81 réponses à ce sujet

[sylvanaerie]

I like the idea of assigned surnames. I often even use default names (my favorite warden was Neria Surana--the default for a female elven mage). It also allowed for some mention of the Amell family name in DA2, and most of the NPC's referred to the PC as "Hawke". If it allows for some diversity in play, I'm all for it!

Don't want to be a noble though. If the option exists for the human, I want to play a commoner. I wish that origin had never been scrapped in Origins. Would have made a nice change.

[Sith Grey Warden]

I'm hoping Warriors and Rogues have different origins. I realize this increases the number of backgrounds from 7 to 11, which is a lot more work, but it'd be nice to have recognition that rogues and warriors tend to be different kinds of people.

[nightscrawl]

Han Shot First wrote...

Yeah, its probably for the sake of voiced dialogue.

Characters will most likely refer to the Inquisitor by his or her last name occasionally.

I hope so, because I'll need some help pronouncing a couple of those.

[ElitePinecone]

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

I'm hoping Warriors and Rogues have different origins. I realize this increases the number of backgrounds from 7 to 11, which is a lot more work, but it'd be nice to have recognition that rogues and warriors tend to be different kinds of people.

It's possible that, instead of doing different backgrounds, they'd have other content to differentiate the classes. It could be done with dialogue, like KOTOR and Mass Effect tried to do. 

I guess it depends on how much of the unique content is allocated to the racial options (or the combination of racial and class options), rather than just class options. 

We also don't yet know how the class/race combo ties into the start of the game (because surely there'd need to be some explanation for a qunari being in the right place at the right time to become Inquisitor), so maybe a human rogue and a human warrior will have different reasons for being there.

Is it even confirmed that warriors and rogues have the same surname? Maybe Trevelyan was just that warrior they showed in the demo.

[Spectre slayer]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

I'm hoping Warriors and Rogues have different origins. I realize this increases the number of backgrounds from 7 to 11, which is a lot more work, but it'd be nice to have recognition that rogues and warriors tend to be different kinds of people.

It's possible that, instead of doing different backgrounds, they'd have other content to differentiate the classes. It could be done with dialogue, like KOTOR and Mass Effect tried to do. 

I guess it depends on how much of the unique content is allocated to the racial options (or the combination of racial and class options), rather than just class options. 

We also don't yet know how the class/race combo ties into the start of the game (because surely there'd need to be some explanation for a qunari being in the right place at the right time to become Inquisitor), so maybe a human rogue and a human warrior will have different reasons for being there.

Is it even confirmed that warriors and rogues have the same surname? Maybe Trevelyan was just that warrior they showed in the demo.

It was confirmed during the making your mark podcast that each background will have it's own reasons for being at the opening sequence and will vary depending on your background which is tied to your race+class choice,  however this is not an origin and won't change the opening sequence it just give our character's different reasons, different concerns, different motivations for being at the place the veil tears.

They hinted at that's going to happen since during the podcasts they said the non mage classes won't diverge much in terms of backgrounds and that the mages will be the only one's that will probably do so which means 7 backgrounds though they and I stress might do different sets but it sounds unlikely from what they've said.

The content for background's after we become the inquisitor is fully explorable in game and has a lot of additional content for them according to the devs, dialogue, quests, codex etc and that their depth is beyond what they've done before, though it will just be some information when you create your character at first and won't have a lot of impact otherwise, also each race will have it's own valid reason for being the inquisitor according to Lee.

This part is about backgrounds, and the different reasons for the race's being the inquisitor.

That's a good question. I think we'll just do more of what we were doing originally - more space, more content. The scope of what you can give to the player is really important in terms of how much they can enjoy and get into the world, so we'll be able to do more of that with the time that we have. But the other thing you use time like this for in development is just to hone and polish so much more.

