Guest_Faerunner_*
Multi-race merely is counterproductive and hurts why many love BioWare games to start.
And yet DAO and DAI were critical and financial successes while DA2 was a fan-divisive flop.
If multi-race by itself automatically ruined "why many love BioWare games," DAO and DAI would be the reviled flops while DA2 would be the widely praised success.
The free market has spoken, dude.
And yet DAO and DAI were critical and financial successes while DA2 was a fan-divisive flop.
If multi-race by itself automatically ruined "why many love BioWare games," DAO and DAI would be the reviled flops while DA2 would be the widely praised success.
The free market has spoken, dude.
I'm curious why you think DA2 was a flop. Seemed pretty successful from what I could see. Sales weren't quite as high as DA:O, but given the much shorter development cycle, I'd be willing to bet less money was spent on it, so it could well have a achieved a better ROI.
On the contrary, racism is rampant in Thedas. It's not the obvious, overt "lynch the non-humans" racism that you might expect, but pay attention to the dialogue and background information, and a more subtle, insidious level of racism is very common. Casual use of racist language, automatic assumption of station based on race, it's everywhere. Hell, go start an elven character, get to Haven and speak to the quartermaster. She assumes you must be a servant simply because you're an elf. It's that kind of racism that is mostly seen in Thedas. When you have a society in which such assumptions are automatic, you cannot claim that racism doesn't exist. It's deeply rooted in Thedas' society. And in general, I think it is really well written and implemented. It makes the world more believable and immersive, as it reflects the kind of racism we see in our world far more than a more overt form would.
And yet, when it comes to the PC, it's glossed over completely. The thing is, the Inquisitor is someone in a position of power. And while a society with with the sort of attitudes to race we see in Thedas will accept other races when they are in the proper position, it is not in any way consistent with the way the world is presented for them to readily accept members of such races holding significant power (hell, just look at the crap Obama gets for being black....). An elven servant or peasant? Fine. An elf in charge of one of the most powerful organisations in Southern Thedas? That's not going to go down easily. A qunari mercenary? No major issues. A qunari proclaimed as the Herald of Andraste? That's gonna cause trouble. And yet it doesn't. There's a few bits of dialogue, but nothing more. Nothing about the game changes. And that is simply not consistent with the world Bioware have created. Whether through laziness, lack of resources, or lack of courage, they have failed to apply the logical consequence of the racism present in Thedas to the player character.
Again: look at the NPCs. The Iron Bull has absolutely no issue with being a mercenary captain. Briala can rule from the not-so-shadow-y shadows in Orlais. And she's a common elf. And Gaspard can't do anything about it, as Emperor of Orlais! I get it: you want racism to be a substantial feature of race choice, and fell that the only way it can be done is by having incredibly divergent content on the basis of racist people in power.
Thedas simply is not as racist as you think.
And yet DAO and DAI were critical and financial successes while DA2 was a fan-divisive flop.
If multi-race by itself automatically ruined "why many love BioWare games," DAO and DAI would be the reviled flops while DA2 would be the widely praised success.
The free market has spoken, dude.
I wouldn't use the games financial success as proof of anything, though I see your point. DA:A was probably worse of a flop than DA2, but that doesn't mean anything.
My list emphasized FANTASY RPGs. I deliberately omitted Jade Empire, KotOR, and the ME series because they aren't the same genre.
Again: look at the NPCs. The Iron Bull has absolutely no issue with being a mercenary captain. Briala can rule from the not-so-shadow-y shadows in Orlais. And she's a common elf. And Gaspard can't do anything about it, as Emperor of Orlais! I get it: you want racism to be a substantial feature of race choice, and fell that the only way it can be done is by having incredibly divergent content on the basis of racist people in power.
Thedas simply is not as racist as you think.
The Iron Bull has proven himself to those that serve him, and "mercenary captain" is hardly a major position of power. And Briala's "rule" is hardly stable or without issue. Even from the little information we get in the epilogues, it's clear people in Orlais are not happy with an elf having power and living it up as a noble.
I'm guessing you think America isn't a racist society because Obama is president?
