820 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

But clearly there was nothing that couldn't be changed if they really wanted to. I think they were still smarting from the DA2 backlash, which I can imagine made them apprehensive about associating anything with it to DA-Inquisition. I just think that if they had a viable story... Which we can't really know for certain, they should have stuck with it. I mean, I understand the idea of catering to fans to some degree, but I think they were too busy trying not to fail.

Even before the switch to multi races there was no indication it was Hawke when Bioware talked about multiple backgrounds for the protagonist

[9TailsFox]

Perhaps, if you choose to ignore how the narrative started. It seemed from the very beginning (Cassandra's interrogation of Varric) that Hawke was the catalyst/protagonist of events that came after his time in Kirkwall. Clearly Cassandra was seeking him for some reason other than the fact that he rose from a no-account immigrant to... Well, whatever he became. In any event from my perspective, it seemed that the narrative was inclined towards something more than a rags to riches tale. 

Cassandra told us She/they wanted first choice Hero of Ferelden second option Hawke. Hawke supost to be Inqusitor DA:I is just expended, cancelled Exalted marches expansion for DA2. She hoped Hawke could stop war before it started.

start at 2:27

[9TailsFox]

Even before the switch to multi races there was no indication it was Hawke when Bioware talked about multiple backgrounds for the protagonist

Because Bioware not use same protagonist for new DA game. DA:I large part of story is exalted marches expansion. Just Hawke replaced with Inquisitor.

[robertthebard]

But clearly there was nothing that couldn't be changed if they really wanted to. I think they were still smarting from the DA2 backlash, which I can imagine made them apprehensive about associating anything with it to DA-Inquisition. I just think that if they had a viable story... Which we can't really know for certain, they should have stuck with it. I mean, I understand the idea of catering to fans to some degree, but I think they were too busy trying not to fail.

It's really a lot simpler than that, scrolling up the page that this post is quoted from, you can see why EA decided it was a bad idea: Nobody was going to buy it because they were too busy raging about DA 2 not being Origins 2. Hell, the rage on the BSN was initially why I didn't buy DA 2, something I later kicked myself in the ass for, because I should know better. Producing DLC isn't free, and if nobody's buying it, they're better off moving on. The rage got what it wanted, they moved on from DA 2, and now the rage is what, lamenting the rage?

[Tremere]

Cassandra told us She/they wanted first choice Hero of Ferelden second option Hawke. Hawke supost to be Inqusitor DA:I is just expended, cancelled Exalted marches expansion for DA2. She hoped Hawke could stop war before it started.

start at 2:27

Thank you for sharing this. It just reinforces (for me), the notion that Hawke was likely meant for greater things.

[Tremere]

It's really a lot simpler than that, scrolling up the page that this post is quoted from, you can see why EA decided it was a bad idea: Nobody was going to buy it because they were too busy raging about DA 2 not being Origins 2. Hell, the rage on the BSN was initially why I didn't buy DA 2, something I later kicked myself in the ass for, because I should know better. Producing DLC isn't free, and if nobody's buying it, they're better off moving on. The rage got what it wanted, they moved on from DA 2, and now the rage is what, lamenting the rage?

I hear you. I came to the franchise via Dragon Age 2, so it's fair to say that I'm somewhat biased. This isn't to say that I thought it was great on all fronts, but I don't believe it's as bad as many claim it is. By the same token, I don't think Origins was as great as some say. In my opinion it was good... Very good in some places, but not great. What's more (and I'm repeating myself), I think it's pretty funny that DA-Inquisition inspired greater appreciation for DA2.

 

Ultimately, what you say here is what I was alluding to in my comment. With that in mind, I still think that if the intent was to elevate Hawke beyond what he/she was in DA2, they should have stuck with it. They could have threw out a "mea culpa" and then told us why Hawke was important and with that in context, continue the story. I'm sure some will disagree with me, but what we got just seems like a case of "throwing out the baby with the bath water."

[9TailsFox]

I hear you. I came to the franchise via Dragon Age 2, so it's fair to say that I'm somewhat biased. This isn't to say that I thought it was great on all fronts, but I don't believe it's as bad as many claim it is. By the same token, I don't think Origins was as great as some say. In my opinion it was good... Very good in some places, but not great. What's more (and I'm repeating myself), I think it's pretty funny that DA-Inquisition inspired greater appreciation for DA2.

 

Ultimately, what you say here is what I was alluding to in my comment. With that in mind, I still think that if the intent was to elevate Hawke beyond what he/she was in DA2, they should have stuck with it. They could have threw out a "mea culpa" and then told us why Hawke was important and with that in context, continue the story. I'm sure some will disagree with me, but what we got just seems like a case of "throwing out the baby with the bath water."

