220 réponses à ce sujet

[Dutch]

As it stands, Dragon Age Inquisition is just badly written fan fiction.

[ashlover mark 2]

I say try sacrificeing the bulls chargers during IB personal quest. Even if you don't care about the chargers themselves watching Iron Bulls reaction is rough stuff.

[Nyaore]

Frankly I hate the idea of 'mandatory' deaths and that losing someone is somehow the most poignant way of getting you invested in the story. It's right up there with authors using rape as a plot device when the author isn't willing to actually show the grace and talent needed for such a heavy subject. It's usually cheap, manipulative, and if it doesn't go well it only stabs holes in the narrative for me unless it's handled like in Game of Thrones where deaths are a dime a dozen. If someone MUST die, I want it handled right. Knowing that 'oh, there has to be a death' is numbing for me and borders on uninteresting. I understand why people prefer those stories, but for me unless - again - it's handled well it just makes the flaws in the writing all the more apparent.

[KaiserShep]

Yes it does.

Death is simple. Emotional depth requires good context. You can kill any character at any time and it can either be really gripping or a waste of time trying to yank some heartstrings.

[Dutch]

Death is simple. Emotional depth requires good context. You can kill any character at any time and it can either be really gripping or a waste of time trying to yank some heartstrings.

 

I'm not advocating for Bioware to plop out companions left and right with no meaningful context. That's what Bioware needs, context in almost all of its poor writing for this game.

[actionhero112]

It's very hard to come up with a universal theme that hits as hard as death does. The other one that comes to mind is birth.

 

Death is always going to be more emotionally involved.

It's not just a saddening event on it's own for a character you've emotionally invested in. But it's also a reminder to the player that yes, they are in fact mortal, and yes, they will die. 

 

For a series that defines itself as dark fantasy, there isn't a lot of companion death in DA:I. Like in DA:2 we had one unavoidable death that hit really hard and was exceptionally well done. More of that. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Unavoidable deaths are even more lacking in emotional depth because it is trying to create drama for drama's sake, feeling fake as a result. 

 

To use Mass Effect as an example, the Virmire choice brought out no big emotions from me because it created drama for drama's sake. Meanwhile the Suicide Run in Mass Effect 2 did because the deaths didn't have to happen, so you feel like you failed that character. 

 

Not saying this is always the case. Mordin's and Legion's deaths are unavoidable and that brought out strong emotions, but those are rare cases. 

[Shaftell]

Lol imagine the Sh** storm if they killed off Morrigan or Leliana permanently. BSN would shut down for good. Or the Warden or Hawke was a permanent death. I feel like they are trying to start off scratch. They want less variables going into the next game. I feel like they're trying to tie up all the old stuff and don't want their next game be lagged by all the old variables that remain.

Death's also don't always make for good writing. It's becoming such a stupid trend on TV shows now, killing off characters makes "good writing" (i'm looking at you GOT and Walking Dead). Every season they introduce new characters so they can kill them off. It's becoming lazy and formulaic. A death needs to be meaningful and honestly, the Fade choice was good enough because it required us to make an emotional choice (unless you had Stroud, sorry buddy you're dying every time).

[Ogillardetta]

It's very hard to come up with a universal theme that hits as hard as death does. The other one that comes to mind is birth.

 

Death is always going to be more emotionally involved.

It's not just a saddening event on it's own for a character you've emotionally invested in. But it's also a reminder to the player that yes, they are in fact mortal, and yes, they will die. 

 

For a series that defines itself as dark fantasy, there isn't a lot of companion death in DA:I. Like in DA:2 we had one unavoidable death that hit really hard and was exceptionally well done. More of that. 

Imagine if someone made one of the mage companions tranquil because of a mistake you did?maybe as a conseqence for juding someone to tranquility? That would hit me harder than their death tbh.

[Nefla]

Yes it does.

For you, not for everyone. For me scenes have emotional depth if they're done well and have a lot of foreshadowing and buildup. I felt that this scene from Game of Thrones https://www.youtube....h?v=RNfy0lFHKzY had a lot of emotional depth and no one dies. I think death can be done well but it's often used very cheaply.

 

Don't get me wrong though, I DO wish the game had more emotional impact, and a balance between setback and sadness vs constant victory but I don't think characters need to die for that to happen (although it would be cool if player or companion death could be one possible result of your choices throughout the game).

