190 réponses à ce sujet

[Aurok]

There are both pros and cons to having the same PC and decisions carry over multiple games, both in terms of the game itself and in commercial terms. Mass Effect pulled it off reasonably well, mostly because it was designed with that in mind from the very beginning; trying to retroactively shoehorn it into Dragon Age is much more difficult. Even Mass Effect was collapsing under the weight of it by the third game, to the point where the designers decided to toss all of that stuff out of the window at the last minute and just let you pick whichever ending you wanted.

The pros of this design approach are obvious enough, but the biggest con for the game itself is how much it curtails where the player can take the story. There's only so much you can allow the player to do if the basic state of the world has to be the same for everyone at the start of the next game. You can change the tone and some nuance of the story, but you can't change the story itself until 'the last game' in the arc.

In terms of potential commercial success, I'm not convinced it actually did help Mass Effect all that much. I'm sure it helped retain existing customers over the course of the franchise, but it also made it more difficult for people to jump in at ME2 or ME3. They went to great lengths to try and convince people that each game was 'the perfect place to jump into the franchise', but people aren't stupid, they know how stories work. Each new game in the franchise they put out they expected it to be the one which went huge, never really seeming to understand that they were always going to be somewhat limited by how well the previous games had done.

It would have been commercial suicide for them to have you play Hawke in Inquisition, simply because not enough people played or liked DA2 (which is also why it isn't called DA3). Likewise, there's no way Skyrim sells a bajillion copies if Elder Scrolls used a continuing story and protagonist, because too much of the potential market would have felt like they'd already missed the boat. Bethesda games consistently crush Bioware games for sales, and the fact that the market understands that each game is an entirely self-contained product --which they can jump into without ever having played a previous title-- is a large part of that.

[Lebanese Dude]

People would insist 'my warden wouldn't do that' and head canon that he didn't.  Even if that was the only option available.

 

Well this is honestly the best approach. 

 

Warden dies a hero. Problem solved.

 

That way people get closure, since anything other than death is a cliffhanger.

[dsl08002]

We all respond differently to each character, but what made the warden so favorable was the amount of options that bioware gave us in DAO, in conversation, voice etc. I created my warden to my image and personalty.

Also given how much involved the warden was, as well as impact on the world itself. Seemed like a character to follow up.

[Blackout62]

However, there is still the mystery of what happened to the Hero of Fereldon or the Orlesian Warden Commander.  For many of us, our Warden survived the battle with the Archdemon.  For those of you whose Warden didn't survive, there is the Orlesian Warden who undertook the events of Awakening, Witch Hunt, and Golems of Andralmach. 

 

Dragon Age 2 made an ominous reference to this character when Leliana is talking to Cassandra at the end saying something along the lines "The Champion has vanished, just like the Warden."

 

What's that cutscene even like if the Warden is dead? Is it "The champion has vanished and, as you know, the Warden is dead".

 

Now my actual opinion on the matter: There's an opportunity for expansion in keeping the Warden out of frame during Inquisition. I'm struck by the idea that with this lack of the Warden's reappearance in DA:I there's potential to have the character spun off into games beyond the main series. Imagine if you will a game on a smaller budget within the Dragon Age universe that allows a new adventure for the Warden or Orlesian Warden Commander without the problem of voice acting due to reasonable budgetary restrictions but still uses your Warden due to syncing with the Keep. Since before even Origins the series has been trying to get a popular cheap spinoff game through the flash games, the Facebook game, and possibly with the Last Court.

[Sully13]

a frog pops out and sings Hello my honey.

[sylvanaerie]

Well this is honestly the best approach. 

 

Warden dies a hero. Problem solved.

 

That way people get closure, since anything other than death is a cliffhanger.

 

If they wanted him dead, people wouldn't choose the DR.  They just want to keep playing him.  