What "race options" in Fallout? A ghoul? A super mutant? You do not even know how ridiculous that sounds...? Fallout is about being human in a post-apocalyptic United States after a nuclear holocaust. That is the only experience meant to be told. People can want all sorts of things. That doesn't make any of those wishes anymore reasoned or practical... On the contrary, adding "race options" in Fallout would be atrocious and not appropriate.
Well, there are androids in Fallout too, as well as aliens in one of the FO3 DLCs. But I'd say that the reactions elicited by ghouls, super mutants, and androids in the Falloutverse are so different from those elicited by non-mutated humans that trying to create a story that works for all of those backgrounds would be nearly unworkable. If people think that the racial origins of the Hero of Ferelden and the Inquisitor get downplayed, I suspect they would be even more downplayed in a Fallout game, unless the devs actually sat down and programmed wildly different versions of the game based on different races.
Actually, I believe you heavily overestimate the likelihood of non-human races, specifically in Mass Effect. I'll explain:
Perhaps you haven't played SWTOR, but there is a reason that every race in the game is humanoid and all can speak basic. It's deliberate and part of BioWare's design. You'll never be able to play as a darkspawn, elcor, hanar, volus, vorcha, demon, or anything of the sort as a main protagonist. Why? Limitations. The reason why many perceive BioWare is so "pro-human" is because humans actually have a lot more variety and flexibility than most races even though many argue humans are "stale" and "generic."
Whether we look at diversity in looks, a wide range of animations, the ability to have romances, speaking the common tongue, there are many reasons why humans are preferred over anything else. This is why there will never be a playable jawa, ewok, wookiee, or anything in SWTOR that cannot fit the basic standards BioWare needs of a protagonist in the story. The same applies to Mass Effect, which is why it's unlikely you'll ever see multi-race. With DA, BioWare can get away with it a bit more as qunari/elf/dwarf are just fantasy humans. Even with that cosmetic distinction, it has been shown that race rarely matters and overall has little impact or influence on the story.
As others have stated, if race doesn't matter and only adversely affects the story because BioWare cripples the voice acting and dialogue, I don't see how it's a benefit to anyone except those who will headcanon regardless. If you want to fabricate your own story and completely contradict what BioWare games do, that's your prerogative. However, I purchase BioWare games because I want to see their stories unfold with amazing characters. Multi-race merely is counterproductive and hurts why many love BioWare games to start.
Well you could see options like Turian, Quarian, Salarian Asari, and Drell.
As far as animation goes, they can re-use a lot of the animations if the other race is humanoid which is why the playable ones generally are. Mass Effect 3 MP offered playable Turian, Quarian, Human, Salarian, Asari, Drell, Krogan, Batarian, Vorcha, Geth, Volus, and Collector. While not all would work in the dialogue heavy SP, a number of them most certainly still would and you could keep the same voice actor for it.
A lot of things don't matter and have little impact on the story. I recall a conversation in which Cassandra asked my Inquisitor if she believed in the Maker. At no point in the future was that ever referenced again. Should we also remove all flavour dialogue because they don't have an impact on the story? They're nice little RP pieces, which even if it's story driven and cinematic Dragon Age is still a RPG.
Hell, a lot of the actual choices you make in quests don't even matter 5 minutes after you're done that quest. Most of the choices you make in Mass Effect get acknowledged in an email in Mass Effect 2 and that's it. They just become flavour text.
As I said before I don't see how multi-race negatively impacts the game considering Origins/Inquisition vs Mass Effect. In my opinion, the Inquisitor's voice acting is not worse than Shep's or Hawke's, and the dialogue in all games has its ups and downs.
I disagree. Dragon age needs to be it's own game, not Mass Effect + a gazillion FedEx quests.
I actually liked the amount of dialogue options for the Inquisitor, and being able to fill in a lot of little details. The only thing I'd criticize is that pretty much no matter what, you have to be a diplomatic leader. My original idea for my character was that she was going to be unsure of herself in a leadership position and grow into it in time, but the game almost immediately decided that she knew exactly what to do and say.
I think this is something of a problem with quite a few video games. Either your character is some sort of elite specialist right off the bat (Shepard, Geralt), or you are a nominal Every(wo)man who still rapidly adapts to being in a leadership position and/or taking dangerous risks (HoF, Inquisitor). Even Hawke has to stick his/her nose into all kinds of dangerous situations with shaky justification for some of the quests to progress. Sometimes my character can't help but seem kind of arrogant and overconfident by sounding so certain and determined about something that would have most people freaking out or at least seeking advice and support from others. Just recently I started playing The Secret World, and at no point does my character seem to have reservations or even just demand an explanation when suddenly acquiring supernatural powers and being drafted by a centuries-old secret society to go investigate a zombie outbreak.
