156 réponses à ce sujet

[Lars Honeytoast]

Hey folks,

 

I wanted to know, what are the chances Dragon Age goes Mass Effect style and keeps the same protagonist for multiple games? I ask, because Inquisition felt like ME1 to me in a few ways. 

 

Hear me out: This game is set up similarly to Mass Effect 1. Your character's legend grows, he gathers his party and now stands as possibly the most important person in the world (galaxy, whatever). Close to the end of the game, you character encounters an enemy that is too powerful to take down himself, signalling big things to come (Reapers, the demon you sacrifice Hawke to escape from (the name escapes me)). Both games were plagued by their open world segments seeming somewhat unfocused and unnecessary, while the story segments seem to be the more successful elements of the game. (Unfortunately, while ME peaked at the end, DA:I peaks somewhere in the middle).

Point being, Inquisition feels much more like the set up of things to come than previous games have. You've been set up as a well respected hero with a nice title (Commander. Inquisitor.), and it seems like a great amount of effort has been put in to emphasize the fastness of the world, and your reputation within it. It seems strange to set up a character to be so influential within the world and not continue on the story through them.

I realize that the past main characters were influential in their own right, but it seems like the Inquisitor has been set up to be a long running hero for this generation of consoles.

 

Someone recently told me the developers have said that there will always be a new main character for each game. Is that true, and if so, when did they say it? Personally, I feel like that strategy hasn't worked out all that well. Each game feels very disconnected from the previous one, and it makes your previous heroes feel very insignificant once you start the next game, despite the fact that they are supposedly outrageously powerful.

 

So, what do you think? I'm curious.

[Exalus]

Likely zero. If it was someone like hawke maybe but certainly not blank slate inquisitor.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

I can't remember where exactly, but it is true, a dev did say that they're aiming for a new protagonist every setting (though they may have taken that back).

I honestly have to agree, while I LOVE playing a new story of a new character every game, the cons to having different protagonists are starting to show, whether there's a certain disconnection, your old protagonist's cameos, etc...

I personally want to continue my adventure in Thedas with my Inquisitor, for once I don't want to feel like I'm the underdog nobody building myself up AGAIN. I want to use all the influence I've worked towards getting in more than just a DLC/expansion.

 

[Dio Demon]

Bupkis and none.

[Ashagar]

None, Mass Effect was the story of Shepard while Dragon Age is the story of Thadas not any one person.

[Lars Honeytoast]

Likely zero. If it was someone like hawke maybe but certainly not blank slate inquisitor.

 

I'm not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but in games that highly emphasize choice and variability, a blank slate character is probably the best bet to have run through multiple games.

 

I don't know, it's just started to feel strange, building up a character to a godly amount of strength, and then when the next game comes along and the world is in peril, that character is just an NPC of little consequence. I apologize for being somewhat of a Mass Effect fanboy, but there are a few moments in this game that were very Shepard-esque, where you felt like your character was becoming the greatest potential for change in this world. Taking the role of inquisitor, escaping Corypheus at Haven, picking who rules Orlais, and travelling through time to alter a post-apocalyptic future... It just seems wrong to give the Inquisitor the Hawke treatment when (s)he essentially runs the known world. You know?

[DracoAngel]

None. Bioware has stated (numerous times) that they are not going to bring in the same protagonist for future installments. Why? Because Dragon Age is supposed to be a story about the world and not about 1 character

[Lars Honeytoast]

Can I get a link to a recent interview? I believe you, but i was trying to find it to put in the OP and couldn't.

 

 

 

 

It's just me being hopeful, I suppose. I wish that the games felt a little more connected, but the jump between console generations may have had as much to do with that as anything else.

[KaiserShep]

I'm not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but in games that highly emphasize choice and variability, a blank slate character is probably the best bet to have run through multiple games.

