62 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

You were the leader of your chosen monarch's armies by the end of the game, and you were the Warden Commander and Arl of Amaranthine by Awakening. 

 

You lead absolutely crap in DA:O. You were appointed to a leadership position and then had absolutely zero input in any relevant command decision. The decision to move to Redcliffe is made without you. The battle plan to take down the archdemon - Riordan's suicide by tower - has no input from you. The decision to march to Denerim in a hurry is not made with your input. Other than Alistair/Anora saying that you're the commander post-Landsmeet - which is the absolutely end of the game - there is no mention of Command and no command role. 

 

And DA:A is much the same. You command exactly no one in DA:A, instead leading a smalls fire-team again. You listen to nobles once or twice on the advice of others, arm your troops, and choose between defending two locations in the endgame (plus a few troop allocation decisions). 

[In Exile]

I think that's definitely a part of it. Despite the 'stereotypical gamer' being perceived as an 18-25-year-old straight white male, there is actually a very large number of gamers and game developers aged 30+. In fact, the entire 'gamer demographic' is a lot more varied than one might think.
No doubt this has resulted in a demand for more diverse characters, including older protagonists.

I'm just thinking that if I were a developer and I had to choose between a 20-year-old or a 40-year-old character for a specific game, I might feel more inclined to go with the younger one because they would be more 'accessible' to both younger and older players, since anyone over the age of 20 can say "I know what it is/was like to be that age" and draw upon that experience to help their roleplay.

Speaking from personal experience, I know that I generally prefer to play protagonists who are close to my own age, though I have no issue playing characters who are older than me (or who are not my own sex, race, sexuality, etc.).

 

I think very young protagonists just don't work for the type of stories that games want to tell. The 17-24 range is really problematic for the foisted on leadership roles that some RPGs try so very hard to foster on you - particularly Bioware games. The best Bioware take on this actually is in ME1-ME3, where Shepard is (1) older, starting the game at 27 (as I recall); and (2) doesn't have much of a say in the broader mission parameters, those decisions being left to more senior persons in more senior command positions. Whatever independence Shepard does have comes from the plot contrivance - being a Spectre, then being with Cerberus, then having pre-existing relationships with so many important figures and the undetectable Normandy, winning the job of stealth diplomat by default. 

 

Older, established individuals do not just give up authority to someone who is young just because it happens that this young persons is really awesome at killing or is otherwise unreasonably well-spoken. This time of power fantasy, IMO, is actually more unrealistic than the usual complaints people have re: the unrealistic nature of romances and fawning over the protagonist in general. 

[XMissWooX]

I think very young protagonists just don't work for the type of stories that games want to tell. The 17-24 range is really problematic for the foisted on leadership roles that some RPGs try so very hard to foster on you - particularly Bioware games. The best Bioware take on this actually is in ME1-ME3, where Shepard is (1) older, starting the game at 27 (as I recall); and (2) doesn't have much of a say in the broader mission parameters, those decisions being left to more senior persons in more senior command positions. Whatever independence Shepard does have comes from the plot contrivance - being a Spectre, then being with Cerberus, then having pre-existing relationships with so many important figures and the undetectable Normandy, winning the job of stealth diplomat by default. 
 
Older, established individuals do not just give up authority to someone who is young just because it happens that this young persons is really awesome at killing or is otherwise unreasonably well-spoken. This time of power fantasy, IMO, is actually more unrealistic than the usual complaints people have re: the unrealistic nature of romances and fawning over the protagonist in general.

I think it depends on the context of the story.
For a story like DAI, you are given power over others because you have a special ability that no one else possess. Your age really is irrelevant next to the fact that you are the only one who can close the veil tears. Which I think is a good thing because it allows the player a choice in their protagonist's age, rather than forcing a pre-determined age. Maybe the story seems more believable if you have a 40-year-old veteran in charge of the Inquisition, but I don't think having a 20-year-old youth in charge is all that immersion-breaking either.

