305 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

You miss the point here: I'm not talking about enjoyment, that's subjective, I'm talking about quest complexity. Only Wicked Eyes can be compared to Redcliffe and the Landsmeet in DAO, all the other main quests in DAI are simpler (just like the Sacred Ashes or Mage tower sections in DAO are: choose between A or B ).
Also you say The Battle of Denerim. Yes, that's great (far better than the DAI ending, imo), but what complexity do you have there? The final sacrifice choice (without the dark ritual), again A or B, and then? With the dark ritual or the "wrong" party composition you don't even have a choice (ofc you made it earlier). It's a good quest? That's subjective; I love it. Is it complex in its structure? No, it isn't.
 
I prefer DAI companions too. Except for Cole. I'm trying to like him but I can't stand him... He's like the second worst Bioware companion evah for me (Carth Onasi is the worst ).

Doesn't this apply to all quests, in every game ever made? Until somebody actually creates a game that has the VA's involved record every possible spoken word, and a dialog system that actually reacts to what you say, you're always limited in what you can do. Even if we limit the dialog choices to text only, with no speech, there is no way that any writer anywhere can allow for every possible nuance a player might assign to a choice. I can think of a few quests that do establish a character path, but none that outright state "this is why they chose what they chose". That subjective interpretation is, and always has been up to the player. Are they saying what they want to say(more or less), or are they saying that because they're afraid of how NPCs involved in the quest might view them?

From Origins: Do we get the lovers together in the Dalish camp because we're hopeless romantics, or because we see that both obviously love each other, and it's the "right" thing to do? Do we sleep with her because we're a giant douche, or because we're a horndog and have to sleep with every girl we meet, where it's an option? Is there really a difference? Based entirely on the dialog, no, there isn't. Based on the motivations of the player, yes, there is.

Some people have maintained that they couldn't establish that connection to the PC, others have stated that they have. Who's right? Both are, because it's subjective. Since it's based entirely on how one feels about the PC, the dialog choices, and the delivery, or, and this is common too, the method of delivery. "My PC has a voice, and I can't control how they feel" is a pretty common statement here, whether it's stated that way, or as "my mute PC has more personality". For myself, having the NPCs talk at my character in dialog is jarring.

[robertthebard]

This is a good example in how much I shifted, because of origin story. My Dalish broke them up. That kid was inept, in their eyes.. They took a harsh view on graduating to hunter status. While, say, my mage or city elf (who romanced Leliana) were romantics and didn't care about the ins and outs of Dalish culture.

Yep, and this basic principle applies to why I make the decisions I make in Inquisition. No, I don't have Origin stories, but I do have the basics to work from. My Dalish mage, at least my current one, will never support the Circles, so Viv will always be mad at me. This will have other consequences as well, both from my Inner Circle, and choices I make going forward, such as making the mages allies, instead of conscripting them, which will have even more affect on my Inner Circle, and will affect the enemies I face throughout the latter portions of the game. All because that character doesn't see the need for the Circles. Ironically enough, she doesn't see the need for the Chantry or Templars either. All stuff that in Origins, we can build in the Origin story, we can take our base, Dalish, for example, and build from there, based on what we know. All the origin stories do, and I don't mean to sound overly minimalistic, is give us an opportunity to see life in Thedas from wildly varying view points. But here's the thing, we've seen that. We have a basic understanding of where these characters came from, and we are free to build from that.

This does, however, play into the subjective nature of the thread. No matter how it's handled, some people won't like it because it's voiced. Some won't like it because it's not voiced. Some will hate the dialog wheel, no matter how close it is to what we actually say, or how far, not like I haven't seen that, especially in DA 2. So these threads will never be anything but sounding boards, because nobody is going to feel the same way about everything, what a boring place that would be.

[robertthebard]

It doesn't really affect or matter to me, but I'm glad you play that way. It kind of annoys me when people aren't roleplaying/consistent somehow in their character's psychology. Origin stories do help greatly though.. they provide focus to make this easier.

Yeah. I was able to extrapolate my Dalish, and my Human rogue from what I played in Origins and DA 2. The setting is more than just a backdrop, it's the lore you need to "function" within the setting. I didn't have any issues with it, and my two completions, so far, are wildly different from each other in motivation, but, to me, that's always been up to the player, voiced PC or not. That is, however, the subjective thing. I can't, er, won't tell someone that if they can't relate to their PC, it's on them, they weren't given what they thought they needed to be able to. Some were given more than enough, over the course of the previous games, to base their character on. That's why "sounding board" is applicable.

[LinksOcarina]

To me, one problem in this game's origins is in how they limit things. Not in how open ended they are. I have a harder time playing too old of a human noble, for example, simply because of the description. If they are the youngest of the family and have yet to either join the Templars or as a priest/priestess, then they must be fairly young. My headcanon can only extend so far. I even wrote David Gaider about this. He told me just to make up my own backstory. lol.. but I can't get over the official description. And I'm not sure what he really meant anyways.

 

That said, within those confines, I can still find a good personality for a character.

 

In the end, I find the most personality and story potential in the Circle mage, personally.