 

I don't know, it's just started to feel strange, building up a character to a godly amount of strength, and then when the next game comes along and the world is in peril, that character is just an NPC of little consequence. I apologize for being somewhat of a Mass Effect fanboy, but there are a few moments in this game that were very Shepard-esque, where you felt like your character was becoming the greatest potential for change in this world. Taking the role of inquisitor, escaping Corypheus at Haven, picking who rules Orlais, and travelling through time to alter a post-apocalyptic future... It just seems wrong to give the Inquisitor the Hawke treatment when (s)he essentially runs the known world. You know?

 

That's really the problem. Awakening is pretty much the only game in the series where we were able to carry the character over, and the Warden had a ridiculous amount of abilities in just a 15 or so hour expansion. With Mass Effect, Shepard's death was the quickest and easiest way around handling the levels of this character. I imported a level 60 character that would have made mince meat of those lousy Vorcha on Omega.

[Arisugawa]

That's really the problem. Awakening is pretty much the only game in the series where we were able to carry the character over, and the Warden had a ridiculous amount of abilities in just a 15 or so hour expansion. With Mass Effect, Shepard's death was the quickest and easiest way around handling the levels of this character. I imported a level 60 character that would have made mince meat of those lousy Vorcha on Omega.

 

And that doesn't explain at all why Tali, Garrus, and Liara were nerfed from their respective Level 60s back to Level 1 in ME2, or Ashley/Kaiden in ME3 for the same reason. Sure, Shepard got all Lazarus Project'd, but other people survived the Collector attack.

[Ash Wind]

While there are those who will tell you Dragon Age has never been about 1 character, Brent Knowles, the Lead Designer for much of DAO's development, stated in his blog (shortly after he left BW, 6 months before DAO was launched (they had finished the PC version and were completeing the console versions)) that in DA2's pre-production, there was a great debate on whether to bring the Warden back or not....

 

Gasps... if DA was NEVER about 1 character, how could there ever be a debate?????? Every BW employee who has repeated the line has lied and is trying to sell you something.

 

It was not the original intent to have a different character for each game, no matter what BS certain devs try to sling.

 

The whole BS about DA never being about one character arose during the announcement of Hawke and DA2, and the reaction to that.

 

If DA2 had sold 10 million copies, Hawke would have been DAI's inquisitor. If DAI sells 10 million copies, you will see, like any number of DA 'truths' reconned and neutered, the IQ character return.

[DracoAngel]

 

Can I get a link to a recent interview? I believe you, but i was trying to find it to put in the OP and couldn't.

A recent interview? I'll keep looking once I get home but here is one from back in 2011 when speaking about DAI

http://biowarefans.c...ew-protagonist/

 

and this talks a little about it too

http://www.pcgamer.c...the-open-world/

[KaiserShep]

And that doesn't explain at all why Tali, Garrus, and Liara were nerfed from their respective Level 60s back to Level 1 in ME2, or Ashley/Kaiden in ME3 for the same reason. Sure, Shepard got all Lazarus Project'd, but other people survived the Collector attack.

 

Well, actually, if you imported a level 60 character from ME1, Shepard and all companions start off at level 5, but I get your point. This doesn't apply to ME3, however, since you and all companions can start off at level 30, provided you beat ME2 at max level.

[Hiemoth]

I really hope not, especially if they end up focusing on Tevinter and Qunari regions.

[Arisugawa]

Well, actually, if you imported a level 60 character from ME1, Shepard and all companions start off at level 5, but I get your point. This doesn't apply to ME3, however, since you and all companions can start off at level 30, provided you beat ME2 at max level.

 

What I mean is that Ashley/Kaidan get reset in ME2 as well, and show up in ME3 as though they were Lazarus'd as well.

[ashlover mark 2]

I hope zero. The Inquisitor is a boring plot device, not a fleshed out charecter. He waved his magic hand at the big green hole in the sky; his job is done. If we are getting a returning protagonist in DA4 (which I doubt) it should be The HOF or Hawke.