I also like the opportunity for character development with a younger protagonist - with an older character, I would think that a lot of that development happened in the past (e.g. "This character's got 40 years under his belt, so what he's been doing all that time? What was his job? Was he married? Did he have children? Which countries has he visited and which people has he met already?") in contrast, with a younger character that development would happen over the course of the game (e.g. "This character's fresh into adulthood, so how's he going to spend it? What will his job be? Will he get married? Will he have children? Which countries will he visit and which people will he meet?")

I know I am planning (game permitting) to play a 21-year-old character who is going to have to mature and adapt awfully quickly once she's put in charge of the Inquisition. So I'm quite liking the idea of starting with a brash, wild youth and seeing her go from there.

[Elite Midget]

I always figured that Hawke was 17, 18, or 19 at the start of DA2. Really fits and has the whole "growing up feel" as Hawke gains influence. Warden though, age could be 20-30 depending on Origin though more than likely it's early 20s.

 

Anyway, I don't see us ever getting a really old protagonist to play as. Even Shepard wasn't that old, like 30-40 in my opinion. It simply makes things easier for the character to be younger, especially when it comes to romance.

 

After all, it's a really hard sell to have a 50 year old protagonist who has never had a lover or the such before.

[In Exile]

I think it depends on the context of the story.
For a story like DAI, you are given power over others because you have a special ability that no one else possess. Your age really is irrelevant next to the fact that you are the only one who can close the veil tears. Which I think is a good thing because it allows the player a choice in their protagonist's age, rather than forcing a pre-determined age. Maybe the story seems more believable if you have a 40-year-old veteran in charge of the Inquisition, but I don't think having a 20-year-old youth in charge is all that immersion-breaking either.

I also like the opportunity for character development with a younger protagonist - with an older character, I would think that a lot of that development happened in the past (e.g. "This character's got 40 years under his belt, so what he's been doing all that time? What was his job? Was he married? Did he have children? Which countries has he visited and which people has he met already?") in contrast, with a younger character that development would happen over the course of the game (e.g. "This character's fresh into adulthood, so how's he going to spend it? What will his job be? Will he get married? Will he have children? Which countries will he visit and which people will he meet?")

I know I am planning (game permitting) to play a 21-year-old character who is going to have to mature and adapt awfully quickly once she's put in charge of the Inquisition. So I'm quite liking the idea of starting with a brash, wild youth and seeing her go from there.

 

Your magic powers make you a figurehead, not a leader. You're a tool that can walk and talk - the idea you'd be given charge of anything is ridiculous. In the real world, someone with your powers would be trapped by powerful people, and then used like a tool by whoever had the power to force you to be their tool and close the tears. To actually have the ear of people who have a say is very difficult. 

 

Of course DA:I will handle this by making you effectively irrelevant at the start of a game beside the support you get from Cassandra and friends. The organization grows around you, instead of being an organization you're being given. 

[In Exile]

I always figured that Hawke was 17, 18, or 19 at the start of DA2. Really fits and has the whole "growing up feel" as Hawke gains influence. Warden though, age could be 20-30 depending on Origin though more than likely it's early 20s.

 

Anyway, I don't see us ever getting a really old protagonist to play as. Even Shepard wasn't that old, like 30-40 in my opinion. It simply makes things easier for the character to be younger, especially when it comes to romance.

 

After all, it's a really hard sell to have a 50 year old protagonist who has never had a lover or the such before.

 

Shepard was canonically around 27. You have a DOB and everything. 

[Elite Midget]

Ah, Shepard always seemed older to me.

[XMissWooX]

Your magic powers make you a figurehead, not a leader. You're a tool that can walk and talk - the idea you'd be given charge of anything is ridiculous. In the real world, someone with your powers would be trapped by powerful people, and then used like a tool by whoever had the power to force you to be their tool and close the tears. To actually have the ear of people who have a say is very difficult. 
 