Obviously a game structured around an Average Joe who remains an Average Joe the entire time wouldn't work either - if I were in the Dragon Age or Mass Effect universe, I'd probably be a background NPC with no dialogue - but it would be great if they could find a way to ease your character into the situation without having the story be too slow or dull at the beginning.
I'm curious why you think DA2 was a flop. Seemed pretty successful from what I could see. Sales weren't quite as high as DA:O, but given the much shorter development cycle, I'd be willing to bet less money was spent on it, so it could well have a achieved a better ROI.
DA2 pissed off many not just because it took away race option. It seem to take away race option because of the (not so great) story. Because Hawke has a mother, sister and brother as NPCs.
So make Hawke a human, problem solved, right? Wrong. Fallout 3 already did that. Lets say you roll a black wastelander. Eventually, you meet your father in the game, and guess what? He is white. But hey, you don't know your mother, she may be black.
In DA2, if you roll a black, your mom, bro and sis are ALL white.
I don't think you need to be reminded of DA2's many shortcomings besides this one, you can find them on pretty much anywhere.
The Iron Bull has proven himself to those that serve him, and "mercenary captain" is hardly a major position of power. And Briala's "rule" is hardly stable or without issue. Even from the little information we get in the epilogues, it's clear people in Orlais are not happy with an elf having power and living it up as a noble.
I'm guessing you think America isn't a racist society because Obama is president?
DA2 pissed off many not just because it took away race option. It seem to take away race option because of the story. Because Hawke has a mother, sister and brother as NPCs.
So make Hawke a human, problem solved, right? Wrong. Fallout 3 already did that. Lets say you roll a black wastelander. Eventually, you meet your father in the game, and guess what? He is white. But hey, you don't know your mother, she may be black.
In DA2, if you roll a black, your mom, bro and sis are ALL white.
I don't think you need to be reminded of DA2's many shortcomings, you can find them on pretty much anywhere.
That didn't answer my question in any way shape or form. I didn't ask why you disliked it. I asked what made you think it flopped.
I think this is something of a problem with quite a few video games. Either your character is some sort of elite specialist right off the bat (Shepard, Geralt), or you are a nominal Every(wo)man who still rapidly adapts to being in a leadership position and/or taking dangerous risks (HoF, Inquisitor). Even Hawke has to stick his/her nose into all kinds of dangerous situations with shaky justification for some of the quests to progress. Sometimes my character can't help but seem kind of arrogant and overconfident by sounding so certain and determined about something that would have most people freaking out or at least seeking advice and support from others. Just recently I started playing The Secret World, and at no point does my character seem to have reservations or even just demand an explanation when suddenly acquiring supernatural powers and being drafted by a centuries-old secret society to go investigate a zombie outbreak.
Obviously a game structured around an Average Joe who remains an Average Joe the entire time wouldn't work either - if I were in the Dragon Age or Mass Effect universe, I'd probably be a background NPC with no dialogue - but it would be great if they could find a way to ease your character into the situation without having the story be too slow or dull at the beginning.
That didn't answer my question in any way shape or form. I didn't ask why you disliked it. I asked what made you think it flopped.
We are still on topic right? As in, whether we need a Shepard-type protagonist? So i just told you why DA2 flopped, and it is partly due to this reason. I'm trying to tell you why the lack of race option is bad. How did i not answer your question?
The fantasy genre is about imagination. Everyone, no matter race or gender, has their own story. We want to see them from different perspectives.
And to the guy who said a Fallout race option is silly, just take a look at their companions. There are ghouls and supermuties/nightkin among them. It is proof they can do everything humans can, besides looking pretty lol.
Guest_Faerunner_*
I'm curious why you think DA2 was a flop. Seemed pretty successful from what I could see. Sales weren't quite as high as DA:O, but given the much shorter development cycle, I'd be willing to bet less money was spent on it, so it could well have a achieved a better ROI.
