134 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

These games (Mass Effect and Dragon Age) already have racism, classism, murder, abortion, maiming, torture, genocide... I don't know if I could handle a full on massacre of a family of my favorite characters mid-game.

 

I guess one thing to consider is that the Red Wedding wasn't even something that couldn't be avoided. It was caused in part because of a choice made prior (this was pretty much Robb's fault for not listening). If crazy sh*t is going to happen in the game that ends with a lot of characters being disposed of at once, it'd be nice if there was a reason that this happens that we can affect, otherwise it's just pointless frustration to yank feels out of us or something.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I don't see it happening. Bioware seems intent on marketing and selling their games to the masses, not a niche. Which means they have to appear as inoffensive as they can. 

 

So nope, don't see Red Wedding moment happening in Dragon Age any time soon, even though I would like to have that moment. 

[Ynqve]

I guess one thing to consider is that the Red Wedding wasn't even something that couldn't be avoided. It was caused in part because of a choice made prior (this was pretty much Robb's fault for not listening). If crazy sh*t is going to happen in the game that ends with a lot of characters being disposed of at once, it'd be nice if there was a reason that this happens that we can affect, otherwise it's just pointless frustration to yank feels out of us or something.

 

Exactly. Killing characters and throwing gore at the screen to be "edgy" and "mature" is just stupid.

 

And I hate how the Red Wedding has become a synonym for violent character deaths. The point wasn't that George Martin loves to kill his characters (and honestly, he doesn't kill that many). The point was that bad decisions have bad consequences! And that's something that I would like to see more of in DA. 

[God]

I would say that an option to have everyone survive the suicide mission is vital. The fact that it's been hyped up so much means that actually beating everyone's predictions and making it out alive becomes a lot more emotionally meaningful; certainly I cheered a bit when I got a perfect score.

 

Now, you might want to make it harder to do somehow, and that's fine, but it should most definitely still be present.

 

I think there should have been a few mandatory deaths in the Suicide Mission, so that it ties up some loose ended characters while leaving room for greater expansion of the surviving ones in ME3. 

 

Making it a Suicide Mission where no-one dies is kind of cheap. I don't think there should have been an ability to have a perfect score. BW partially follows this philosophy now, admitting the mechanic for the SM should have been held off. I don't know if they ever held that some deaths should be mandatory, but they believe that the number of variables was a bit too high. The mechanic should have been used for ME3, and enforced the 'anyone can die mechanic'.

 

Any Dragon Age reestablishment of this mechanic should probably be much more mindful of the variables and how they might affect continuation of the story (or at least, hold them off until the final game.)

[Arijharn]

Sten is one of the Beresaad, who are the vanguard of the Qun's Antaam sent to investigate the Darkspawn rumors. So when you see him or any of his buddies around, you know the Qun is interested in that area. So yeah, he's definitely not low on the totem pole.

 

You're not going to send the heir apparent of a kingdom into hostile territory as a scout

[Heimdall]

You're not going to send the heir apparent of a kingdom into hostile territory as a scout

You send someone trusted and perceptive, capable of making his own decisions without needing to defer to a higher authority on such a mission.

Such a person might be suitable for command, though I doubt he was the only "heir". In fact it may have been his safe return with news of the Blight that elevated him.

[Felya87]

I hate forced death of companions just for the feels. Already had it in Mass Effect, and the result was that the companions didn't even noticed it (Thane).

I'm all for companions death only if are tied to choices, and aren't inevitable. Like with Zevran, Winnie, Shale, Anders, Loghain, Alistair, the Warden. Not only give choice to both who like or not the "death to have feeelz", but add replayability. After all, I'm playng a game with choices, is just right having different outcomes if I make different choices. Forced events no matter what choice you make kill the premise. If I can't have a way to change anything with my choices, well, I'm going to play a simple adventure, like Uncharted or Assassin's Creed.

 

I liked in ME2 and DAO having different outcomes based on the decisions I made. It made me play those games many times! On the contrary, I can't finish my third run at ME3, since I know nothing really change in the end.

[CathyMe]

I personally don't mind having characters die, as long as it makes sense(the fade decision comes to mind), and not just happily killing them just to make us depressed or seem "mature". The best approach I've seen was in ME2. Yes, it as easy to see loyal=not dead, but some characters were a bit trickier to get their loyalty, and there were the jack/miranda and tali/legion arguments, and even with a fully loyal party, could end up with one or two dead party members at the "hold the line" segment.

[BabyPuncher]

The point was that bad decisions have bad consequences! And that's something that I would like to see more of in DA. 

 

Perhaps to an extent. But nobody wants to play a video game where the player character sits in a prison cell for the rest of his life, regardless of how 'realistic' such an outcome might be.
 

[NasChoka]

I don't see it happening. Bioware seems intent on marketing and selling their games to the masses, not a niche. Which means they have to appear as inoffensive as they can. 
 
