161 réponses à ce sujet

[addiction21]

Conduit0 wrote...

Whoops, you're right, apparently its been far too long since the last time I watched the movie.

Honestly, I think I prefer remembering Andre saying it.

[Fast Jimmy]

addiction21 wrote...

Conduit0 wrote...

Whoops, you're right, apparently its been far too long since the last time I watched the movie.

Honestly, I think I prefer remembering Andre saying it.

Anybody want a peanut?

[Mathias]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

All I'm gonna say is the death of a character loses it's weight if the writer just brings them back later in the story. As much as I loved Dragon Ball Z or Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, those two are strong examples of this. But it becomes flat out disheartening to see the writer bring back a character in the next installment of a story, and his excuse for it is, to put it simply "*eh whatever *shrug*" 

No David you didn't use those exact words, but that's pretty much what it amounts to. I understand that variation in games based on a player's past choices can sometimes be a programming and narrative nightmare, But I hope you can at least take this into consideration in the future. I can easily understand you guys not wanting to attempt to deal with the huge culturally impacting choices, given how difficult it would be to code in future games. But something as simple and yet impacting as the death of a NPC should stick, without question. Outta respect to the player and to the character.

[Wulfram]

http://www.oxforddic.../english/retcon

Oxford Dictionaries wrote...
verb
[with object] (retcons, retconning, retconned)
revise (an aspect of a fictional work) retrospectively, typically by introducing a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events:
I think fans get more upset when characters act blatantly out of established type, or when things get retconned

[DRTJR]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

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 [/i]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 [/i]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 [/i]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.

All I'm gonna say is the death of a character loses it's weight if the writer just brings them back later in the story. As much as I loved Dragon Ball Z or Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, those two are strong examples of this. But it becomes flat out disheartening to see the writer bring back a character in the next installment of a story, and his excuse for it is, to put it simply "*eh whatever *shrug*" 

No David you didn't use those exact words, but that's pretty much what it amounts to. I understand that variation in games based on a player's past choices can sometimes be a programming and narrative nightmare, But I hope you can at least take this into consideration in the future. I can easily understand you guys not wanting to attempt to deal with the huge culturally impacting choices, given how difficult it would be to code in future games. But something as simple and yet impacting as the death of a NPC should stick, without question. Outta respect to the player and to the character.

they spent Search for Spock and Voyage home to get Spock back to where he was in Wrath of Kahn, they Erned their resurrection. Do not dis Wrath of Kahn. I look at liliana's possibilal resurrection as a sighn that there is a very long game being played that we will only be able to grasp at for a while

[Sanunes]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

All I'm gonna say is the death of a character loses it's weight if the writer just brings them back later in the story. As much as I loved Dragon Ball Z or Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, those two are strong examples of this. But it becomes flat out disheartening to see the writer bring back a character in the next installment of a story, and his excuse for it is, to put it simply "*eh whatever *shrug*" 

No David you didn't use those exact words, but that's pretty much what it amounts to. I understand that variation in games based on a player's past choices can sometimes be a programming and narrative nightmare, But I hope you can at least take this into consideration in the future. I can easily understand you guys not wanting to attempt to deal with the huge culturally impacting choices, given how difficult it would be to code in future games. But something as simple and yet impacting as the death of a NPC should stick, without question. Outta respect to the player and to the character.

Isn't the player assuming that Leliana dies or that one of the many ways that our party can resurrect themselves on our behalf isn't used to heal her? All we really know is that Leliana is defeated in combat after we taint the ashes, not that we preform a coup de grace?

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

David Gaider wrote...

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...
I killed Leliana in DA:O, but  Leliana's corpse seems to have been risen by a bloodmage and has been used to infiltrate the seekers of truth in DA:2. Its probably just an oversight or bug with the savegame import

Not a bug. It's intentional that she is still alive.

but please remember the Leliana=DEAD flag in the planned DA:Keep tool

The DA Keep will look for whether you killed her (or attempted to, if you prefer) in DAO, and DAI will react to that. It doesn't mean she's dead in DAI, your desire to kill her and (evidently) stomp on her corpse notwithstanding.