 

If Bioware voiced him, people would whine "That doesn't sound like my warden"--this being a silent protagonist he doesn't sound like anything, so however he 'sounds' is head canon.  Or the new engine won't render him like it did in Origins so the complaint becomes "This doesn't look like my warden."  Give them a dialogue wheel to choose from and they will complain "This doesn't fit what my warden would say"--ignoring that most dialogue options in Origins varied from 3-4 lines.  And it was impossible to tell what might be a good response or an insulting one or a playful one.

 

I, for one, am happy with the send off my warden has in my head canon.  It even fits the 'warden disappeared' canon.  If someone doesn't want to be found, they won't be.  

[sylvanaerie]

What's that cutscene even like if the Warden is dead. Is it "The champion has vanished and, as you know, the Warden is dead".

It's the same line, "The warden has disappeared"

 

Really Bioware?  Weekend at Bernie's?

[xkg]

It's the same line, "The warden has disappeared"

 

Really Bioware?  Weekend at Bernie's?

 

Because one of the wardens we can play, is alive. No matter what. So, actually, that line is still true.

[dsl08002]

It all depend on HOW you do it with the warden. ME was on correct course but then the developers choosed to ignore all that made it good in the last game.

[New Kid]

Because one of the wardens we can play, is alive. No matter what. So, actually, that line is still true.

Still, they could have tweaked the dialogue slightly.

[sylvanaerie]

Because one of the wardens we can play, is alive. No matter what. So, actually, that line is still true.

 

Do you really believe they are referring to the Orlesian warden in that dialogue, and it's not just an oversight by QA?  The Orlesian Warden does little to differentiate herself from someone like Stroud for instance.  Or if they were looking for a warden who ended the Blight, and the PC dies, there is always Loghain or Alistair, depending on who lived.  They aren't referring to either of those two, or they would use their names.

[Revan Reborn]

Ok, what if in your mind your Warden hated Morrigan, but did the dark ritual to survive.  Then because you did the DR, the game flags Morrigan and Warden as being friendly??

 

Or what if in your mind your Warden is a racist ****** but did mostly good because it was in his best interst so now the computer controlled warden comes along as being a good two shoes kind of warden based off your choices.

 

It has been made clear by DG that even if Hawke or the Warden appeared in DAI, we wouldn't be controlling them.

I don't believe you would have to worry about Morrigan and the Warden being friendly due to the Dark Ritual. Morrign was rather transparent what her motives were and it was a chance for the Warden to avoid an unnecessary death. If you had a romance with Morrigan, you can argue there was more to it, but otherwise that's not how BioWare portrayed it in DAO.

 

There were no choices in DAO that I can remember that allowed you to be a racist. These personalities would be based purely on the choices we were able to make in the game. Anything outside of that isn't practical because it's purely the imagination of the player.

 

I wouldn't be so sure about Hawke not being controllable... We have evidence to prove quite the contrary. The Warden certainly won't be playing a significant role though.

 

I understand that point, believe me I understand the benefit of being able to develope a character and relationships over multiple installments. I'm just saying that in the case of an RPG there can be drawbacks of trying to maintain that type of continuity and I think Mass Effect (Which is the only applicable example of this type of game as far as I know, the others you mentioned have fixed protagonists) has demonstrated as many of those drawbacks as strengths. My point is that the continuity you describe doesn't work as well when you put variables into the mix. Leliana is a peculiar case because bringing her back was a deliberate choice right after the first game. As series go on and variables mount, the way variable continuity is portrayed becomes more difficult and developers have to design the games so that, no matter what, the protagonist can start at the same place in the next game. It's constraining.

I'll admit that personally I think Bioware should concentrate more on making choices impactful within the game those choices are in, and I think the more self contained environment of Dragon Age titles is better for that than what Mass Effect had. That way they can worry less about how it will impact the next title. I'm not against bringing back protagonists for a second game persay, I thought the Awakening expansion showed how that could work in Dragon Age, I just think the way parts of the fan base constantly try to treat Dragon Age as the story of the Warden is decidedly wrong headed. I know it's the same universe, but it's a big universe. Yes, a few of the same characters are involved but most are new. As you said, it's been ten years. The world changed. This is a different story in the same universe, separated by time and geography.