 

how can you play a too old human noble in Origins though when your father looks like hes fifty and your older brother is in his late 20s?

[Hazegurl]

how can you play a too old human noble in Origins though when your father looks like hes fifty and your older brother is in his late 20s?

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.
 

[LinksOcarina]

I can't. Cousland is definitely young. "Pup".

 

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that Origins was better than DAI. Both pretty much give me a similar age character (when it comes to nobles). What origins does provide though is little details that might add more flavor to my character. For example, I can't for the life of me recruit Sten on a noble. He just saw his own family killed. It's kind of weak to just recruit some giant who slaughtered another family. It works better (for me) if I'm more removed from that kind of tragedy. Like one of the elves or dwarves.

 

That stems moreso from a story issue. I like the Origin stories, but they are very...purposeful in terms of their content if that makes any sense. They are designed to be tragic or discouraging for those around you. I guess when it comes to issues like that, maybe its possible, but you can then easily say I recruit Sten because i'm desperate, or I hated my father or something like that, you know what I mean?

 

That is where the headcannoning comes in. Just because were shown aspects of that moment, or told it, are two different things. 

 

Plus it should be noted that the backgrounds in Inquisition are not as tragic, which I actually prefer because there is only so much drama you can get out of the murder of your family,rape of your wife, or attempted regicide. 

[Cheech 2.0]

Ok I get that people like The Inquisitor that's all well and good. That being said you can't honestly tell me any of the the Inquisitor's voice performances can hold a candle to Hawke's ( female one ) I had more attachment to her before she got to Kirkwall, than I did to the Inquisitor as the credits rolled. Sure people say you gotta head canon, you have to become the Inquisitor. You know what I say about that head canon smed canon. I don't like playing that way I never have, but I'm in the minority it looks like.

 

Yeah DA2's recycled environments sucked no doubt about that, but I never knew people were upset about monster closets and spawn points lol, is that a thing? I like that people have opinions and discuss them in a orderly and respectful manner. Oh wait this is BSN, home of the outraged, the righteous, and those who know real rpg's and how to play them. One day when I grow up I hope my opinion becomes right like yours

[robertthebard]

Ok I get that people like The Inquisitor that's all well and good. That being said you can't honestly tell me any of the the Inquisitor's voice performances can hold a candle to Hawke's ( female one ) I had more attachment to her before she got to Kirkwall, than I did to the Inquisitor as the credits rolled. Sure people say you gotta head canon, you have to become the Inquisitor. You know what I say about that head canon smed canon. I don't like playing that way I never have, but I'm in the minority it looks like.
 
Yeah DA2's recycled environments sucked no doubt about that, but I never knew people were upset about monster closets and spawn points lol, is that a thing? I like that people have opinions and discuss them in a orderly and respectful manner. Oh wait this is BSN, home of the outraged, the righteous, and those who know real rpg's and how to play them. One day when I grow up I hope my opinion becomes right like yours

Welcome to BSN, where if you actually enjoy something someone else doesn't, you must be lying.

[LinksOcarina]

I think people are bit more sophisticated than that, now a days. At least, a large number of folks are more "talky" if that makes sense. 

[robertthebard]

I think people are bit more sophisticated than that, now a days. At least, a large number of folks are more "talky" if that makes sense.

Some may indeed be, but the guy I quoted? Not so much. The whole post drips with condescension, and the worst part? It's not even sarcastic, he legitimately believes his own hyperbole.

[LinksOcarina]

Fair point. Like I said, this just works for me. I don't expect everyone to not recruit Sten in that scenario. Heh. It's only about what I find mentally comfortable and how the origin serves a guidepost. I am interested in other people's rationale as well, so long as it's character-centered reasoning, rather than something the player merely wants.

 

I can use similar reasoning here btw.. If I have a character who really believes they are the Herald -- or is just a mage in general -- then recruiting Bull is kind of difficult. Exactly how do I find it in myself to be THIS openminded? One believes it's a Holy Calling, the other doesn't want his tongue cut out. They don't take kindly to Qunari spies either way. And Bull's more practical reasoning to be a "bodyguard" isn't all that needed either. The only difference with DAO or DA2's background is that this is general lore/faction based opposition. Rather than personal hangups and history. I like to have a little of both.. which those games did.

 

You could also argue that you need men and soldiers since your numbers at that point are very thin. you also have the option of the "ill keep my eye on you" sort of dialogue when you recruit them as well, so the question then stems on how you want to roleplay it.

 

It is also simple to due to the binary decisions made during those choices. I can only think of two scenarios in the Dragon Age series that actually have really complex choices and decisions to them, and that is the Landsmeet, and Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts. Everything else is pretty much binary, with variations at times. Connor and the Demon or Nature of the Beast for example have three options a piece, but those choices are not really complex, it boils down to who you want to save, and how you save them. Why you would choose one over the other is where the roleplaying comes in, which is not as present in Dragon Age II or Inquisition, and probably won't be present due to how it can lead to problems down the road.