[Dutch]

It's very hard to come up with a universal theme that hits as hard as death does. The other one that comes to mind is birth.

 

Death is always going to be more emotionally involved.

It's not just a saddening event on it's own for a character you've emotionally invested in. But it's also a reminder to the player that yes, they are in fact mortal, and yes, they will die. 

 

For a series that defines itself as dark fantasy, there isn't a lot of companion death in DA:I. Like in DA:2 we had one unavoidable death that hit really hard and was exceptionally well done. More of that. 

 

This is a good post.

[KaiserShep]

Unavoidable deaths are even more lacking in emotional depth because it is trying to create drama for drama's sake, feeling fake as a result.

To use Mass Effect as an example, the Virmire choice brought out no big emotions from me because it created drama for drama's sake. Meanwhile the Suicide Run in Mass Effect 2 did because the deaths didn't have to happen, so you feel like you failed that character.

Not saying this is always the case. Mordin's and Legion's deaths are unavoidable and that brought out strong emotions, but those are rare cases.

I actually didn't feel anything for the companion deaths in ME2. I guess because it was really easy to decide who does what. I had to metagame the tragedy. DA:O, I felt had a great use of this with the Cousland parent deaths. It set a great tone for the rest of the noble's story, especially when it comes back to you at the temple of sacred ashes. Mordin's death was great, because it was part of such a large story spanning two games.

[Aesir26]

I agree to an extent. I would say that death does not equal emotional depth but the game does lack a feeling of risk or adversity. The mission "In Your Heart Shall Burn" was the absolute high point of the game for me.

 

However, after that we're beating Corypheus's plan at practically every turn in a way that feels like you're beating on a pinata.

 

It's a shame because otherwise this is probably my favourite DA game.

[ashlover mark 2]

Lol imagine the Sh** storm if they killed off Morrigan or Leliana permanently. BSN would shut down for good. Or the Warden or Hawke was a permanent death. I feel like they are trying to start off scratch. They want less variables going into the next game. I feel like they're trying to tie up all the old stuff and don't want their next game be lagged by all the old variables that remain.

Death's also don't always make for good writing. It's becoming such a stupid trend on TV shows now, killing off characters makes "good writing" (i'm looking at you GOT and Walking Dead). Every season they introduce new characters so they can kill them off. It's becoming lazy and formulaic. A death needs to be meaningful and honestly, the Fade choice was good enough because it required us to make an emotional choice (unless you had Stroud, sorry buddy you're dying every time).

I  feel they are doing the complete opposite even if it's unintentional. By haveing the HOF off on a ridiculously important warden mission and Hawke\Warden contact disappearing makes people want to know whats going on with them.

[Dutch]

Lol imagine the Sh** storm if they killed off Morrigan or Leliana permanently. BSN would shut down for good. Or the Warden or Hawke was a permanent death. I feel like they are trying to start off scratch. They want less variables going into the next game. I feel like they're trying to tie up all the old stuff and don't want their next game be lagged by all the old variables that remain.

Death's also don't always make for good writing. It's becoming such a stupid trend on TV shows now, killing off characters makes "good writing" (i'm looking at you GOT and Walking Dead). Every season they introduce new characters so they can kill them off. It's becoming lazy and formulaic. A death needs to be meaningful and honestly, the Fade choice was good enough because it required us to make an emotional choice (unless you had Stroud, sorry buddy you're dying every time).

 

Of course, it s no surprise really that most of writing in Dragon Age Inquisition is tailored for the constant users of the BSN. 

[phaonica]

It seems that no one can ever agree when it is and isn't okay to have a character death. What *should* Bioware be using to engage someone emotionally? What *does* actually constitute a "hard choice" if you are the type who is just going to reload when there is a negative consequence?

[CoM Solaufein]

Kill Leliana? It would be game over, man, game over.

 

Lol imagine the Sh** storm if they killed off Morrigan or Leliana permanently. BSN would shut down for good. Or the Warden or Hawke was a permanent death. I feel like they are trying to start off scratch. They want less variables going into the next game. I feel like they're trying to tie up all the old stuff and don't want their next game be lagged by all the old variables that remain.