Endings are hard. You can't please everyone and everyone expects all the threads to be wrapped up in a neat bow. I don't think the Morrigan issue started with Witch Hunt though, people were agitating on the forums for their chance to walk off into the sunset with Morrigan ever since DAO. I really hope they manage to close the book on the Warden, but I know that no matter how well they do it, short of displaying his/her corpse, there will be people complaining that DA4 isn't the return of the Warden.

I certainly understand the underlining issues. With these kinds of games, the player is only allowed so much choice. The same thing can be applied to a new protagonist though. We know regardless of what we do we are going to be the hero/ine in the game. There is no option to be a villain or to decide not to participate in major events. There are some things, for the sake of story, we are just forced to do. I have no problem with this as long as BioWare attempts to make the story and our choices both reasonable and flexible. I personally have very little issue with their execution with Mass Effect. Sure, there were issues, but DAO and DA2 certainly aren't prime examples of how to do a story properly.

 

I'm personally not arguing that Dragon Age is a story about the Warden, but rather his purpose has been left unresolved and BioWare continues to allude to it. If they tie up loose ends and wrap up his purpose in DAI, then fair enough. I just find that difficult to do when we have confirmation he will not even be making an appearance in the game. What issues exactly can be resolved if he has no physical presence to affect them?

 

At least with Morrigan and Flemeth it's a safe bet they will continue to have recurring roles. If BioWare is able to wrap up the Warden's story through Leliana and Morrigan, then great. Again, I'm not suggesting that future DA games should necessarily follow in the footsteps of ME, but I think it's something DG and BioWare could heavily consider. Whose to say we can't have direct sequels and then standalone games in the same universe? We've certainly been seeing that work quite well in Hollywood as of late with major franchises, especially super hero films.

 

Morality might have been that cut-and-dried in BioWare's older games, but it has never been that way in Dragon Age.

 

Hawke's personalities weren't tied to morality.

 

Who would make a value judgment (agreeable to all) on each of the player's actions from DAO?

 

I'm sorry, but it is simply too problematic in my mind.

While there were moral dilemmas littered throughout DAO, I'd actually argue the choices generally were good/neutral/bad. Leliana more or less represented the good moral path for the Warden. Morrigan in many respects represented the bad moral path. A lot of these trends you could see based on their approval, their personalities, and the context of the situation.

 

It certainly wasn't as black and white as KotOR or even ME, but those archetypes were still significant and present in many choices. You could either be a kind and considerate individual or a selfish punk. I really don't see how BioWare couldn't formulate personalities based on the decisions as they clearly had some semblance of a personality for each choice they were creating.

[Revan Reborn]

We all respond differently to each character, but what made the warden so favorable was the amount of options that bioware gave us in DAO, in conversation, voice etc. I created my warden to my image and personalty.

Also given how much involved the warden was, as well as impact on the world itself. Seemed like a character to follow up.

I think that the fact that the Warden ended with so much power and influence is a large reason why a followup in many respects makes sense. Had he just gone back into the Deep Roads and disappeared, then such a task would not be necessary. Considering he can be King/Warden-Commander/leader of the Ferelden army, that really changes the dynamics. My Warden made Alistair king and I was given the task of leading his army. Unless the Warden was assassinated, I would be under the impression he still retains his various positions and authorities. Having a presence and an important one would make sense in many respects.

[xkg]

Do you really believe they are referring to the Orlesian warden in that dialogue, and it's not just an oversight by QA?  The Orlesian Warden does little to differentiate herself from someone like Stroud for instance.  Or if they were looking for a warden who ended the Blight, and the PC dies, there is always Loghain or Alistair, depending on who lived.  They aren't referring to either of those two, or they would use their names.

