Leliana: "You can leave, sure..."
Inky: "K, adios suckas"
Leliana: *quietly under her breath as her right hand reaches behind her back...* "The righteous stand before the darkness and The Maker shall guide their hand."
Inky: *gurgle*
That's how that would have played out. Satisified? I just saved Bioware a ton of money in animations.
Very satisfied. Thank you for settling this debate. 
Leliana: "You can leave, sure..."
Inky: "K, adios suckas"
Leliana: *quietly under her breath as her right hand reaches behind her back...* "The righteous stand before the darkness and The Maker shall guide their hand."
Inky: *gurgle*
That's how that would have played out. Satisified? I just saved Bioware a ton of money in animations.
I lol'd :'D
*snip*
I can create a hundred equally logical paths the game could or even should have provided. I'm fairly certain a BioWare dev can walk in and give you a hundred more.
The issue is that all these suggested paths need to be implemented and they can't be conjured out of thin air, nor can they be magically independently integrated into the game without cost. Even having Cassandra be more hostile towards you throughout the game has an expected domino effect on all her interactions with you.
Everything that made into the game? Those are the paths there were ultimately selected.
Console gamer, reporting... T^T If I had a better PC I'd buy Inquisition for it right away, but my monetary situation does not allow me to buy anything fancy at the moment. So I have to make do with my XBox 360 and patch 2. :/
Ah sorry made the wrong assumption that you were a PC player as I had thought the glitch was PC-only.
Leliana: "You can leave, sure..."
Inky: "K, adios suckas"
Leliana: *quietly under her breath as her right hand reaches behind her back...* "The righteous stand before the darkness and The Maker shall guide their hand."
Inky: *gurgle*
That's how that would have played out. Satisified? I just saved Bioware a ton of money in animations.
Ah sorry made the wrong assumption that you were a PC player.
No worries. And not exclusively. I switch between PC and XBox. Depending on what i feel like playing and how I feel like sitting. 
Don't care about which platform it is, as long as the game is enjoyable. I like PC for the freedom of mods and XBox for the freedom of lying either on the couch or in bed while playing. To each their own and one can enjoy them all if one concentrates on the perks instead of the negatives. Goes well with any aspect of life come to think of it...>_>
No worries. And not exclusively. I switch between PC and XBox. Depending on what i feel like playing and how I feel like sitting.
Totally relate. My XBOX 360 died on me a few months ago (red ring of death) and I sorta miss lounging on a sofa with a controller in hand
I like divergent paths even if the end is the same, the way the game tied the templar and mage questline regardless of which one you do was nice.
If the game had a 1-2 more divergent points it would have been a more interesting experience, in that regard, denying content actually gives the illusion of choice.
Totally relate. My XBOX 360 died on me a few months ago (red ring of death) and I sorta miss lounging on a sofa with a controller in hand
I'm terribly sorry for your loss... Hope it was relatively painless.
Yeh, best feeling, especially if playing before going to sleep, just turn tv to face bed instead of couch, play until you get tired, switch to Netflix and fall asleep to your favourite tv:show. XBox turns off itself, tv turns off itself, no problem And without further ado, and to not further derail from the topic of this thread, I shall leave you guys to it and take my own advise: Turn on XBox and Netflix and hopefully fall asleep relatively quickly. It is 3 a.m here in Finland after all so. xD Night night
I like divergent paths even if the end is the same, the way the game tied the templar and mage questline regardless of which one you do was nice.
If the game had a 1-2 more divergent points it would have been a more interesting experience, in that regard, denying content actually gives the illusion of choice.
There is one significant divergence point near the end. Depending on who drinks from the well, the consequent quests and available options differ.
In fact, one can make the argument that the entire Arbor Wilds temple quest has three potential divergent paths that take you through the quest in a unique independent manner.