Taking something from 90 to 95 per cent is just incredibly difficult and it requires a lot of time and focus and energy to do it. So this extra time will allow us to do even more of that than we would have previously, along with bringing in playable races. And playable races have broad-reaching impact on game development. It fuses and ripples along the entire story and all the side bits and pieces as well, with recordings and such as well. It's crazy. So that was a pretty big shift, especially to bring in a fourth one as well with the Qunari.

It's interesting. There'll be people out there who understand the Qunari and their religious beliefs and how all that works. There is a valid reason why Qunari are sitting on the throne of the Inquisition, as there is for an elf. Elves have been persecuted in this world, so how would a human nation feel about having an Elven inquisitor come up to them and talk to them? So there are ways that all this fits together. David Gaider and the writers are hard at work putting that together.

But it's interesting to see it all take shape.
 
www.totalxbox.com/68769/features/interview-bioware-on-bringing-dragon-age-to-xbox-one/

Modifié par Spectre slayer, 24 janvier 2014 - 05:09 .

[eyesheild21]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I still don't get why we need assigned surnames.

I know what is the point of having a name at all everyone will just call us Inquisitor.

[Sir DeLoria]

I'd like my human Femquisitor to be Orlesian actually.

[DRTJR]

I hope the City Elf inquisitor will be from Denerim's Alienage.

[ElitePinecone]

eyesheild21 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I still don't get why we need assigned surnames.

I know what is the point of having a name at all everyone will just call us Inquisitor.

There's also "Your Eminence", which I heard a soldier use in the PAX demo. So we don't just have a title, we have an honorific to go along with the title. 

(Eminence is apparently the appropriate term of address for a highly-ranked religious figure or member of a military order, but it sounds a bit strange)

And I can think of some situations where having a unique surname would be really relevant. Unlike Hawke, the Inquisitor will have different family (even if we never see them), a different background, different social status. Surnames can speak volumes in that sense.

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 24 janvier 2014 - 07:25 .

[aerisblight]

such difficult to remember last names.... I liked hawke ._. it was short

[Danny Boy 7]

I just hope differences between warrior and rogue are enough to make me feel like it's less warrior/rogue/mage and more mage/non-mage. Hopefully the choice to be either a warrior or rogue is as reactive as being a mage is.

I'm curious whether we'll get NPCs who are connected to our background ala Mass Effect or even Origins. Not necessarily dozens but maybe one who is a minor part of the Inquisition.

[sandalisthemaker]

Lavellan for the elf? Haha. Named after a mystical rat-like creature. Lol

[Sylvius the Mad]

ElitePinecone wrote...

There's also "Your Eminence", which I heard a soldier use in the PAX demo. So we don't just have a title, we have an honorific to go along with the title.

Titles like this (or like "Warden") are why I don't see the need for assigned surnames.

There was certainly no need for them in DAO.

And I can think of some situations where having a unique surname would be really relevant. Unlike Hawke, the Inquisitor will have different family (even if we never see them), a different background, different social status. Surnames can speak volumes in that sense.

They can still refer to the family without us having to carry the name.  My character can be a Cadash without having Cadash written on my character sheet.  Just as my character can be a Warden without having Warden written on my character sheet.

[Sir JK]

Sylvius the mad wrote...
They can still refer to the family without us having to carry the name. My character can be a Cadash without having Cadash written on my character sheet. Just as my character can be a Warden without having Warden written on my character sheet.

It's one of the basic rules of being a good gamemaster not to let a player have a freedom you have no intention of following up on. If you don't want a player to go to a village, don't put it on the map.

In the same vein, the story could be written so that you're a Cadash but not have it be your surname. But what if the player wants to be an Ortan? Or an Aeducan? Making the surname fixed prevents players from hijinks like that.

It's all about maintaining a degree of control of the narrative. To make sure the player won't make a character that the narrative cannot handle. Or at least limit such occurances.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm not saying the player should be given the option not to be a Cadash. I'm saying that the player should be able to name his own character.

The most important story in an RPG is the one the player creates through his character's choices. The story the writers create is merely backdrop.

[Gregolian]

Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that a human male mage is going to be an Amell?