 

Yes I really do believe. Why hould they suddenly call them by name, In DA2. Even in Epilogues in DA:A it is simply Warden Commander, not his name.

 

i.e.

Spoiler

[sylvanaerie]

Yes I really do believe. Why hould they suddenly call them by name, In DA2. Even in Epilogues in DA:A it is simply Warden Commander, not his name.

 

i.e.

Spoiler

 

I didn't say anything about the warden commander's name.  I was asking if you truly believed the warden they refer to in that cutscene with Leliana and Cassandra the Orlesian Warden in the case of a USed Ferelden Warden and it wasn't just an oversight.  I was pointing out that the Orlesian warden does little to make himself stand out as opposed to any other warden.  It's not like he stopped a blight.  He fights darkspawn.  An unusual darkspawn but darkspawn nonetheless.

[xkg]

I didn't say anything about the warden commander's name.  I was asking if you truly believed the warden they refer to in that cutscene with Leliana and Cassandra the Orlesian Warden in the case of a USed Ferelden Warden and it wasn't just an oversight.  I was pointing out that the Orlesian warden does little to make himself stand out as opposed to any other warden.  It's not like he stopped a blight.  He fights darkspawn.  An unusual darkspawn but darkspawn nonetheless.

 

He has done as much as HOF, in my eyes. And done uncomparably more than Hawke, who litteraly did nothing worth mentioning, and could be replacd with Joe the Janitor in the DA:I.

 

Both wardens are important for me, and I believe the one that survived disspeared, just as the prologue says. I don't see it as any kinf of oversght.

[sylvanaerie]

He has done as much as HOF, in my eyes. And done uncomparably more than Hawke, who litteraly did nothing worth mentioning, and could be replacd with Joe the Janitor in the DA:I.

 

Both wardens are important for me, and I believe the one that survived disspeared, just as the prologue says. I don't see it as any kinf of oversght.

 

That is a case of differing perceptions then.  I don't view it that way, but I'm cool if you see it differently.  

On the basis of that, I will have to agree to disagree with you.

[Heimdall]

I certainly understand the underlining issues. With these kinds of games, the player is only allowed so much choice. The same thing can be applied to a new protagonist though. We know regardless of what we do we are going to be the hero/ine in the game. There is no option to be a villain or to decide not to participate in major events. There are some things, for the sake of story, we are just forced to do. I have no problem with this as long as BioWare attempts to make the story and our choices both reasonable and flexible. I personally have very little issue with their execution with Mass Effect. Sure, there were issues, but DAO and DA2 certainly aren't prime examples of how to do a story properly.

Except those restrictions are multiplied with the continued protagonist because the developers have to make all paths lead to a similar or near identical result so they can continue the same story in the next installment. There's less room for divergence. DAO certainly had more divergent endings than either of the first two Mass Effect games. DA2, less so, but for the same reason as Mass Effect, they intended to follow it up with an expansion starring Hawke.
 

I'm personally not arguing that Dragon Age is a story about the Warden, but rather his purpose has been left unresolved and BioWare continues to allude to it. If they tie up loose ends and wrap up his purpose in DAI, then fair enough. I just find that difficult to do when we have confirmation he will not even be making an appearance in the game. What issues exactly can be resolved if he has no physical presence to affect them?

I don't his purpose has been left unresolved. The only real question is why they've dissapeared and that doesn't necessarily require their presence.
 

At least with Morrigan and Flemeth it's a safe bet they will continue to have recurring roles. If BioWare is able to wrap up the Warden's story through Leliana and Morrigan, then great. Again, I'm not suggesting that future DA games should necessarily follow in the footsteps of ME, but I think it's something DG and BioWare could heavily consider. Whose to say we can't have direct sequels and then standalone games in the same universe? We've certainly been seeing that work quite well in Hollywood as of late with major franchises, especially super hero films.