So nope, don't see Red Wedding moment happening in Dragon Age any time soon, even though I would like to have that moment.

I agree. Maybe the player can hear about it "there was this terrible and shocking event 5 minutes before you created your character" but we won't see it.

[KaiserShep]

I think there should have been a few mandatory deaths in the Suicide Mission, so that it ties up some loose ended characters while leaving room for greater expansion of the surviving ones in ME3. 

 

I'm not sure that mandatory death would actually solve any problems with past squadmates that appear in ME3, at least not unless their fates in ME2 are totally fixed and we have no control over who lives and dies.

[Ynqve]

Perhaps to an extent. But nobody wants to play a video game where the player character sits in a prison cell for the rest of his life, regardless of how 'realistic' such an outcome might be.
 

 

Sure, but it kind of feels like no matter what you do in DAI you still end up on top. RP a complete moron and people will still love everything you do, no matter how shortsighted or stupid you act. Your companions might be angry at you for doing certain things but the worst they can do is leave you. 

[leaguer of one]

Wait a sec..... If red wedding is all about bad decision causing bad results then bw already did something like this....

[God]

I'm not sure that mandatory death would actually solve any problems with past squadmates that appear in ME3, at least not unless their fates in ME2 are totally fixed and we have no control over who lives and dies.

 

That's what I was saying, apologies for not clarifying it.

 

I'd say that maybe 3-4 squadmates and a significant portion of the crew in ME2 would be a mandatory death.

[God]

Sure, but it kind of feels like no matter what you do in DAI you still end up on top. RP a complete moron and people will still love everything you do, no matter how shortsighted or stupid you act. Your companions might be angry at you for doing certain things but the worst they can do is leave you. 

 

You might be misinterpreting David. 

 

He doesn't believe that any action, no matter how practical or rational or logical, should be rewarded. He takes a rather hardline and extreme view that black and white morality applies, and that morally good or 'heroic' actions should always be the correct decision, while ruthless, morally questionable, but ultimately practical and savvy actions should always be doomed to fail hopelessly.

[Ynqve]

You might be misinterpreting David. 

 

He doesn't believe that any action, no matter how practical or rational or logical, should be rewarded. He takes a rather hardline and extreme view that black and white morality applies, and that morally good or 'heroic' actions should always be the correct decision, while ruthless, morally questionable, but ultimately practical and savvy actions should always be doomed to fail hopelessly.

 

Urgh, do not want! I will never understand why anyone would want a strict black/white morality. It's so boring!

 

So just to make things clear: When I say bad decision, I mean stupid decision.

[Dieb]

Popular guy speaking, I find the necessity for such devices pretty baffling.

 

I know shows like Game of Throne and Walking Dead are hip because "you cannot do that on television!", but read some greek mythology (speaks of hip shows and then brings up greek mythology, I am the total package)  for example, where deaths of major characters are rather trivialized than employed as shock. I'm NOT saying those shows or their stories are bad, but it's a dramaturgical dead end road nevertheless.

 

The Virmire outcome didn't really make me get intimidated by Saren, it made me angry that I (as in my character) was unable to figure out a better solution to the mission onjective, and how I failed as a commander. Thane's death for example is part of a weridly beautiful story arc - it's not supposed to scare you, or show how evil the evildoer really is.

 

Anyone can sever my love's head off, that doesn't make him necessarily dangerous; an opportunist at the worst. If you want a means to present the villain properly, personally, I would like to see them simply do some actual damage. I was compelled to stop the Reapers because I saw what they are capable of doing to a culture in a heartbeat - I only saw people ****** and moan about Corypheus after Haven, and then it was victory after victory.

[brownie56]

Popular guy speaking, I find the necessity for such devices pretty baffling.

 

I know shows like Game of Throne and Walking Dead are hip because "you cannot do that on television!", but read some greek mythology (speaks of hip shows and then brings up greek mythology, I am the total package)  for example, where deaths of major characters are rather trivialized than employed as shock. I'm NOT saying those shows or their stories are bad, but it's a dramaturgical dead end road nevertheless.

 

The Virmire outcome didn't really make me get intimidated by Saren, it made me angry that I (as in my character) was unable to figure out a better solution to the mission onjective, and how I failed as a commander. Thane's death for example is part of a weridly beautiful story arc - it's not supposed to scare you, or show how evil the evildoer really is.

 

Anyone can sever my love's head off, that doesn't make him necessarily dangerous; an opportunist at the worst. If you want a means to present the villain properly, personally, I would like to see them simply do some actual damage. I was compelled to stop the Reapers because I saw what they are capable of doing to a culture in a heartbeat - I only saw people ****** and moan about Corypheus after Haven, and then it was victory after victory.

As someone who loves Game of Thrones and Greek mythology, and hates Walking Dead I think your point before follows in a sense, I guess the reason I like those particular things is different than the reasons others do. 