 

As for this whole "Dragon Age is about Thedas and not the PCs" business? The allure of that gimmick is fadeing quick. By the time we get to DA5  (if not sooner) players will be thinking "Uh... So we have The HOF, Hawke, The Inquisitor,the DA4 hero and they are all off on other business\too far away to help -- or have completely disappeared and can't be found? And once again some new random dude must step up and become the ultra baddass that saves the world? Lame."

[Bluto Blutarskyx]

I think it would be nice if bioware created an "open" cannon dlc adventure that the player could chose to use the warden or the inquisitor (or hawke if they must),

That is basically written like golems of amgorak.

Ie: no connection to any story and the adventure can fit into the world without longstanding reproussions. Like a "one and done" type of quest that simply gives the player the option to revisit their prior characters with only the title of "warden" "inquisitor" or "hawke" to change.

No returning companions and just add some cool "throwaway" companions (or none and you go it solo or pay for generic hirelings you pick up throughout the story).

Or make the story so open you could even re create anyone in the facegen and make them fit the adventure with a 4th title of "mercenary" or something.
Where the protagonist is just helping a group of people somewhere for money or foolishness or whatever.

It gives people the chance to play a standalone adventure and replay their favorite characters (or hawke) from prior games with no impact on this or any other story. Maybe like amgorak give some bonus starting items upon completion.

[Bluto Blutarskyx]

@ashlover-
The inquisitor is as fleshed out as you make him or her- granted there isn't as much freedom to define your char through dialogue as there is the warden but it's certainly more than hawke- then again so is your freedom to define John marston in red dead redemption more than Hawke (or clos to it)....

If your inquisitors only defining personally trait is the mark on their hand that's your fault for not developing a more in depth personality for them.

People should not expect a pre rendered personality to be laid out for them in a role playing game. That defeats the purpose of playing a role playing game.

Don't get me wrong- some pre rendered protags are iconic- marston, Johnny gat, solid snake, Claire redfield, duke nukem, batman, kratos, PAC man, etc. but making them a main char in an rpg tends to undermine the point.

[Vicious]

pretty much zero

 

morrigan leaves lands dominated by the inquisition. so ferelden and orlais.

 

next stop tevinter with an almost all new cast and protagonist.

[Bluto Blutarskyx]

Although I do agree with you that future da games should be open world enough to let you design who the protag is- but also not force you into the warden or inquisitor or hawke (I wouldn't buy another game with hawke as the protagonist).

I agree with you in that they should take the Bethseda approach and create a story where you can squeeze your char into the events of that game. So if I wanted to play as warden or even geralt- there is nothing stopping me.

I just think that the inquisitor is not the "one horse show" you seem to indicate. If any of the protags are its hawke- with three "canned" cookie cutter personalities to chose from and nothing more.

[ashlover mark 2]

The Inquisitor is a plot device not a charecter. He has no story beyond sealing the breach and repeating "Yes I am the Herald of Andraste." or "No I'm not the Herald of Andraste."  10 times. I have to completely  disagree with you Hawke has waaay more personality than the Inquisitor. The voice acting alone for Hawke blows the Inquisitor out of the water. I've played DAI 5 times from beginning to end. I've tried out all the races; the Inquisitor is dull in all of them -- some even more so. Hawke > Inquisitor. HOF > Inquisitor.  

[Bluto Blutarskyx]

No offense but you are confusing voice acting and the framework given to you as part of the plot with personality.

Hawke is a b or c no matter what you do.

But the warden or inquisitor can be role played with a wide variety of personality traits in reaction to dialogue given to them.

If your warden(s) and inquisitor(s) don't have more personality than hawke then it's because you didn't create a character with a 3d personality for the game. Hawke is a b or c as given to you. Warden, with the widest variety of options (due largely to text only dialogue).