Super hero films are... rather unique in their source material, but I'm open to the idea of direct sequels in Dragon Age, I just think that path has lots of drawbacks.

[90s Luke]

While there were moral dilemmas littered throughout DAO, I'd actually argue the choices generally were good/neutral/bad. Leliana more or less represented the good moral path for the Warden. Morrigan in many respects represented the bad moral path. A lot of these trends you could see based on their approval, their personalities, and the context of the situation.

 

It certainly wasn't as black and white as KotOR or even ME, but those archetypes were still significant and present in many choices. You could either be a kind and considerate individual or a selfish punk. I really don't see how BioWare couldn't formulate personalities based on the decisions as they clearly had some semblance of a personality for each choice they were creating.

 

The game itself never judged the player based on decisions being made. It was always subjective (the player was able to interpret the morality of his or her own actions). I don't know about you, but I don't want someone else assuming what my mindset was when I made a particular choice. Furthermore, how would the DA team (consisting of hundreds) decide such things?

 

I personally don't see any utility in BioWare wasting resources (such as the writing and VO budgets) placing value judgments on choices from DAO and then trying to formulate personalities for the Warden based on those choices. And then voice acting all the different voice/personality combinations. It seems like too much effort for relatively little payoff. At least with Hawke half of that effort is finished (by already having three predefined personalities).

 

By the way, I disagree about Leliana and Morrigan. Between the merciless assassin trying to escape punishment and the misanthropic girl with the creepy body-snatching mother, I honestly felt more sympathy for the misanthropic girl.

[berrieh]

I hope they kill the Warden off-screen in DA:I to end this fuss. In a way befitting her, of course, like a Calling or some heroic do, told to us by a character of note. Until the Warden is dead, I doubt Bioware will ever hear the end of this. (I'm fine with some stand alone The Calling DLC if that works, but I think it'd be mighty hard to do.) But I am much more interested in the new characters Bioware is bringing in. I think it's fine Hawke is in the game - her story was ended prematurely. The Warden got plenty of screentime, and now the torch is passed. 

 

yes, it happens in a US situation too.

 

I guess they're referring to the Orlesian Warden then, but that's really weird since the OW is basically just a normal Warden-Commander of which there are several in Thedas of equal standing and note. Seems like an error to me. 

 

While I do not necessarily disagree and change can be good, there is something to be said about maintaining tradition and even seeing a protagonist or companions grow over subsequent games. We can take the Mass Effect Trilogy as a perfect example. Regardless of what one's thoughts are of the ending, it's irrefutable that Shepard's story is easily one of the greatest and most memorable ever done in the industry.

 

You are right that DA is different from ME. On purpose, I think. In ME, Shepard was the star (who knows what comes next?) whereas in Thedas, the world is the star. It is a different kind of story with a different kind of focus. I think what DA does is extremely interesting and seeing the world from different places, telling different stories, through different people is part of it's beauty. It's not that I don't love ME - I do - but I don't want DA to become like ME. I want DA to stay DA. 

[Razyx]

I hope they kill the Warden off-screen in DA:I to end this fuss. [...]

 

Yep, they should give closure if they do not think in reusing them (warden or whoever).

 

[...]

You are right that DA is different from ME. On purpose, I think. In ME, Shepard was the star (who knows what comes next?) whereas in Thedas, the world is the star. It is a different kind of story with a different kind of focus. I think what DA does is extremely interesting and seeing the world from different places, telling different stories, through different people is part of it's beauty. It's not that I don't love ME - I do - but I don't want DA to become like ME. I want DA to stay DA. 

 

But the problem with the hero model in every installment (a new one) is that it's going to 'erode' itself along the titles (being monotonous).., and Thedas could look like Marvel Universe, so, I really hope that we are heading towards something interesting, more interesting... 