Of course DA:I will handle this by making you effectively irrelevant at the start of a game beside the support you get from Cassandra and friends. The organization grows around you, instead of being an organization you're being given.

At the beginning of the game, yes, I wouldn't expect the Inquisitor to hold much sway over anyone.

But the whole point of the game is that you gradually build the organisation up from almost nothing. It's through your actions and decisions that things get done. Ultimately, it's your decision whether you side with the Mages or Templars, it's your decision whether you side with Celene or Gaspard, it's your decision whether you take a diplomatic approach or a militaristic one - and even if others object, you have the power to overrule them.

Given that the whole point of the story is that the Inquisitor is someone who brings together and coordinates the companions (via making them work together, and commanding them in combat), who funds (via money and weapons/armour/training/crafting resources) and controls (via commands given at the War Table) the Inquisition and it's men/women, and who influences vast areas of Fereldan and Orlais by their actions (by taking over forts, saving/destroying villages, wiping out bandit groups), I would say that qualifies them as a 'Leader'.

[Fufunette]

Gandalf Inquisitor! o/

[In Exile]

At the beginning of the game, yes, I wouldn't expect the Inquisitor to hold much sway over anyone.

But the whole point of the game is that you gradually build the organisation up from almost nothing. It's through your actions and decisions that things get done. Ultimately, it's your decision whether you side with the Mages or Templars, it's your decision whether you side with Celene or Gaspard, it's your decision whether you take a diplomatic approach or a militaristic one - and even if others object, you have the power to overrule them.

Given that the whole point of the story is that the Inquisitor is someone who brings together and coordinates the companions (via making them work together, and commanding them in combat), who funds (via money and weapons/armour/training/crafting resources) and controls (via commands given at the War Table) the Inquisition and it's men/women, and who influences vast areas of Fereldan and Orlais by their actions (by taking over forts, saving/destroying villages, wiping out bandit groups), I would say that qualifies them as a 'Leader'.

 

It's still contrived. Even in a minor organization, talented young people don't auto-default to leader. Bioware has been historically terrible at showing what it takes for a young person to actually lead - it's usually just plot contrivance and people deferring to you. Alistair just straight up going "LOLNOPE" to leadership is pretty much the epitome of the trope.

 

The Inquisitor certainly becomes a leader, but I still think it'll be implausible for a very young person to be in that role. 

[Shapeshifter777]

Just think of Kim Jung Un.  I think he is only my age (26) and he is in control of an entire nation and army.  You don't have to be old to have great power.

 

EDIT:  Nevermind.  He is 31.  Thanks, Google.  Still though.  That is pretty young for so much power.

[In Exile]

Just think of Kim Jung Un.  I think he is only my age (26) and he is in control of an entire nation and army.  You don't have to be old to have great power.

 

EDIT:  Nevermind.  He is 31.  Thanks, Google.  Still though.  That is pretty young for so much power.

 

He's a dynastic heir, though. It's a bit different from just straight up stumbling into power. Lots inertia behind keeping the same family in power. 

 

That said, today 31 is still more young than old (at most you've been working for a decade with three more decades of work to go). 

[Realmzmaster]

He's a dynastic heir, though. It's a bit different from just straight up stumbling into power. Lots inertia behind keeping the same family in power. 

 

That said, today 31 is still more young than old (at most you've been working for a decade with three more decades of work to go). 

 

Actually I would pick Alexander III of Macedon, even through he succeed his father Phillip II. Alexander III was twenty at the time. He was tutored by Aristotle. He spent 10 years expanding the kingdom. Never lost a battle and considered one of history's greatest commanders.

 

So he may have had a head start, but he prove himself worthy of his kingship.

 

Or what about Audie Murphy in World War II, who enlisted at the actual age of 16 (his older sister produced a falsified affidavit making his age 17). He left the service at 20 (due to disability) as a 1st lieutenant having successfully lead men in both the Mediterranean and European theaters.