steelcan]

That's a great strength of DA:O, choices affect the game much better than any other. Saving the Anvil has tangible benefits in the game at the Battle of Denerim and I loved it for that.  Siding with the werewolves starts a mission to wipe out the Dalsih, etc...

The trouble is the choices don't import well at all and seem to have a propensity for being retconned in order to fit the next game.

Modifié par Steelcan, 10 décembre 2013 - 05:36 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

SergeantSnookie wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

Looks like someone really has a grudge against Leliana.

Probably stole the OP's lunch money once. 

Probably stole OP's name.

[Killdren88]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Just remember David. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get butthurt.

Its actually a really terrible idea most of the time to bring dead characters back to life.

...I just realized that I have mispoken. What I mean to say is that before you consider giving the option to kill a companion, think very carefully. If you think this character can play a role in future games then don't give the option.

[Usergnome]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

MisanthropePrime wrote...

One thing I would really like to see with the keep is if they could have it so if my warden died in DA:O, the player character of Awakening is the Orlesian Warden. As much as people complain about Leliana returning from the dead, we've been having characters do that for much longer.

Heh... not a bad idea

On Leliana: I assumed it was a bug? If it is intended that she comes back - I dont have a problem with it at all - aslong as we can kill her again in a creative way in DA:IQ. Hopefully slowly, or keeping her prisoner while we destroy the chantry or defile something as sacred as Andrastes ashes. Kinda like with Bane in the newest batman movie. First: Destroy the spirit, then kill them. The most satisfying scenario imaginable to me would be if we could corrupt or kill the maker himself, and watch as Leliana falls down on her knees annihilated by despair and crushed by sorrow. 

You're weird.

[MKDAWUSS]

Killdren88 wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

Just remember David. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get butthurt.

Its actually a really terrible idea most of the time to bring dead characters back to life.

...I just realized that I have mispoken. What I mean to say is that before you consider giving the option to kill a companion, think very carefully. If you think this character can play a role in future games then don't give the option.

I agree with this. Otherwise I basically end up having to minimize casualties for the sake of retcon reduction.

[Fast Jimmy]

Killdren88 wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

Just remember David. Don't give the option to kill off companions unless you have ideas for them for future games. Otherwise people get butthurt.

Its actually a really terrible idea most of the time to bring dead characters back to life.

...I just realized that I have mispoken. What I mean to say is that before you consider giving the option to kill a companion, think very carefully. If you think this character can play a role in future games then don't give the option.

 

That's asinine.

Things for Inquisition aren't hammered down on plot or choices and the game is less than a year out. You expect them to already have detailed plans about every fharacter for DA4 right now, when it may not come out in 5 years? Or a sequel not happen at all?

You need to realize what the import system is - a very small, tiny way to reference past games. It will never be anything more. It CANNOT be anything more. Otherwise it quickly becomes the game itself, where it is doing nothing but creating content from previous games instead of making the game at hand. If you want a game that never ignores any choice or decision you ever made, that's not possible.

This version of the Save Import system is what people will get. Does it tick off players? Obviously. Does it make writing more difficult for the team? Absolutely. Is it worht it in the long run? Debatable. 

[DRTJR]

The real reason the Inquisition is formed is Zombie Leliana eating the Divine's brains and gaining her knowledge thus she rends the veil asunder to feed her need for BRAINS!.

[David Gaider]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Things for Inquisition aren't hammered down on plot or choices and the game is less than a year out. You expect them to already have detailed plans about every fharacter for DA4 right now, when it may not come out in 5 years? Or a sequel not happen at all?

Indeed. Not to mention that, even though we do make plans for future games, plans change all the time. The plan for a game-in-progress generally goes through radical changes before it's done--never mind the plan we have for what follows. Most often these things change for reasons far beyond anything to do with writing.

Even if that weren't the case, decisions are made because they affect things now--we might have the opportunity to go "well, we may need that character in the future so maybe we should leave them alone", but if our biggest consideration was what we might need them for in potential future stories we would never have any decisions in the current game whatsoever. Which is not to say that we toss all decisions out the window, either--treating a few adjustments that need to be made as if they render void all the other permutations we do include is, in my opinion, a bit of an exaggeration for effect.