[Revan Reborn]

Except those restrictions are multiplied with the continued protagonist because the developers have to make all paths lead to a similar or near identical result so they can continue the same story in the next installment. There's less room for divergence. DAO certainly had more divergent endings than either of the first two Mass Effect games. DA2, less so, but for the same reason as Mass Effect, they intended to follow it up with an expansion starring Hawke.
 
I don't his purpose has been left unresolved. The only real question is why they've dissapeared and that doesn't necessarily require their presence.
 
Super hero films are... rather unique in their source material, but I'm open to the idea of direct sequels in Dragon Age, I just think that path has lots of drawbacks.

ME's method was rather simple really. The main plot is left the same largely regardless of your choices. It was side elements and choices that created the diversity (saving the Council, appointing Anderson as the human representative, destroying the human reaper plans, saving your entire crew on the suicide mission, etc.). I found this to be incredibly effective and consistent as we still had control, while BioWare was able to continue steering the narrative.

 

DAO may have more divergent endings than ME1, but certainly not ME2. I'd argue players had the most control over ME2 than any other BioWare game. It was the only game they've done so far where all of your companions can actually die and as a result Shepard also dies. DAO really only had a choice of survive or die, mixing in either sacrificing someone else or taking the DR. Hardly a large variety of choices.

 

My only reason for why I believe the Warden's presence is necessary is because he is one of the leaders of Ferelden and the country is literally being torn apart, with the rest of Thedas. It's strange that the Warden would not make an appearance, unless there is some story reason that justifies his lack of input.

 

I think it would be interesting to mix it up. Put in some variety rather than rebooting DA every game with a new protagonist. Honestly, how realistic or believable is it that all of these heroes are rising to fame and prominence in a small amount of time from each other? It almost defeats the purpose of how amazing some of these feats are when another hero just rises up and outdoes what the previous hero did.

 

The game itself never judged the player based on decisions being made. It was always subjective (the player was able to interpret the morality of his or her own actions). I don't know about you, but I don't want someone else assuming what my mindset was when I made a particular choice. Furthermore, how would the DA team (consisting of hundreds) decide such things?

 

I personally don't see any utility in BioWare wasting resources (such as the writing and VO budgets) placing value judgments on choices from DAO and then trying to formulate personalities for the Warden based on those choices. And then voice acting all the different voice/personality combinations. It seems like too much effort for relatively little payoff. At least with Hawke half of that effort is finished (by already having three predefined personalities).

 

By the way, I disagree about Leliana and Morrigan. Between the merciless assassin trying to escape punishment and the misanthropic girl with the creepy body-snatching mother, I honestly felt more sympathy for the misanthropic girl.

There wasn't a morality bar such as KotOR or ME, but choices were still morally transparent in their outcome nevertheless. In most decisions in DAO you were either helping people or harming them. The choices were written by a small team of writers, so obviously they would handle the personalities.

 

Little payoff? Most people on these boards alone love their Warden. Quite a few would like to see that story fully resolved. I doubt many would complain about BioWare committing another expansion or a standalone game to his/her final story.

 

Leliana gave up her bard days in DAO and joined the Chantry because they almost got her killed. Virtually every "good" choice you make gives you approval for Leliana. Morrigan generally only gains approval if you make "bad" choices to the detriment of someone else. Morality was rather clear in my opinion, largely because of how the companions responded to your choices.

 

You are right that DA is different from ME. On purpose, I think. In ME, Shepard was the star (who knows what comes next?) whereas in Thedas, the world is the star. It is a different kind of story with a different kind of focus. I think what DA does is extremely interesting and seeing the world from different places, telling different stories, through different people is part of it's beauty. It's not that I don't love ME - I do - but I don't want DA to become like ME. I want DA to stay DA. 

I wouldn't really make the argument that Thedas is the star. With TES and Tamriel? Perhaps. Dragon Age on the other hand comes across more of picking and plucking varying stories that have some connections but are also standalone stories. The setting has little to do with it.