I starter from start DA:O and loved it. DA:2 is not bad it's different. Everyone hate because it's not DA:O. What i don't understand why people who hated DA2 love DA:I. DA:I is less DA:O then DA2 is. DA2 is just 2 steps from what DA:O was, DA:I 2 steps forward and 4 steps back. DA:I over-fixed one DA2 problem environments and in the process everything else suffered.

And personally I tire of chosen one. I much prefer nobody who don't save world just the ones he love family/friends. And sarcastic Hawke wins everyday.

[b09boy]

Late into this topic, and certainly didn't read through all 29 pages of it, but here's my little weigh-in.

 

First, the "silent protagonist" thing is not dead.  At best it's slumbering, but it's most likely the way of the future for RPGs.  Keep in mind that most such protagonists are not silent - they are you.  They are what you put into them.  And as technology improves to better allow us to put more into them, RPGs will open up more to allow more for this, and less for defined protagonists.

 

That aside, protagonists are an all-or-nothing ordeal.  Either you have to make them silent, and allow the player to form them completely (which isn't very cinematic at the moment, which is all the rage) or  you give them a voice, in which you're already defining them.  Bioware's greatest mistake in their modern titles is believing they can create blank slate voiced protagonists, but this simply does not work.  Even Hawke and Shepard they attempted this with and, frankly, they too are not all that great of characters.  Shepard got away with this somewhat due to fantastic voice work, and Hawke could be alright if you stuck down a single dialogue path, but in general it's just not the most efficient way to go with such characters.

 

So let's talk about future then.  Bioware won't be creating a silent protagonist in the forseeable future.  That's obvious.  Thus they shouldn't be holding back with the protagonist anymore.  Make them a character in their own right, one with a defined personality, history, motivation, yet one we can influence.  For example, not having a character who is sarcastic, or mean, or nice in any given choice, but has one solid personality which we influence the choices of.  Thus we'd have a character that can be sarcastic while doing good, or bad, or just for the hell of it.  This'd create a more consistent, cinematic and, in the end, memorable character.

[Heimdall]

Why couldn't this thread stay dead and buried?

@b09boy

NO

Bioware should continue searching for the middle ground between the defined voices character and the blank slate, just because the Inquisior didn't work for some people (Worked fantastically for me) doesn't mean they should abandon the effort entirely and make Geralt of Rivia style characters. I prize my ability to mold my characters to an extent and Bioware are one of the few companies that provide that. I don't want them to abandon it.

If your character isn't memorable, part of that is on you.

[Tremere]

Late into this topic, and certainly didn't read through all 29 pages of it, but here's my little weigh-in.

 

First, the "silent protagonist" thing is not dead.  At best it's slumbering, but it's most likely the way of the future for RPGs.  Keep in mind that most such protagonists are not silent - they are you.  They are what you put into them.  And as technology improves to better allow us to put more into them, RPGs will open up more to allow more for this, and less for defined protagonists.

 

That aside, protagonists are an all-or-nothing ordeal.  Either you have to make them silent, and allow the player to form them completely (which isn't very cinematic at the moment, which is all the rage) or  you give them a voice, in which you're already defining them.  Bioware's greatest mistake in their modern titles is believing they can create blank slate voiced protagonists, but this simply does not work.  Even Hawke and Shepard they attempted this with and, frankly, they too are not all that great of characters.  Shepard got away with this somewhat due to fantastic voice work, and Hawke could be alright if you stuck down a single dialogue path, but in general it's just not the most efficient way to go with such characters.

 

So let's talk about future then.  Bioware won't be creating a silent protagonist in the forseeable future.  That's obvious.  Thus they shouldn't be holding back with the protagonist anymore.  Make them a character in their own right, one with a defined personality, history, motivation, yet one we can influence.  For example, not having a character who is sarcastic, or mean, or nice in any given choice, but has one solid personality which we influence the choices of.  Thus we'd have a character that can be sarcastic while doing good, or bad, or just for the hell of it.  This'd create a more consistent, cinematic and, in the end, memorable character.

While I personally don't think that a voiced protagonist detracts from player immersion, I do agree with a lot of what you say here. I say this because I've never been a fan of "fixed" protagonists. Having said that, I mean it in the sense of how they look, their gender, etc. I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of having a character with a personality, but is still "player" directed. I think this allows the player to better relate to the character and ultimately become more invested in what they do and say. In this sense, I don't think a voiced protagonists detracts in any way. In contrast, I think it adds to the experience. I'd rather see my character being more expressive as opposed to stoic. With this in mind, it is my greatest hope that whatever BioWare does next, they do away with that annoying "paraphrasing" mechanic. I don't know whose version of a good idea that was, but let's hope it's run its course and is set to be done away with.

