231 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

Oh are you a mind reader? that was so on point.

The ones I expect more off ("Josy,Sera and Vivianne"), were really disappointing. That is why I founded the game boring, the rest of the cast aside from Dorian just was not that great to me. The reason I played DA2 almost 7 times was because I loved the characters, well maybe not Anders but even his romance was a nice challenge.

Since bioware is not that great when it comes to the main story, the characters happen to be their strong side and when they are not ,it is just boring. I mean I played the game 3 times full and I am not planning to do more than 4 PTs, my last one is being a problem even.

Not great does not mean none happened. Vivie kept the player guessing to her intent and is a truely complex character, Sers is the Jack of dragon age and Josy may be cute but needs more. But the cast ingeneral is much more complex and developed then the other character in other da's. DA2 the cast just has more issues and is crazier.

[midnight tea]

 

I think you are conflating two entirely different things. There is nothing wrong with continuity and having a save import/keep to make past events relevant to the present. My concern is to what degree should that have on future games. Again, the more installments you have, the more fan service that is actually possible. Where should the line be drawn? How much fan service should you have compared to new, original content? Should BioWare be cognizant of that? I think it's a valid concern that many, and perhaps even BioWare, haven't thoroughly considered.

 

I think you may be looking at it from a wrong perspective - the games (and other media) are supposed to tell the tale that features different protagonists, characters and parts of Thedas, but are all actually a part of bigger, more cohesive story that ties everything together and slowly unfolds before our eyes. So no wonder it's all connected - it would be connected no matter if fanservice existed or not.

[Mihura]

Not great does not mean none happened. Vivie kept the player guessing to her intent and is a truely complex character, Sers is the Jack of dragon age and Josy may be cute but needs more. But the cast ingeneral is much more complex and developed then the other character in other da's. DA2 the cast just has more issues and is crazier.

 

I am not saying Vivienne, Josephine, even Sera could not be great or at least had some good moments but DA 2 characters just felt more involved and compelling.

This is why I find the game boring, I have no reason to return. With DA:O for example the characters are on the same level, maybe a little better on some cases when it comes to surprising arcs and they sure are more connect to side and main stories.
I come back to that game because I love the side stories and not the main one, with DA:I the side stories are meh at best, so I have nothing that appeals to me. It is simple as that.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

On the contrary, your friend's ignorance of half the cast being from DAO and DAII does not make that fan service any less relevant. This was never a discussion of whether someone new to enjoy DAI. My point is that DAO and DAII largely define DAI almost to the point where the story of DAI doesn't matter. A newcomer wouldn't notice this. For those of us who have played since DAO, we know just how important DAO and DAII is for the actual story of DAI. Again, without DAO and DAII, there really isn't actually much left to the story of DAI. My concern is whether this is a good thing or not. Should BioWare rely so heavily on fan service?

I disagree. While DAO and DA2 help shape DAI, which is to be expected since they are prequels to it, DAI is still a game that can be a solid standalone title. It doesn't require DAO or DA2, but playing those games instead merely enhance the experience while playing this one.  

[leaguer of one]

I disagree. While DAO and DA2 help shape DAI, which is to be expected since they are prequels to it, DAI is still a game that can be a solid standalone title. It doesn't require DAO or DA2, but playing those games instead merely enhance the experience while playing this one.  

Yes and no. DAI may stand on it's but it has way less impact with out the other 2. The point Flemeth makes when you meet her, the flaws of the chantry, the impact of finding what the elven gods really are, what it mean to physically go into the fade and alot more have far less impact in meaning with out Dao and da2. Dai is just a tree.Dai, dao, and da2 is a forest.

[Revan Reborn]

I think you may be looking at it from a wrong perspective - the games (and other media) are supposed to tell the tale that features different protagonists, characters and parts of Thedas, but are all actually a part of bigger, more cohesive story that ties everything together and slowly unfolds before our eyes. So no wonder it's all connected - it would be connected no matter if fanservice existed or not.

You missed the point of the thread then. This isn't about continuity and choices carrying over per se. What this thread is discussing is to what degree that fan service should dictate the experience of the next installment. DAI arguably has more fan service than any other BioWare title. The fan service is so pronounced that it even largely affects the main story and what occurs. If you take out all the DAO and DAII content, you'd recognize you are left with a rather emaciated skeleton of a game. Should BioWare rely that heavily on previous games? Or should they have more of a balance with new ideas versus returning stories?

 

I disagree. While DAO and DA2 help shape DAI, which is to be expected since they are prequels to it, DAI is still a game that can be a solid standalone title. It doesn't require DAO or DA2, but playing those games instead merely enhance the experience while playing this one.  

Again, that is not what this discussion is about. Forget about DAI being a solid standalone game. That's irrelevant. The point is DAI is more dependent on previous events in sequels than arguably any other BioWare game. Even Mass Effect had the main story changing drastically with each installment while the background and side ventures largely showed the continuity.

 

Now, take out all of the aspects of DAO and DAII in DAI. What are you left with? Not much, really. This is my point. If we were to put a number on the fan service versus original content, it's roughly 65% fan service and 35% original story. Perhaps it is even more than that. The call of the question is should a BioWare title be this reliant on its predecessors? That is what this thread is asking.