 

What makes DA and ME different is their setting and lore. It wouldn't matter if they both used the same story concepts, they would still be different. I am just saying that generally ME games have been more rewarding due to consistency and the building of relationships and choices over a period of games. That impact isn't as strong in DA as you are constantly changing protagonists and the new character has to familiarize themselves with the world as they were a nobody before.

 

DA in a lot of ways is more of a traditional type of storytelling, which isn't to say that it's bad. However, I feel that in many respects it can be limiting, especially when BioWare is making such an effort from choices in DAO and DA2 to impact DAI to some degree. It wouldn't be nearly as difficult if we just revisited the game as the Warden or Hawke as the connection would be more natural and not forced. There are pros and cons to both. I just have found BioWare has been more successful at the ME approach, which they also used for SWTOR.

[wcholcombe]

I don't believe you would have to worry about Morrigan and the Warden being frien

dly due to the Dark Ritual. Morrign was rather transparent what her motives were and it was a chance for the Warden to avoid an unnecessary death. If you had a romance with Morrigan, you can argue there was more to it, but otherwise that's not how BioWare portrayed it in DAO.

There were no choices in DAO that I can remember that allowed you to be a racist. These personalities would be based purely on the choices we were able to make in the game. Anything outside of that isn't practical because it's purely the imagination of the player.

I wouldn't be so sure about Hawke not being controllable... We have evidence to prove quite the contrary. The Warden certainly won't be playing a significant role though.

I certainly understand the underlining issues. With these kinds of games, the player is only allowed so much choice. The same thing can be applied to a new protagonist though. We know regardless of what we do we are going to be the hero/ine in the game. There is no option to be a villain or to decide not to participate in major events. There are some things, for the sake of story, we are just forced to do. I have no problem with this as long as BioWare attempts to make the story and our choices both reasonable and flexible. I personally have very little issue with their execution with Mass Effect. Sure, there were issues, but DAO and DA2 certainly aren't prime examples of how to do a story properly.

I'm personally not arguing that Dragon Age is a story about the Warden, but rather his purpose has been left unresolved and BioWare continues to allude to it. If they tie up loose ends and wrap up his purpose in DAI, then fair enough. I just find that difficult to do when we have confirmation he will not even be making an appearance in the game. What issues exactly can be resolved if he has no physical presence to affect them?

At least with Morrigan and Flemeth it's a safe bet they will continue to have recurring roles. If BioWare is able to wrap up the Warden's story through Leliana and Morrigan, then great. Again, I'm not suggesting that future DA games should necessarily follow in the footsteps of ME, but I think it's something DG and BioWare could heavily consider. Whose to say we can't have direct sequels and then standalone games in the same universe? We've certainly been seeing that work quite well in Hollywood as of late with major franchises, especially super hero films.

While there were moral dilemmas littered throughout DAO, I'd actually argue the choices generally were good/neutral/bad. Leliana more or less represented the good moral path for the Warden. Morrigan in many respects represented the bad moral path. A lot of these trends you could see based on their approval, their personalities, and the context of the situation.

It certainly wasn't as black and white as KotOR or even ME, but those archetypes were still significant and present in many choices. You could either be a kind and considerate individual or a selfish punk. I really don't see how BioWare couldn't formulate personalities based on the decisions as they clearly had some semblance of a personality for each choice they were creating.

Considering they said 2 years ago that if Hawke or Warden show up we wouldn't be able to play them, I am not going to assume that just because the Inq isn't shown in the footage with Hawke doesn't mean we control Hawke.

[berrieh]

 

But the problem with the hero model in every installment (a new one) is that it's going to 'erode' itself along the titles (being monotonous).., and Thedas could look like Marvel Universe, so, I really hope that we are heading towards something interesting, more interesting... 