Which is kind of pointless to mention, I imagine, since many fans simply aren't going to care about our issues when it comes to writing and planning. They see "decisions will have impact on future games" and imagine that means every decision being treated equally and offering complete divergence--and anything short of that, as it affects what they personally want, to be inadequate...as of course we developers could do it if we just a) wrote more, and made a bigger game. Which is not untrue, even if it's unrealistic. But who said they have to be realistic?

You need to realize what the import system is - a very small, tiny way to reference past games. It will never be anything more. It CANNOT be anything more.

Some decisions will have larger effects, and thus are hardly "tiny" in their impact on scope, but perhaps that's accurate when used in comparison to the expectations of some. Either way, our first priority is to make this story and this game work... as it's always been. Which is really as far as this conversation can go.

Modifié par David Gaider, 10 décembre 2013 - 06:57 .

[MKDAWUSS]

But at the same time, shouldn't there also be a case of, "Well, this character might be dead in some stories, time to live with the consequences."? I don't know of too many people who would want to metagame and replay to revise their "canon" just to avoid a retcon down the road.

[David Gaider]

MKDAWUSS wrote...
But at the same time, shouldn't there also be a case of, "Well, this character might be dead in some stories, time to live with the consequences."?

Of course. There are many possibilities for DA2, for instance, that we tossed out simply because the benefits weren't worth the required story convolutions (or the alternative was just as good). Occasionally that's not going to be the case.

[Fast Jimmy]

Some decisions will have larger effects, and thus are hardly "tiny" in their impact on scope, but perhaps that's accurate when used in comparison to the expectations of some. Either way, our first priority is to make thisstory and this game work... as it's always been. Which is really as far as this conversation can go.

I was thinking tiny only in terms of the true difference to the player.

For instance, Tuchanka in ME3 was likely a nightmare to organize - different characters, scenes, options and dialogue were all over the place there. Yet, ultimately, the end result is two or three NPCs dead or alive and that's about it. The world still played out the exact same way, with the exact same end results. The Krogan assisted your war efforts the same, regardless of any choices made, in the third game or the previous ones. Anyone who would have sided with the Krogan beforehand because they felt it was important to secure their help in the upcoming war found that wasn't neccessary at all. The option to save the Krogan or trick them is offered, regardless. The overall story is the same, regardless.

That's what I meant by tiny. The Save Import can't create a different world for any choice. I say that not to belittle the work of anyone, but to try and put it in perspective for those fans who hear "choices import" and think that means the entire world will change. Compared to the world changing, a couple lines of dialogue or a cameo is tiny.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 10 décembre 2013 - 07:22 .

[David Gaider]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
That's what I meant by tiny. The Save Import can't create a different world for any choice. I say that not to belittle the work of anyone, but to try and put it in perspective for those fans who hear "choices import" and think that means the entire world will change. Compared to the world changing, a couple lines of dialogue or a cameo is tiny.

True. We can offer completely divergent plots, and in some cases (where the implications outside of that plot are limited in scope) that's actually a fine idea. If one's expectation runs to the overall story being completely different based on an imported choice, however, they're going to be disappointed. Which, you're right, is not to minimize the work involved to even make the player's individual timeline as consistent as possible (if not truly divergent), and probably why most games don't even attempt it.

Modifié par David Gaider, 10 décembre 2013 - 07:39 .

[Ieldra]

David Gaider wrote...
Which is kind of pointless to mention, I imagine, since many fans simply aren't going to care about our issues when it comes to writing and planning. They see "decisions will have impact on future games" and imagine that means every decision being treated equally and offering complete divergence--and anything short of that, as it affects what they personally want, to be inadequate...as of course we developers could do it if we just a) wrote more, and made a bigger game. Which is not untrue, even if it's unrealistic. But who said they have to be realistic?

Actually, I do care. I find things I dislike much easier to accept if the reasons are explained to me and I understand them. Often, it's the difference between "Why the hell haven't you done things differently?" and a grudging "I still hate it, but I see your point."

Having said that, this only applies if both sides have a point. In this case, ideally the retcon of Leliana's death wouldn't have been necessary, but since we don't live in a world of ideal game development, these things occasionally do happen. Both sides have a valid point. About a design decision that might've gone another way as easily and with equal effort, I tend to be less tolerant if others' preferences are represented but mine are not. For instance, I frequently find my philosophical preferences being thematically linked with evil with no attempt at inclusion, which is extremely annoying, given that most people's *sexual* (read: far less important, and yes, that includes my own) preferences are being represented.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 10 décembre 2013 - 07:49 .