Death's also don't always make for good writing. It's becoming such a stupid trend on TV shows now, killing off characters makes "good writing" (i'm looking at you GOT and Walking Dead). Every season they introduce new characters so they can kill them off. It's becoming lazy and formulaic. A death needs to be meaningful and honestly, the Fade choice was good enough because it required us to make an emotional choice (unless you had Stroud, sorry buddy you're dying every time).

[Zombie Chow]

I'm not sure this game lacked deaths, because Haven.

I do agree it lacked emotional depth, because Haven led to an upgrade with Skyhold and you're the leader now, yay!

To be fair, there's a lot of things we could compare between DAI and previous Mass Effect games, just for example. I had to choose between Hawke and the Warden as I had to choose between Ashley and Kaidan. Inquisition troops died at Adamant and presumably at the Mythal Temple just as at the Citadel and on the Normandy. However, Mass Effect went on to show you the ruins of the Citadel even after the fight, as if to say "never forget".

DAI seemed so happy to let those moments slip by.

You guys already mentioned Varric's modest reaction when Hawke was left in the Fade in DAI. In ME1, I still remember when I left Kaidan behind (because I had to make sure Ashley could set up the bomb correctly, the goal of the mission), Ashley snapped at me for choosing her over him, and I had to snap back at her. Then afterwards, there was still that empty chair, a constant reminder.

In DAI, people talked about Haven afterwards, the most poignant being Josephine saying the workers leapt to arms before anyone, because they were so proud. Then you have the Big Table Operations to build a monument. I remember in ME2 there was a whole mission for a Normandy monument. It was solo, a tiny map, but trying to find 13 dog-tags. At 1st, I thought it was just filler, but that empty map, your footsteps, the wreckage, finding Navigator Pressley's dogtag and thinking back when we were arguing about aliens at the start of ME1.

So yeah, while there were deaths, I'm not sure there was weight.  I loved DAI, but I could have seen those moments being more.

 

TL;DR - I'm not sure if it's just more deaths, but we certainly hadn't even treated the deaths we got in DAI with respect, let's be fair.

[Dutch]

I'm not sure this game lacked deaths, because Haven.

I do agree it lacked emotional depth, because Haven led to an upgrade with Skyhold and you're the leader now, yay!

To be fair, there's a lot of things we could compare between DAI and previous Mass Effect games, just for example. I had to choose between Hawke and the Warden as I had to choose between Ashley and Kaidan. Inquisition troops died at Adamant and presumably at the Mythal Temple just as at the Citadel and on the Normandy. However, Mass Effect went on to show you the ruins of the Citadel even after the fight, as if to say "never forget".

DAI seemed so happy to let those moments slip by.

You guys already mentioned Varric's modest reaction when Hawke was left in the Fade in DAI. In ME1, I still remember when I left Kaidan behind (because I had to make sure Ashley could set up the bomb correctly, the goal of the mission), Ashley snapped at me for choosing her over him, and I had to snap back at her. Then afterwards, there was still that empty chair, a constant reminder.

In DAI, people talked about Haven afterwards, the most poignant being Josephine saying the workers leapt to arms before anyone, because they were so proud. Then you have the Big Table Operations to build a monument. I remember in ME2 there was a whole mission for a Normandy monument. It was solo, a tiny map, but trying to find 13 dog-tags. At 1st, I thought it was just filler, but that empty map, your footsteps, the wreckage, finding Navigator Pressley's dogtag and thinking back when we were arguing about aliens at the start of ME1.

So yeah, while there were deaths, I'm not sure there was weight.  I loved DAI, but I could have seen those moments being more.

 

This is also a good post. Thanks for the input.

[tself55]

Lol imagine the Sh** storm if they killed off Morrigan or Leliana permanently. BSN would shut down for good. Or the Warden or Hawke was a permanent death. I feel like they are trying to start off scratch. They want less variables going into the next game. I feel like they're trying to tie up all the old stuff and don't want their next game be lagged by all the old variables that remain.

Death's also don't always make for good writing. It's becoming such a stupid trend on TV shows now, killing off characters makes "good writing" (i'm looking at you GOT and Walking Dead). Every season they introduce new characters so they can kill them off. It's becoming lazy and formulaic. A death needs to be meaningful and honestly, the Fade choice was good enough because it required us to make an emotional choice (unless you had Stroud, sorry buddy you're dying every time).