Mr. Gaider I do not neccesarily wish her dead. Only to break her... purely for roleplaying reasons ofcourse *cough* 

Modifié par SomeoneStoleMyName, 11 décembre 2013 - 01:39 .

[Neon Rising Winter]

Was no one else ever taught the basic rule that if you don't see the body, autopsy the body and then burn the body, you don't get to assume they're dead? And even if you do all that there's a good chance they're not.

[TeamLexana]

I just hope Anders/Justice stays dead for peeps that murder knifed him at the end of DA2. No more terrorists for companions either please.

[Iakus]

b0j4ngles wrote...

 I think the frustration that some players have with the Leliana retcon situation is that it feels like another example of an rpg that doesn't support evil player characters.  I'm sure that most players don't make evil decisions, (at least not on their first playthrough) but when we do, we hope that the game takes them seriously.

The choice is to defile the Ashes.  As far as I know, Leliana being dead, alive, or not in the party doesn't change that.  The Sacred Ashes remain defiled.  The "evil" (if that's the term you wish to use) is respected, so far as we know.

As for Leliana's state, that's simply a consequence to that action.  One that doesn't seem to work out as was originally assumed.  I'd say we should wait and see if an explanation is comes along.  If it makes sense, great.  If it's just another Lazarus Project, we can facepalm then.

[Neon Rising Winter]

iakus wrote...

b0j4ngles wrote...

 I think the frustration that some players have with the Leliana retcon situation is that it feels like another example of an rpg that doesn't support evil player characters.  I'm sure that most players don't make evil decisions, (at least not on their first playthrough) but when we do, we hope that the game takes them seriously.

The choice is to defile the Ashes.  As far as I know, Leliana being dead, alive, or not in the party doesn't change that.  The Sacred Ashes remain defiled.  The "evil" (if that's the term you wish to use) is respected, so far as we know.

As for Leliana's state, that's simply a consequence to that action.  One that doesn't seem to work out as was originally assumed.  I'd say we should wait and see if an explanation is comes along.  If it makes sense, great.  If it's just another Lazarus Project, we can facepalm then.

Excellent example of why just because they're dead, burned and autopsied they ain't necessarily dead.

[Nightdragon8]

TeamLexana wrote...

I just hope Anders/Justice stays dead for peeps that murder knifed him at the end of DA2. No more terrorists for companions either please.

its already been confirmed that if you kill Anders in DA2 he is dead. As for Justice its a spirt so it never really "dies" as far as we know.

@David I sort of get what you are saying but, knowing that now we care about our "long term" desiutions. Putting in options to "kill" a character compainion, should be carried over. Now the only way you can write it out to say "Hey they survived" should be done in a way where it is ambiguous to begin with, and force the player to move on in a timely manner. Like the ceiling caveing in. or some such. Even if the character was ordered to go down that hallway and ended up "dieing"

Giving us the first hand option to kill a character and then having them spring back to life, should be seen as bad writing that really the adudeince so far, seems to dislike. So should be avoided yes?

So if like Denarious pops up again in DA:I after we "killed" him in DA2. That would be considered bad.

Basicly to the fans. get off his case cause I think he has learned his lesson. And David I hope you learned that if you are going to be part of a game that gives people options to kill a character, you need to make sure the story can allow them to die by the characters hands. And not cause serious issues later.

[Steelcan]

Now I'm curious as to what Leliana is going to be doing that is so critically important that only she can do and no other character could be created to do the same job.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

I'd just like to add something I feel is important to adress (Note that this post contains DA:O spoilers):
First: Im not that opposed to bringing Leliana back. As Mr. Gaider says, sometimes a story might benefit more overall at such choices. Blizzard did it multiple times. I just thought this was a bug at first. But I see now that I touched an area that seemingly has been discussed to pieces allready.
Now;

As for why its important imo to be able to kill characters like that - look at game of thrones. When you think a character is too important to die - it removes excitement as the plot becomes painfully predictable. Such predictability is a bad thing because it makes a plot BORING.

Why was executing Alistair so fantastic?
Why was being able to kill Wynne and Zevrand and a multitude of other characters a good choice?