Okay, maybe "flop" is too strong a word, but last I checked it didn't sell as many copies as DAO or DAI, both of which included race selection. I only said this in response to Revan's direct claim that "multi-race is counterproductive and hurts why many love BioWare games to start." It clearly didn't hurt enough to give DAO or DAI inferior long-term sales figures or overall critical reception compared to DA2 (regardless of how much time and money the devs poured into the games behind the scenes). It seems enough people either like race selection or are relatively unaffected by its inclusion enough to buy and enjoy the games regardless.
I'm only trying to say that the mere inclusion of "multi-race" doesn't automatically "hurt many" people's enjoyment of the games the way Revan tries to imply.
I wouldn't use the games financial success as proof of anything, though I see your point. DA:A was probably worse of a flop than DA2, but that doesn't mean anything.
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't either. It's an Appeal to Popularity fallacy that I try to avoid.
However, Revan Reborn tried to Appeal to Popularity first by arguing that "multi-race . . . hurts why many love BioWare games." And I countered with higher sales and critical reception for the Dragon Age games that included multi-race. Race selection doesn't seem to hurt people's enjoyment of a given Dragon Age game that much, even if it doesn't necessarily help it either.
Okay, maybe "flop" is too strong a word, but last I checked it didn't sell as many copies as DAO or DAI, both of which included race selection. I only said this in response to Revan's direct claim that "multi-race is counterproductive and hurts why many love BioWare games to start." It clearly didn't hurt enough to give DAO or DAI inferior long-term sales figures or overall critical reception compared to DA2 (regardless of how much time and money the devs poured into the games behind the scenes). It seems enough people either like race selection or are relatively unaffected by its inclusion enough to buy and enjoy the games regardless.
I'm only trying to say that the mere inclusion of "multi-race" doesn't automatically "hurt many" people's enjoyment of the games the way Revan tries to imply.
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't either. It's an Appeal to Popularity fallacy that I try to avoid.
However, Revan Reborn tried to Appeal to Popularity first by arguing that "multi-race . . . hurts why many love BioWare games." And I countered with higher sales and critical reception for the Dragon Age games that included multi-race. Race selection doesn't seem to hurt people's enjoyment of a given Dragon Age game that much, even if it doesn't necessarily help it either.
Okay, maybe "flop" is too strong a word, but last I checked it didn't sell as many copies as DAO or DAI, both of which included race selection. I only said this in response to Revan's direct claim that "multi-race is counterproductive and hurts why many love BioWare games to start." It clearly didn't hurt enough to give DAO or DAI inferior long-term sales figures or overall critical reception compared to DA2 (regardless of how much time and money the devs poured into the games behind the scenes). It seems enough people either like race selection or are relatively unaffected by its inclusion enough to buy and enjoy the games regardless.
I'm only trying to say that the mere inclusion of "multi-race" doesn't automatically "hurt many" people's enjoyment of the games the way Revan tries to imply.
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't either. It's an Appeal to Popularity fallacy that I try to avoid.
However, Revan Reborn tried to Appeal to Popularity first by arguing that "multi-race . . . hurts why many love BioWare games." And I countered with higher sales and critical reception for the Dragon Age games that included multi-race. Race selection doesn't seem to hurt people's enjoyment of a given Dragon Age game that much, even if it doesn't necessarily help it either.
Sales are in no way indicative of whether multi-race is popular or not. A large portion of gamers never even finish the games they buy. I'd also like to remove this gloss of nostalgia around DAO because it was an incredibly controversial title. It sold well, but it was also heavily criticized for antiquated combat and a generic art style.
Many of the factors that went into DAII were a direct response from fans wanting to fix what they did not like about DAO (silent protagonist was one of them). If you really want to use the "financial success" logic as a foundation for your argument, ME3 sold nearly double the amount of copies that DAI has and it was available on only three platforms instead of five... Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I'm under the impression many buy BioWare games for the amazing story, amazing characters, and the choices you make throughout the experience. That is the primary incentive people purchase these games.
My argument has been thoroughly consistent in that a blank slate character or lifeless avatars are less compelling for many because they lack depth due to those who want to headcanon. In essence, BioWare intentionally dilutes their own storytelling capabilities in order to appease a fraction of the community who would rather go by their own story rather than the one BioWare creates. That's perfectly fine, expect for the fact that BioWare games are story first and foremost.