My inquisitors have way more personality than hawke- well, maybe not the one that is a sociopathic serial killer type but he "fakes" it better than hawke.
That is because I make them that way and crate an in depth personality with traits that go beyond "species/gender/class". As do most people's I would guess.
Just because you don't bother to create a 3d inquisitor or warden, doesn't mean they are flat. You have the tools to make them as flat or dynamic as you want. The mark and the joining/blight. Are in fact only plot devices not the beginning and end of the characters depth- unless the player fails to generate one beyond that.
But this is an rpg. Not assasins creed where I have a "hawke" spoonfed to me.

(Nothing against Ac- it's a great series, but you don't have much if any, room to create or define your chars personality- like hawke).

Sorry but all my wardens and inquisitors have a lot more depth and motivations to thier chosen responses than "diplomatic" "aggressive" or "sarcastic".

[ashlover mark 2]

What 3D Inquisitor are you talking about? He says the same thing just with varied wording and a different tone of voice. I know how to Role play, I've played the best RPG games 10 times over. The Inquisitor is one of the most boring protagonists' I've ever played as. If you like him\her that's fine. But the Inquisitor is most likely done. And I for one am glad, because Bioware can and has done better imo.

[BackdoorPaco]

Sorry but all my wardens and inquisitors have a lot more depth and motivations to thier chosen responses than "diplomatic" "aggressive" or "sarcastic".

Well all the iq gets are options such as 'holy yes' 'snarky yes' and 'passive aggressive yes'.

Wait, that sounds like a previous protagonist.

Spoiler

Teehee.

[Wrath_Of_Deadguy]

What would really make me happy is a major, major expansion of the role of Dwarves in this series. It's time we saw Kal Sharok and the rest of the Deep Roads, beneath which the last two Old Gods still sleep. That would give us substantial leeway in choosing races- after all, anyone can be a Grey Warden (with the option, if you pick a Dwarf, of being Legion of the Dead instead of a Warden). That's one of the two huge arcs that must be concluded... preferably as a single event. I can't really see Bioware making two more games about us defeating blights, since it's already been done once. I can, however, see them resolving that arc with one single super blight involving both remaining Old Gods/Archdemons. Don't tell me nobody else sees that looming on the horizon. It'd be the perfect time to take us back underground to see where the horror show begins.

 

After that's out of the way... well, then we're left with five major competing religions, aren't we? Ancient Tevinter's Old Gods have had their day with the blights and Corypheus (and possibly the Architect, depending on whether you belive, as I do, that he was also one of the ancient magisters). That's resolved once the blights are, which provides a perfect segue into the last grand celestial war. We have, in the four corners, representatives of the four races of Thedas: The Humans, with their Andrastian Chantry; the Elves, with their pantheon (which has recently been proven to also exist), the Dwarves, who venerate their ancestors and the living stone (anyone notice that lyrium is, in fact, a "living stone?"); and the Qunari, who deny all of the above, instead seeking to impose order and eradicate chaos. Hey... four races, four religions, what more perfect way to send out a series than to give us that many options?

 

I expect a new hero every time. I hope that we will be heading several generations into the future with each installment, and thus see fewer cameos from old characters. It's not that I don't like the rogues' gallery we've accumulated... I love most of them. I just don't want to feel like it's only one giant glob of characters that matters in the world of Thedas. Everybody thus far has six degrees of separation... when we're really really lucky. Most of the time it seems more like two. The series is called Dragon Age, so it's safe to assume all the stories told will take place within that hundred year period (or fifty-nine, rather- that's what remains now)... it isn't impossible that some favorites might still be around by the end of it all. However, the more interconnected the cast of each successive installment becomes with its predecessors, the less convincing the world becomes. I'd like to see a new story where just about everyone, save perhaps the very youngest of the characters we've come to know, are dead of old age (or the Calling). Where they are legends- the shadows looming over whoever we play next. The Warden who ended the Fifth Blight; the Champion who touched off the Mage/Templar war; the Inquisitor who sealed the Breach and defeated the first darkspawn. I don't want to be these people again. They've had their stories. This isn't Mass Effect. Give us a whole new cast- and make us fall in love with them again. Don't just rehash old characters and try to shoehorn them in wherever they'll fit.