Its main reason isnt "cause - evil" but because it gave that WTF moment youd get from the red wedding for example in game of thrones. So it is actually 3 great story elements Bioware provides:

- Removing predictability and thus the "bore". Why is predictability bad? Because gamers have probably mentally exhausted fiction to a part nothing brings that "WOW" moment anymore. Nothing new under the sun and all that. If you can predict the plot, then the plot is not as intelectually stimulating (Though it can ofcourse remain as emotionally stimulating)

- Consequenses that actually matters (You oppose a companion's core values so much that her reaction is brutally realistic) It just destroys any enjoyment for me personally if I do something my companion would kill me over, and the companion instead shrugs its shoulders and goes on. In KOTOR this might happen, but for reasons acceptable by the lore (Force influence)

- It allows people roleplaying evil or moral gray-area characters to have options. Yes, this is important too. Some of us might want to play an "evil" or selfish character. Or someone that thinks "The end justifies the means". Pidgeonholing our characters into a standard "hero" trope is sickening, not because Im a cruel person. But because it removes choice. As for roleplaying evil characters this can have psychological value aswell. You get to experience in a simulation, what such a person might think or WHY such a person does what he/she does. Overall Id say roleplaying an evil character is taking a step in the direction of attaining wisdom and understanding. You want to "feel" and understand why you would do such things. I consider roleplaying evil characters a journey into understanding yourself and others. My previous post may have made me look like a psychopath, but Im as goodhearted and nice as you get it IRL. So why did I say what I did? To provoke abit I guess. But IMO having such choices open (Cruelty vs kindness) - even in a game which represents a simulation of an alter ego, gives realism, understanding and catharsis. 

So to conclude. I hope you guys at bioware allows such drastic reactions, and drastic choices in DA:I. Because from a literary standpoint, Dragon age's allowance to be extremely cruel, kind and have realistic reactions from your characters - is one of the things that makes this series great. DA:O gave me some real WTF moments, crushed my mediocre expectations and ended up as a pleasing and smartly written story that not many games provide anymore. Having played videogames for over 20 years, with RPGs as my favorite genre - Ill admit DA:2 disappointed me. But only because DA:O set my expectations so high (I still enjoyed DA:2 though). 

I hope that clears up why I wanted to "Stomp on Leliana's corpse"  If anything, it gave enjoyment because Bioware had the balls to offer such options in itself. Options which most RPGs are afraid to go too far with. Predictability was still there, but having stuff like this happen means: No doors are closed. Being genuinely surprised by storyelements in a game at the age of 30, when I thought I would know all possible outcomes? It made me feel young again.

Im not a native English speaker, but I hope my point came across.

Modifié par SomeoneStoleMyName, 11 décembre 2013 - 02:32 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Steelcan wrote...

Now I'm curious as to what Leliana is going to be doing that is so critically important that only she can do and no other character could be created to do the same job.

The Maker has a thing for redheads.

[addiction21]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Now I'm curious as to what Leliana is going to be doing that is so critically important that only she can do and no other character could be created to do the same job.

The Maker has a thing for redheads.

Not only the maker.

But there is that first dialogue about her dreams so there is some wiggle room for having her around.

[Mathias]

DRTJR wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

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 [/i]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 [/i]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 [/i]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.

All I'm gonna say is the death of a character loses it's weight if the writer just brings them back later in the story. As much as I loved Dragon Ball Z or Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, those two are strong examples of this. But it becomes flat out disheartening to see the writer bring back a character in the next installment of a story, and his excuse for it is, to put it simply "*eh whatever *shrug*" 

No David you didn't use those exact words, but that's pretty much what it amounts to. I understand that variation in games based on a player's past choices can sometimes be a programming and narrative nightmare, But I hope you can at least take this into consideration in the future. I can easily understand you guys not wanting to attempt to deal with the huge culturally impacting choices, given how difficult it would be to code in future games. But something as simple and yet impacting as the death of a NPC should stick, without question. Outta respect to the player and to the character.

they spent Search for Spock and Voyage home to get Spock back to where he was in Wrath of Kahn, they Erned their resurrection. Do not dis Wrath of Kahn. I look at liliana's possibilal resurrection as a sighn that there is a very long game being played that we will only be able to grasp at for a while

It doesn't really mattered whether or not it's "earned". Especially when it happens immediately in the next movie. We see this happen in comics too. The death of a character has completely lost all meaning to it because we know that the writers will, without fail, bring the character back later. And they do.