Game of Thrones is a book series first, not a TV series, so it cannot be a trend of TV. Characters are not introduced to just be "killed off", every character fulfills his/her role in an incredibly complex political world in which no one is assured stupid plot armour.

[KaiserShep]

I could see Scout Harding holding the line to her last breath. The forum would sink into a sea of the saltiest tears ever.

[Shimmer_Gloom]

Game didn't need more death. And it had PLENTY of emotional depth.

It COULD have used more set backs. To borrow a film critic term: we could have used a bit more to highlight the midpoint (the Fade). Heavy stuff happens but it's not a REAL midpoint because here isn't a 'changing of tactic.' Ie we are triumphant and not forced to re-evaluate our outlook (debatable depending on if you felt your PC was sent by Andraste)

As for emotional content... Most people that say that didn't romance Solas. Or had Alastair or Loghain in the fade. Or sacrifice the Chargers. Or they don't stop to think that not every emotional scene is sadness. There is also Elation (triumph at Adamant). Frustration and Disapointment (Sera). Betrayal (Blackwall).

Dragon Age is not lacking in emotional depth. And I hardly think Ubisoft is reaching as far as Bioware when it comes to making people feel/think. Nothing against AC4. But Bioware has a reputation for a reason.

[Dutch]

Game didn't need more death. And it had PLENTY of emotional depth.

It COULD have used more set backs. To borrow a film critic term: we could have used a bit more to highlight the midpoint (the Fade). Heavy stuff happens but it's not a REAL midpoint because here isn't a 'changing of tactic.' Ie we are triumphant and not forced to re-evaluate our outlook (debatable depending on if you felt your PC was sent by Andraste)

As for emotional content... Most people that say that didn't romance Solas. Or had Alastair or Loghain in the fade. Or sacrifice the Chargers. Or they don't stop to think that not every emotional scene is sadness. There is also Elation (triumph at Adamant). Frustration and Disapointment (Sera). Betrayal (Blackwall).

Dragon Age is not lacking in emotional depth. And I hardly think Ubisoft is reaching as far as Bioware when it comes to making people feel/think. Nothing against AC4. But Bioware has a reputation for a reason.

 

Bioware HAD a reputation but now it has a poor reputation of bad writing and inconsistent plot. Personally, i have played all Bioware games and i find that i had to think on the endings of each game and what transpired, but not for Dragon Age Inquisition. And the fact that i had dwelled more on the ending of AC4 and its characters than Dragon Age Inquisition speaks more. 

[EvilChani]

Game didn't need more death. And it had PLENTY of emotional depth.

It COULD have used more set backs. To borrow a film critic term: we could have used a bit more to highlight the midpoint (the Fade). Heavy stuff happens but it's not a REAL midpoint because here isn't a 'changing of tactic.' Ie we are triumphant and not forced to re-evaluate our outlook (debatable depending on if you felt your PC was sent by Andraste)

As for emotional content... Most people that say that didn't romance Solas. Or had Alastair or Loghain in the fade. Or sacrifice the Chargers. Or they don't stop to think that not every emotional scene is sadness. There is also Elation (triumph at Adamant). Frustration and Disapointment (Sera). Betrayal (Blackwall).

Dragon Age is not lacking in emotional depth. And I hardly think Ubisoft is reaching as far as Bioware when it comes to making people feel/think. Nothing against AC4. But Bioware has a reputation for a reason.

 

^^This. I'm sick of this idea that there should be massive deaths in entertainment to make it "riveting". Or this idea in fiction that, once a hero's mentor needs to be removed, the only solution is to kill him/her. Life doesn't work that way. People don't magically die when their "plots" are over. There are other ways to remove characters from the story (see Solas, or Blackwall if you ****** him off too much). There is plenty of emotional dept in this game, if you pay attention. If you're just looking for people dropping like flies and wanting nothing but misery and tears, then I suppose it may not be enough for you, however. It is for that reason that I fully support having setups like in ME2, where you can save everyone if you do everything just right, or where you can end up with your whole squad dead, if you so choose. Then I can work for my happy ending and you can gorge on death and misery. Then we're all satisfied.