 

As to the last bit, I agree with what your saying and would like to see a count of how many people we actually saw Cory kill (I'm thinking 0?). 

 

As to the debate about mandatory death, I think there's a potential compromise. I think if the factors that contribute to whether someone lives or dies were a little more concealed, it would be a great compromise. My issue with the way ME2's mission worked out was that loyal/not loyal pretty much let you know what was going on. When Zevran turned on me in DA:O, it took me by surprise, though I eventually got it so that he lived, I liked the arc of the tale better when he ended up dying, so I left it that way in the Keep. 

[Master Warder Z_]

o.o this reminds me of the Red Wedding music parody.

[KaiserShep]

That's what I was saying, apologies for not clarifying it.

 

I'd say that maybe 3-4 squadmates and a significant portion of the crew in ME2 would be a mandatory death.

 

Miranda, Garrus, Tali and Mordin are the surest bets for survival, because they're either popular or have the most potential to do much more in the next game. I'm not sure what to make of Legion, since it's a last minute recruit that you could never even bother with, though the game could just as well be written to make its presence mandatory for at least one mission, like EDI with TIM's headquarters. In any case, things would be a lot simpler, though considering the game as it is, even if their cameos aren't the best, I admit that I would miss them.

 

Anyway, mandatory death is always kinda tricky when we have multiple options all over the place. Even Virmire, looking back, felt kind of awkward.

[thruaglassdarkly]

I have mixed feelings here.  My initial response is to say no, because I don't really want Dragon Age to be A Song of Ice and Fire.  Mr. Martin verges a little further into the realm of cynicism than I typically want to go in fiction, even if it is a realistic portrayal of how monarchy works.  And I agree with KaiserShep that mandatory death is difficult to deliver with principal characters in a video game.  It usually feels a little inorganic, especially given the sort of physics-defying feats one performs during the course of a game to escape certain death.  

 

But in a larger sense, I have seen the dramatic value of a choice-driven game suddenly/violently wrestling choice away from the player.  I still have an eerie feeling about the "a man chooses, a slave obeys" moment in Bioshock, which is both a highly controversial and undeniably poignant piece of video game scripting (for someone who rarely plays shooters, its saying something that I remember it).

 

I guess the question in my head is whether this particular video game trope works well in the Bioware universe.  To me its not so much a question of killing off characters or appropriate emotional payoff; part of the reason I became attracted to Bioware games is that each story is really 4-5 stories, some of which are happy, some of which are tragic, and some that fall in between.  I'd probably agree with the idea that there need to be more situations where important characters are put at risk (although, to be fair to DA:I, there are iterations of Here Lies the Abyss that I find pretty moving).  But I think I'd prefer that these outcomes be heavily influenced by my input. I like getting the chance to experience all of the versions of these events.

[Andreas Amell]

This is my Modest Proposal:

 

Don't do a 'Red Wedding'. A Godfather-style kill off is better than a 'Red Wedding'. The death of King Arthur is a better story than 'Red Wedding'.

 

Instead, what we need is a story where the main hero must survive by eating darkspawn flesh. Trapped in the Deep Roads with a band of six companions, they all must find a way back to the surface. But after eating darkspawn flesh (you have no choice in this matter), the group starts to turn on each other. You must then find various ways to eliminate your companions in order to be the last one standing. You can either use

 

• blood magic (mage role)
• backstabbing or poison (rogue)
• trickery (any class)
• open challenge (warrior)

You can choose the order by which you need to kill your companions.

[Ynqve]

This is my Modest Proposal:

 

Don't do a 'Red Wedding'. A Godfather-style kill off is better than a 'Red Wedding'. The death of King Arthur is a better story than 'Red Wedding'.

 

Instead, what we need is a story where the main hero must survive by eating darkspawn flesh. Trapped in the Deep Roads with a band of six companions, they all must find a way back to the surface. But after eating darkspawn flesh (you have no choice in this matter), the group starts to turn on each other. You must then find various ways to eliminate your companions in order to be the last one standing. You can either use

 

• blood magic (mage role)
• backstabbing or poison (rogue)
• trickery (any class)
• open challenge (warrior)

You can choose the order by which you need to kill your companions.

 

Let the 76th Hunger Games begin! 

 

Please tell me the darkspawn are watching and placing bets on who's going to make it. 

[Andreas Amell]

I was thinking more of "The Descent" than Hunger Games. No way I'm letting children get involved. I'm not Jonothan Swift.

[saber1red]

What if they pull off a red wedding moment by killing your romance character whoever he/she is. That's right, if you have a committed romance partner, they are automatically killed in a red wedding style, and the killer is (a still living) Zeveran just doing his job to fulfill his contract. And we get the option to do with him as we please. Such as in either killing him or doing something else. We will cringe, throw our controllers at the television, and then sob for hours right before coming here to the forums and either blaming or praising bioware for killing our love interest, and then they'll say "but you guys wanted a red wedding moment in dragon age".