 

I feel like there is always ample opportunity to role play a character in a BioWare game, but the characters themselves are still devoid of personality, outside of Shepard who is again the outlier. What works for an individual does come down to preference of course, not taking that away, but it should be noted that it is always there in some form, of course, be it the origins helping or not. 

[VilhoDog13]

Heh, BioWare can't win for losing. They give 'em too much personality, and people complain, they try to leave it open to the player's interpretation, and people complain, they're screwed, no matter what they do.

 

 

For all its faults da:2 def was on the right track with Hawke. The sarcastic Hawke was just an fantastically voiced character.

The inquisitor basically is either very diplomatic or very angry. Half the time I don't know which option I'm choosing

 

 

Good freakin' lord. This is the point. Bioware really can't win. People complained that Hawke was too narrow. Good/Sarcastic/Bad options. So, Bioware creates the inquisitor - far more neutral options/tones, along with more options of lines.

 

Even still, apparently that's not good enough. (And I'm not saying you were one of those people uncle, I'm merely pointing out how ironic your statement was in relation to what people said about Hawke in DA2. But I do disagree with you that the inquisitor was either very diplomatic or angry. He could have a fairly neutral point of view. There were many times where, instead of agreeing/disagreeing with someone, I questioned them about their motives instead).

 

Sometimes BSN......sometimes.....

[KaiserShep]

The sad truth is that according to the forum, the franchise will need fixing forever.

[Maverick827]

Welcome to BSN, where if you actually enjoy something someone else doesn't, you must be lying.

 

Also, if you don't enjoy something that someone else does, then you're a hater whose opinion doesn't matter.

[Elite Midget]

True enough Hawke had a ton of personality and Witty FemHawke is still the #1 Bioware protagonist in my eyes. Inquisitor doesn't have as much "Energy" or Defining Personality" like Hawke for sure.

 

Main disappointment I had is that Hawke wasn't around longer in DA:I. Would have loved to have Hawke at least helping in some way in the final battles.

 

 

You're absolutely right. Ironically, the voiceless Warden with the thousand-yard stare had more personality and depth than either Hawke or the Inquisitor.

Hilarious.

 

Warden had no personality at all.

 

They didn't even have a voice.

[Mesecina]

Wow I never expected to find so many answers, most of them quite civil too

Well for me I mostly play RPGs for story and having a main protagonist with at least some character backstory definitely helps the whole experience (again I'd go with my favourite Shepard as an example).
I personally do not enjoy open world RPGs as I find them mostly very lacking in that aspect and that's why I have to admit all my favourite titles come from Bioware (well except WOW but you can't really compare that).

I actually wastly prefer having voiced protagonist over mute and I thought I was going to struggle through Origins after developing the urge to replay it again after finishing DAI (I think I haven't replayed it for at least 1,5 year), that's why It really took me by surprise how much the old Warden grew on me in a few hours of gameplay comparing to inquisitor (so after that I developed another urge to share it on forums

While origin certainly is a huge factor here I agree with many who have pointed out sidequests - in Origins and let's be honest also in DA2 those actually had a meaning and shaped the protagonists personality in many cases (Dagna, Cammen and Gheyna, Fate of Redcliffe village, Connor...) while in DAI sometimes I didn't even know which quest it was supposed to be when "quest completed" (for example that ashes quest or dead grandpa in hinterlands or that felandris I was waiting ages to even find out what it was and all it got me was an abomination coming out of nowhere...) popped up.

After DAI I grabbed Alistair, Morrigan and Leliana + extra dog slot as I don't imagine my Cousland going anywhere without her mabari and They are literally reacting (and bickering) about every single side or mainquest I take, something I really miss in inquisition.

Hell as Dalish you can have your whole clan wiped out and you can't even go and mention it to ANYONE in inquisition, while as Cousland you get to cry about your family to almost anyone you meet (Cailan, Alistair, Flemeth, Bann Teagan...)

[Hazegurl]

The sad truth is that according to the forum, the franchise will need fixing forever.

Well that's kinda true for all franchises. They will always have things to improve on because the goal is to do better than what they did in the previous game. It's just a matter of if it's for the better or worse.

[LinksOcarina]

Well that's kinda true for all franchises. They will always have things to improve on because the goal is to do better than what they did in the previous game. It's just a matter of if it's for the better or worse.

 

True in theory at least. In practice...the issue kind of stems from an age old debate regarding fans and their "ownership" of the subculture. Sociologically it's a fascinating thing, but it's also a problem with a lot of "nerd" cultures. The Star Wars fanbase as an example is one that really captures these type of subcultural issues. Rejection of aspects of the culture by the creators, believing in certain canon over another, following lore to the T in terms of being the be all, end all of what the world encompasses, the list is endless.

[Cheech 2.0]

Meh it's all opinions. Hawke owns Inquisitor in every aspect. That's how I feel, and no matter how many pie charts, star maps, fossil records, and sworn statements people argue with it won't change my mind. Am I wrong? are they wrong? who cares it's my opinion. Put it this way I'd rather hang out in IRL with Hawke than Inquisitor because I like a little trouble with a whole lot of snark on the side oooooohhhhhh dat snark.