1) Follow Enemy
2) Do Ritual + Refuse Elven Cooperation
3) Do Ritual + Accept Elven Cooperation
I like divergent paths even if the end is the same, the way the game tied the templar and mage questline regardless of which one you do was nice.
If the game had a 1-2 more divergent points it would have been a more interesting experience, in that regard, denying content actually gives the illusion of choice.
Sure, but the problem with fighting the plot is that you can come up with a reason to fight the plot at every stage. It's a lot of work to keep coming up with reasons as to why you can't fight the plot, and the best (and least satisfying) "But Thou Must" is some variant of a geas.
The mark is killing you. That's the card the game should have played to not let you walk away. Help us because you agree or help us to help yourself. This is role playing.
The "we can't protect you" idea is less convincing (you can avoid people but not the mark) and offers less role playing leeway.
I think the OP's idea is overkill.
The mark isn't killing you anymore at that point in the game only in the intro before haven.
Yeah, that's all nice and all, but you have to remember that an option such as this is not just a matter of a few lines added like in older RPGs. You are talking about a bunch of extra animations, cutscenes, dialogue...for something that would result the player in the same place. If you wanted to play a character that would refuse to join the cause and wanted to literally leave then it's like you're saying you want to play a character that doesn't fit in the game.
I like divergent paths even if the end is the same, the way the game tied the templar and mage questline regardless of which one you do was nice.
If the game had a 1-2 more divergent points it would have been a more interesting experience, in that regard, denying content actually gives the illusion of choice.
1) Define "choices without consequences". In the hypothetical scenario that I describe in the original post, the immediate and apparent consequence of refusing to join the Inquisition is that you're thrown into a prison cell and that you earn Cassandra's enduring wrath. Is that not enough? It alters your personal story in an interesting, if transitory, way and it has a negative effect on one of your relationships.
Of course the choice doesn't derail the entire plot. The plot, as I mentioned in a previous post, is a large, complicated, obstinate animal that by necessity needs to hold its general course until the end of the game. You'll note that despite all of the "decisions with consequences" that you made in 200-hours-worth of Mass Effect, the game always ends with Shepard sacrificing himself to thwart the Reaper invasion. That inevitable outcome doesn't render any of your previous decisions pointless, does it? Of course not -- because those decisions still helped to define your personal universe and your own Commander Shepard's personality.
2) I didn't "conjure an entire alternative path out of thin air". The holding cells beneath the chantry already exist in-game, so no new environments are required. And most of Cassandra's hostile attitude would be conveyed via occasional party banter. If you're suggesting that BioWare haven't got the time or resources to provide a storyline that diverges even slightly at various points, depending on player decision, then BioWare really shouldn't be making RPGs.
But of course BioWare have got the time and resources to do that kind of thing, clearly, because their games are already packed full of examples of it. And if BioWare find themselves lacking either time or resources, I'm sure many of us would prefer them to sacrifice some of the huge, empty, open-world environments this game offers and concentrate on enhancing the roleplaying experience.
3) You say "roleplaying doesn't fly as an excuse if you actively refuse to play the campaign [BioWare] has in mind and disrupt it where you can".
Firstly, "roleplaying" in a roleplaying game is never an excuse. It's the number one reason most of us play these games, and it has value, in and of itself.
Secondly, I'm not trying to "disrupt" a thing. On the contrary: I'm so invested in the story that BioWare has crafted, and in the dilemma that my hero faces, that I'd like to be able to choose to do what I actually would do were I in her position.
For a person of your obvious intelligence, it should not be hard to fathom why a homesick Dalish elf might not be thrilled about joining a rogue organization of Marker-loving zealots, especially now that she's stabilized the Breach, proven her innocence, and is -- apparently, according to one certain spymaster -- free to go.
Now -- as the player -- I am more than aware that my character isn't going to be able to go anywhere; but that isn't the point. The story should be written well enough that I can roleplay in a way that's authentic to my character without breaking the game.