[Tremere]

I think that annoys me more than other issues. I think DAI is OK in it's own right, but I always liked where DA2 was going. I was one of the ones who discussed it frequently here. To me, it seemed like enough people enjoyed it... It wasn't a massive failure.

 

And then they reward the ragers instead. lol. Not the people who actually like their game. Strange policy.

*nods in wholehearted agreement* Well said.

[Tremere]

And just to add, the final nail in the coffin is when Aaryn Flynn accepted a reward for DAI, and said it was Bioware's "return to form". To me, that's a veiled way of saying that haters were right.

 

I'd prefer them actually being proud of their work.

*laughs & applauds*

 

It's ironic, considering how some seem to think that they moved away from what put them in the public's eye. It's unfortunate... I really didn't want to feel about BioWare as I now do, but at this point (in regards to them and Bethesda), I'm perfectly okay with keeping my money in my pocket and embracing the basic principle of paying for what's advertised... Provided it's what I'm looking for.

[AresKeith]

Thank you for sharing this. It just reinforces (for me), the notion that Hawke was likely meant for greater things.

 

And like Varric said Hawke would have most died at the Conclave like everyone else trying to keep both sides from killing each other

 

And just to add, the final nail in the coffin is when Aaryn Flynn accepted a reward for DAI, and said it was Bioware's "return to form". To me, that's a veiled way of saying that haters were right.

 

I'd prefer them actually being proud of their work.

 

I think you read too much into that comment 

[AresKeith]

Would it surprise you if I actually asked myself the same, and wonder if I read too much into it?

 

I honestly don't know how to interpret it any other way. "Return to form" doesn't sound like he's proud enough of recent work.

 

Gaider on the other hand is. I know he was still upset the expansion got canceled, even while DAI was released. He said it even hurts to talk about it.

 

I wouldn't say that they aren't proud of their work because they want try it again in future games (and hopefully more development time) and we know how Bioware always like to drop things when they don't work out

[9TailsFox]

And like Varric said Hawke would have most died at the Conclave like everyone else trying to keep both sides from killing each other

 

 

I think you read too much into that comment 

No he would be survived like Inquisitor.

[Tremere]

No he would be survived like Inquisitor.

That's one possibility, but it would have been a bit much. I think they'd have eventually let him/her be found, or they would have had Varric confess that he knew where Hawke was. Ahh... It doesn't matter at this point anymore. What's done is done.

[Iakus]

No he would be survived like Inquisitor.

Only if Hawke managed to walk in on Corypheus' ritual like the Inquisitor did.  Or rather, instead of the Inquisitor.

 

That's rather unlikely

[9TailsFox]

Only if Hawke managed to walk in on Corypheus' ritual like the Inquisitor did.  Or rather, instead of the Inquisitor.

 

That's rather unlikely

I can think of X reasons how Hawke survived fade opening. 4-5 of them is Flemeth. But like Tremere said What's done is done.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So let's talk about future then.  Bioware won't be creating a silent protagonist in the forseeable future.  That's obvious.  Thus they shouldn't be holding back with the protagonist anymore.  Make them a character in their own right, one with a defined personality, history, motivation, yet one we can influence.  For example, not having a character who is sarcastic, or mean, or nice in any given choice, but has one solid personality which we influence the choices of.  Thus we'd have a character that can be sarcastic while doing good, or bad, or just for the hell of it.  This'd create a more consistent, cinematic and, in the end, memorable character.

I disagree with this idea entirely. I do not want a set protagonist, at least not from Bioware when they are one of the few developers that let you create 'your' character, or at least sometimes. 

[metalfenix]

It's the eternal struggle between the fully voiced-semi-customizable-character-a-la-shepard-hawke or a silent-HoF-type-or-semi-vacant-various-races-Inquisitor.

 

I played twice with the human male inquisitor, and I found that his dialogue lines were kinda meh, even compared with ME1, wich has the worst male-shep acting. It seems that they wanted to have 4 races (with 2 genders each one) but in their effort to have everything they lost a bit on the writing and acting. I even liked more Hawke's lines and voice acting in DA 2.

 

So I'll be honest. As much as I like a huge variety of choices, I prefer the approach of bioware on ME 1-3 and DA 2, than the one on DA:O (even though is my fav game of bioware) and specially, DA:I .

[Fearsome1]

I do NOT want to be limited to playing a single racial choice in Dragon Age games ..... ever again. I have no idea why anyone would prefer to always play as a human in a fantasy rpg?