As some have alluded to, by having multi-race as an option isn't really giving you more "control" over your character. It's an illusion of control, because that racial difference is largely cosmetic. What I'd much rather see is one focused protagonist with strikingly different paths to choose throughout the main story based on choices. Instead of BioWare games being so linear with there being little difference in choosing one dialogue choice over another, we should feel real impact and difference in the choices we make.
That wouldn't be possible with multi-race due to the resources that are necessary to make it viable. If we were to remove it, however, think about how much more depth and complexity we could have in choices. How much more meaningful the dialogue between characters and story would be. Instead, the writing team has to be careful not to step on the toes of roleplayers and create a rather bland main protagonist that is not believable and lacks the capacity to truly lead an experience.
I love how the OP is essentially asking that Bioware limit/remove role-playing out of their role-playing games.
Why stop at races, OP? Why not remove other things as well, like choosing your gender or appearance? Just think how much better the story would be if we had a completely set protagonist.
In DA2, if you roll a black, your mom, bro and sis are ALL white.
Um, I think you're thinking of DAO. In DA2, your family members changed to match your race.
I love how the OP is essentially asking that Bioware limit/remove role-playing out of their role-playing games.
Why stop at races, OP? Why not remove other things as well, like choosing your gender or appearance? Just think how much better the story would be if we had a completely set protagonist.
BioWare games are story-driven roleplaying games. In other words, story comes first, roleplay comes second. This is what distinguishes BioWare from everything else. What I'm actually suggesting is BioWare to emphasize the story more and the roleplay less because you can't do both exceptionally well. BioWare has tried and failed both times. Being able to customize different gender and looks is fine. Having different races that add little value and detract from the story? A waste of resources.
I agree with the OP. Inquisition shows clearly that quantity of options does not go along with quality of experience. Inquisitor turned out to be so extremely bland and forgettable protagonist. It is almost painful when you compare him to any of companions, Shepard or even Hawke.DA2 has flaws but iconic protagonist is actually good thing. Hawke could become memorable in the same way as Shepard. I remember how "badass" he was in cinematic previews. Sadly his representation in game was far from perfect, both in the matter of iconic appearance and storyline (always powerless, always too late to do anything about anything, apparently rich and yet working as delivery guy...). Still, Hawke with his personalities and iconic champion armor is far interesting character than Inquisitor.Bioware should limit amount of and improve quality of options. Human protagonist guarantees more focused and personal storytelling (ME proves that very well). Player can still have a lot of freedom, choose gender, personality, develop relationships, eventually modify iconic appearance. However "exotic" races should be reserved for npc characters.Non human protagonists in DA series are mostly like disguised humans anyway so what is the point?
Exactly. You know what was really sad? When Hawke is first introduced in DAI, I wanted to play as him again instead of the Inquisitor... It was really awkward because the Inquisitor came across as a bumbling fool trying to figure out what to do and Hawke had all the answers. It's pathetic because Hawke had such a miniscule role in DAI, and yet what he said and did was far more interesting than 90% of what the Inquisitor did in DAI. I would have preferred to see what Hawke did after leaving the Fade (if you didn't kill him off).
BioWare did a great marketing campaign with Hawke. DA2 may have been a disappointment as a game, but I thought the story was actually very good and Hawke was a highlight. Not to mention, the iconic armor really helped bolster the character, whereas even the Inquisitior's iconic armor just looks bland. I think two aspects that may have hurt DAI is that BioWare was so focused on building a larger world with multi-race that they didn't really pay much attention to how the Inquisitor looked and how he was represented in the game.
I wholeheartedly agree with the OP. And bioware need to be brave when it comes to choosing the race of the PC. I don't think they will alienate fans if you force them to play as an elf or Tal-Vashoth.
I wholeheartedly agree with the OP. And bioware need to be brave when it comes to choosing the race of the PC. I don't think they will alienate fans if you force them to play as an elf or Tal-Vashoth.
I think a story built entirely around an elf protagonist or a qunari would be incredibly interesting. BioWare could go so far in-depth and away from the human-centric necessity of previous games that it would almost be an entirely new Dragon Age. This is all possible if they don't do multi-race and they focus on one, defined character.
Retour en haut