Or, at the very least, Leliana shouldn't say "You can go if you wish" when you can't. lol
Well said.
I'm fine with giving the player the opportunity to make dumb decisions like this as long as choosing them instantly results in a game over screen. There's no way you would have walked out of Haven alive. Your choice to remain was in your self interest - anything else is a fantasy.
Near the start of the game, after Cassandra declares that she is reforming the "Inquisition of old", the Herald can ask:
"What if I refuse [to join the team]?"
To which Leliana replies: "You can go if you wish."
Well it could of been like the old NINTENDO version of Rambo
"THE GAME WILL NOT CONTINUE UNLESS YOU SAY YES."
It would of been kind of sorta funny to see the ending credits so early in the game after seeing your inquisiter walk away from everything so early on in the game.
The world is about to end. This isn't the time to get uppity about who is helping you stop the apocalypse.
Besides, at your induction ceremony as Inquisitor you can outright say you're doing this for yourself and no one else. Should the PC have then spent the rest of the game going ''guys, just as a reminder, you god sucks and I'm only doing this for my own selfish reason. What were you saying again, Cullen?''.
If there was ever a time for a Non-Standard Game Over, that would have been it.
"The Herald left and the Breach destroyed the world. What did you think was going to happen?"
Yep, this is why I like Bethesda games at times. Take Fallout 3 for example, there is a part where you can choose to activate the G.E.C.K device, while you are standing next to it inside a vault not the greatest idea in the world but you CAN do it.
Ha!
Honestly I'm not opposed to more "Game Over" screens if the character does something badly or incredibly stupid. Those don't need animations at all.
The WHWM Court Approval-linked failure was pretty awesome, for example.
*snip*
The difference is that all three of those options ultimately fulfill your objective, to stop the Reapers and save known civilization, by any means necessary.
Refuse goes against that premise entirely.
No real Shepard would ever pick that option. It's only there for meta-gaming purposes for the player's satisfaction.
They shouldn't have added it in and let detractors roast in their own foolishness.
I've never played ME, so I could be wrong in this specific case, but I believe that when in terms of game mechanics it's possible to have a choice, you give the choice. Of course it's there for the player's satisfaction, the whole point of a video game is to be there for player's satisfaction. Granted, no choice-driven game can add all choices, but it should as as many as possible, if one choice can be implemented, it should be implemented.
Leliana: "You can leave, sure..."
Inky: "K, adios suckas"
Leliana: *quietly under her breath as her right hand reaches behind her back...* "The righteous stand before the darkness and The Maker shall guide their hand."
Inky: *gurgle*
That's how that would have played out. Satisified? I just saved Bioware a ton of money in animations.
Nope, it should have ended out with an epilogue detailing the return of Corypheus and subjugation of part of Thedas under him, while the rest tries to fight him and a comment mentioning that the would-be quizzie went on a journey to cure him/herself of the mark but his/her fate remains unknown.
There. A way to implement out-of-campaign choices without making the potential writer/dm seem like a passive-aggressive %$#!&*
I've never played ME, so I could be wrong in this specific case, but I believe that when in terms of game mechanics it's possible to have a choice, you give the choice. Of course it's there for the player's satisfaction, the whole point of a video game is to be there for player's satisfaction. Granted, no choice-driven game can add all choices, but it should as as many as possible, if one choice can be implemented, it should be implemented.
The point though is that implementing every conceivable choice leads to an inevitable waste of resources. The game should be implementing as many options as possible that don't fight the premise of the story.
Mass Effect is based on stopping the Reaper threat. That's the only narrative that will ever be developed further. Bioware could spend resources accounting for any number of possibilities, but each will lead to the same "game over" screen. Do we really need a "Refuse option"? An "I joined Saren and let the Reapers through the Citadel" option? The "Shepard died stopping the Collectors" option?
I want choices, yes. But I want choices for a game that I'll actually be able to play to the end credits. I get more bang for my buck that way.
Retour en haut