I'm not saying you can't bring back a dead character and not have it work for the story. But if you're gonna kill of a character, and have it be this big sad dramatic moment for the characters and audience, and then you immediately bring him back in the next film/game, then what was the point?

[Mathias]

Sanunes wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

All I'm gonna say is the death of a character loses it's weight if the writer just brings them back later in the story. As much as I loved Dragon Ball Z or Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, those two are strong examples of this. But it becomes flat out disheartening to see the writer bring back a character in the next installment of a story, and his excuse for it is, to put it simply "*eh whatever *shrug*" 

No David you didn't use those exact words, but that's pretty much what it amounts to. I understand that variation in games based on a player's past choices can sometimes be a programming and narrative nightmare, But I hope you can at least take this into consideration in the future. I can easily understand you guys not wanting to attempt to deal with the huge culturally impacting choices, given how difficult it would be to code in future games. But something as simple and yet impacting as the death of a NPC should stick, without question. Outta respect to the player and to the character.

Isn't the player assuming that Leliana dies or that one of the many ways that our party can resurrect themselves on our behalf isn't used to heal her? All we really know is that Leliana is defeated in combat after we taint the ashes, not that we preform a coup de grace?

I've seen people claim that they performed a finisher on Leliana during that fight. If I beheaded her during the fight and she's back in DA2, then that's a bit of a headscratcher yes? I could see the writer coming up with the oh so convienent excuse that,

"Oh you didn't kill her, you just knocked her out."

or...

"Oh...uh...the sacred ashes healed her. When you opened the door to leave, a gust of wind entered the room and spilled a few flakes of ash on her body."

You could pull anything out your butt to come up with an excuse of how she's alive, no matter how awful that excuse might be. Problem is we didn't get an excuse. It was just "She's alive because we say so."

[Isichar]

I just watched a video of Lelianna getting decapitated so lol @ the people talking about her just getting knocked out.

Decisions like this should be made based on whats best for the story, not on what people want regardless of whether they want her alive or dead (that means you too Bioware). Unfortunately, I do not consider blatantly ignoring your own continuity to be a positive thing for the story, I would go as far as to say it is just poor and lazy storytelling. I really hope Bioware deals with this in a way that does not just ignore your choice or try to give you some contrived explanation in a couple lines.

[Firky]

I dunno, and I haven't really looked at the "she's supposed to be dead" thing because that never happened in my game, but everything about Leliana makes me think that she's special. (Like, maybe above death.)

[Conduit0]

Have people forgotten that rogues have an ability called feign death? Its specifically meant to trick an enemy into thinking the rogue is dead. Leliana was a spy and expert in manipulation and subterfuge long before she met the Warden, so her tricking the Warden into thinking she is dead is entirely within the realm of reason.

[BioFan (Official)]

Guys, this thread is getting nasty. Let's all try and be respectful.

Bioware is one of the few game companies that have games that carry over. If you don't like it, you don't have to import. Many players love the import system.

[Isichar]

Conduit0 wrote...

Have people forgotten that rogues have an ability called feign death? Its specifically meant to trick an enemy into thinking the rogue is dead. Leliana was a spy and expert in manipulation and subterfuge long before she met the Warden, so her tricking the Warden into thinking she is dead is entirely within the realm of reason.

Are you suggesting she is capable of faking her own decapitation without any knowledge or preperation beforehand?

To be fair I really should give Bioware a fair chance to explain how she could still be alive, I am just extremely skeptical it will be done so in a way that does not feel forced.

Modifié par Isichar, 11 décembre 2013 - 05:33 .

[Heimdall]

Honestly, it bugs me that people are talking about this as if Bioware has been introducing an epidemic of character resurrections in their games. Really, besides Leliana and Shepard (Which was a different situation entirely), name one lately.