 

I am not a Marvel fan, so cannot appreciate the comparison fully, maybe, but I think of DA as more a "Game of Thrones, see the world from different perspectives" kind of thing (albeit over a longer period of time). Granted, we are only seeing one perspective in each story so maybe it's a poor analogy, but it's more about seeing different adventures in this same world. And since it's a fantasy setting, there are lots of adventures to be had. I don't doubt several other people are having adventures simultaneous to my Inquisitor (Hawke certainly seems to be, and I can think of a few characters from the books we may or may not meet who are). I don't consider my game heroes to be the only people of note in Thedas - others of note are mentioned all over Bioware DA canons of various kinds. Plus, our companions are experiencing their own versions of the story as well. 

 

I don't really see the problem or know what the "Marvel universe" problem is. Comics aren't really my think, sorry. 

 

Little payoff? Most people on these boards alone love their Warden. Quite a few would like to see that story fully resolved. I doubt many would complain about BioWare committing another expansion or a standalone game to his/her final story.

 

I don't mind a DLC/expansion, but a full game? I would be very disappointed if that happened as it would make the US even less appealing. Awakening already was a bit of a mistake in that way. Also, I'd rather see new stories - DA is the only game that tells new stories in the same fantasy universe. No one else does this. 

 

I wouldn't really make the argument that Thedas is the star. With TES and Tamriel? Perhaps. Dragon Age on the other hand comes across more of picking and plucking varying stories that have some connections but are also standalone stories. The setting has little to do with it.

 

The setting is what unites those stories together. You get to see the variety of perspectives on Thedas. The more we see, the more interesting Thedas and its history and mysteries become. I find Thedas a much more compelling setting than Tamriel (not necessarily in design, but in lore). The lore of the setting is part of the setting - I'm not just talking about set dressing. 

 

What makes DA and ME different is their setting and lore. It wouldn't matter if they both used the same story concepts, they would still be different. I am just saying that generally ME games have been more rewarding due to consistency and the building of relationships and choices over a period of games. That impact isn't as strong in DA as you are constantly changing protagonists and the new character has to familiarize themselves with the world as they were a nobody before.

 

I feel like the lack of a central character, a central voice, in DA lore makes the setting and lore stronger in DA than it was in ME. The fact that it's not a world with Earth also helps that, I'm sure. I love ME, but I personally find Dragon Age more rewarding. We'll see if that continues with Inquisition or not, but I really liked the choice to tell a smaller, loosely related story with DA2. The story definitely worked for me very well. I like the aspect of changing protagonists and seeing the world through new eyes. 

 

 

DA in a lot of ways is more of a traditional type of storytelling, which isn't to say that it's bad. However, I feel that in many respects it can be limiting, especially when BioWare is making such an effort from choices in DAO and DA2 to impact DAI to some degree. It wouldn't be nearly as difficult if we just revisited the game as the Warden or Hawke as the connection would be more natural and not forced. There are pros and cons to both. I just have found BioWare has been more successful at the ME approach, which they also used for SWTOR.

 

 

See, I find ME to be a more traditional type of storytelling (neither is a particularly traditional type of game, due to the continuity) since it centers on one protagonist and that's much more traditional. I think DA is the most interesting Bioware franchise, though - it's the only one I'll read the novels, etc, for. 

[Revan Reborn]

Considering they said 2 years ago that if Hawke or Warden show up we wouldn't be able to play them, I am not going to assume that just because the Inq isn't shown in the footage with Hawke doesn't mean we control Hawke.

Not sure where you are getting your information from, but BioWare has deceived the fan base and changed the story in the past. A large portion of the ending for ME3 was changed due to the original script being leaked on the internet.

 

We also know that DA2 was supposed to have an expansion that was cancelled and that Hawke will have a significant role in DAI. Based on the video footage and being able to modify his appearance in CC alone, I will be shocked if we don't control Hawke for a portion of the game. BioWare has hinted at the prospect without outright stating it.