[Sir JK]

What do you imagine a Cadash's surname to be if not Cadash? Letting a player choose their surname sets up the expectation that they're given complete control of their background (real or fictional). If I am allowed to choose my surname, I could be an Aeducan if I wanted.

Only that would be to set up a false expectation. Since the game won't care at all you wrote Aeducan. You're a Cadash. That's what you're written to be. That's how the narrative will treat you. Ideally you should be able to claim otherwise, of course. But there's only so much content the game can contain. This is really just part of the elaborate system of narrative smoke and mirrors to hide how small the world really is.

Hence... fixed surnames. To prevent false expectations.

[Heimdall]

@Gregolian

Actually, I'm pretty sure Gaider came out and said the Inquisitor would not be an Amell (It was awhile ago, before multiple races were announced I think,)

[Wulfram]

I don't know if those surnames have been confirmed officially, they could be place-holders or subject to change.

Actually, I don't know if it's been confirmed we won't be able to choose our own surname, so they could be simply the names that were chosen for that playthrough.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

What do you imagine a Cadash's surname to be if not Cadash?

Why does he need a surname at all? He can go by whatever name he likes.

Letting a player choose their surname sets up the expectation that they're given complete control of their background (real or fictional).

No it doesn't. It sets up the expectation that the player is allowed to choose his character's name.

If I am allowed to choose my surname, I could be an Aeducan if I wanted.

No, you're a Cadash. That should be documented somewhere during character creation.

All permanent restrictions on the character design should be available to the player during character creation.

Only that would be to set up a false expectation. Since the game won't care at all you wrote Aeducan.

Why would we expect it to?

You're a Cadash. That's what you're written to be. That's how the narrative will treat you.

And that's fine. No one is claiming otherwise.

Ideally you should be able to claim otherwise, of course.

That seems unnecessary.

But there's only so much content the game can contain. This is really just part of the elaborate system of narrative smoke and mirrors to hide how small the world really is.

The best way to hide that is to remove all unnecessary restrictions. Like the name.

Hence... fixed surnames. To prevent false expectations.

Those expectations would be baseless.

[KC_Prototype]

I can't wait to be nobleman Trevelyan and see why a noble Ferelden is at the conference. And for those who are confused on the surname thing, it adds a background and connection to the story. Just like in DA:O, it gives your character some history and extra content to explore. I don't want to be some random charactet with power who make deals and kills people *cough* FNV.

[Sylvius the Mad]

KC_Prototype wrote...

And for those who are confused on the surname thing, it adds a background and connection to the story. Just like in DA:O, it gives your character some history and extra content to explore.

That's a reason to provide a background, not a surname.

One does not require the other.

Personally, I would prefer not to be given a pre-written background (NWN is BioWare's best effort on this front), but even with a pre-written background there is no reason at all to enforce a fixed surname. They could even have a default surname which we're allowed to delete or overwrite.

[The Elder King]

@KC_Prototype: you're assuming that Trevelyan has a Noble background. As well as the fact that there's still a conference.

[Danny Boy 7]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

KC_Prototype wrote...

And for those who are confused on the surname thing, it adds a background and connection to the story. Just like in DA:O, it gives your character some history and extra content to explore.

That's a reason to provide a background, not a surname.

One does not require the other.

Personally, I would prefer not to be given a pre-written background (NWN is BioWare's best effort on this front), but even with a pre-written background there is no reason at all to enforce a fixed surname. They could even have a default surname which we're allowed to delete or overwrite.

Imo the names provide a connection nameless or even titled characters can't. It's arguable that a player can adjust to being called an unfamiliar name better than a title I.e Cook or worse yet nothing at all. It certainly personalizes the character a bit and bridges the gap between the game universe and the imagination of the gamer. It provides borders for the player to play within the same way classes, races and the like do.

That's not to say that I don't like open ended roleplaying as well, but even in tabletop games or the less restrictive forum roleplay restrictions are there. So seeing games know their limits and try to circumvent them while making us more a part of the world is refreshing.