[leaguer of one]

 

 

Again, that is not what this discussion is about. Forget about DAI being a solid standalone game. That's irrelevant. The point is DAI is more dependent on previous events in sequels than arguably any other BioWare game. Even Mass Effect had the main story changing drastically with each installment while the background and side ventures largely showed the continuity.

 

Now, take out all of the aspects of DAO and DAII in DAI. What are you left with? Not much, really. This is my point. If we were to put a number on the fan service versus original content, it's roughly 65% fan service and 35% original story. Perhaps it is even more than that. The call of the question is should a BioWare title be this reliant on its predecessors? That is what this thread is asking.

but that's the point. It's all one world.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Again, that is not what this discussion is about. Forget about DAI being a solid standalone game. That's irrelevant. The point is DAI is more dependent on previous events in sequels than arguably any other BioWare game. Even Mass Effect had the main story changing drastically with each installment while the background and side ventures largely showed the continuity.

 

Now, take out all of the aspects of DAO and DAII in DAI. What are you left with? Not much, really. This is my point. If we were to put a number on the fan service versus original content, it's roughly 65% fan service and 35% original story. Perhaps it is even more than that. The call of the question is should a BioWare title be this reliant on its predecessors? That is what this thread is asking.

Having stuff/plot points from previous games affect this game is not fanservice. It's called continuity. Unless you think Mass Effect was filled with fanservice sine it had main plots influenced by aspects of the previous games, like the Genophage and the Geth/Quarian conflict. Mass Effect was even more reliant since it was continuing with the same protagonist, whereas each DA game has a different one. DAI is not reliant on its predecessors, as I was proving by bringing up my friend who just started it. It's not lacking for them just because they didn't play DAO or DA2. DAI is capable of standing on its own because it has enough original content to do so. 

[phaonica]

If by "fan service" you mean listening to player feedback and trying to make the most entertaining product that they can, then yes, please, more of that.

[Revan Reborn]

If by "fan service" you mean listening to player feedback and trying to make the most entertaining product that they can, then yes, please, more of that.

Not at all. "Fan service" would be raising Leliana back from the dead just to tie her into DAII and then make her a major character in DAI. That being said, my personal Leliana lived, but this is an example of how BioWare will use previous assets and bring them back when it's not entirely necessary. I feel I should make a further distinction between traditional "continuity" and just "fan service."

 

There is obviously going to be continuity with any game that has a save import/keep and is going forward into the future. The point is to what degree should that dictate the next installment? Fan service would imply many of these inclusions aren't actually necessary for the plot and are merely done in order to make the fans happy. I believe there should be a balance to this fan service and continuity and how much it dictates a future title. DAI has far more of this than any BioWare game to date and it's an interesting question of whether that's a good idea or not.

[leaguer of one]

Not at all. "Fan service" would be raising Leliana back from the dead just to tie her into DAII and then make her a major character in DAI. That being said, my personal Leliana lived, but this is an example of how BioWare will use previous assets and bring them back when it's not entirely necessary. I feel I should make a further distinction between traditional "continuity" and just "fan service."

 

 

That was not done because of the fans. That was done because of the writer.

[leaguer of one]

Why is it that whenever I see "fan service" I think of blowjobs?

..this said with a desire demon pic.

[Revan Reborn]

That was not done because of the fans. That was done because of the writer.

You miss the point. I'm aware that Gaider wanted to reuse the character because he felt killing her off was a mistake and wasteful. The fact of the matter is she is still very much fan service as her inclusion was not necessary and it was to provide more connections of longstanding DA fans to the older titles. We can use Dagna as the enchanter as a great example of fan service I felt was done right as it was optional and secondary to the main point of the story. Whereas key elements such as Leliana, Cassandra, Morrigan, Flemeth, Corypheus, etc. were obviously tied to the main plot regardless of your actions. This was blatant fan service in order to show that continuity.

 

Continuity is important. BioWare needs to be aware of how they use it and to what degree they will rely on fan service to sell a game. I think part of the reason DAI relied so heavily on fan service was because BioWare wanted to rebuild the Dragon Age franchise's image and using previous characters people loved was a great way of doing that.

[leaguer of one]

You miss the point. I'm aware that Gaider wanted to reuse the character because he felt killing her off was a mistake and wasteful. The fact of the matter is she is still very much fan service as her inclusion was not necessary and it was to provide more connections of longstanding DA fans to the older titles. We can use Dagna as the enchanter as a great example of fan service I felt was done right as it was optional and secondary to the main point of the story. Whereas key elements such as Leliana, Cassandra, Morrigan, Flemeth, Corypheus, etc. were obviously tied to the main plot regardless of your actions. This was blatant fan service in order to show that continuity.

 

Continuity is important. BioWare needs to be aware of how they use it and to what degree they will rely on fan service to sell a game. I think part of the reason DAI relied so heavily on fan service was because BioWare wanted to rebuild the Dragon Age franchise's image and using previous characters people loved was a great way of doing that.

1. Cassandra, Morrigan, Flemeth, and Corypheus are not fan service. Cassandra was tied to the plot of Dai form da2. Cory was , surprising , tied to it from da: witch hunt being that the prophet in the dlc not only tell of his forth coming but the breach as well. And  Morrigan and Flemeth stories are bounded to the series plot for ever being that they are the heart and soul of the series.

2. leliana is a writers pet. No major fan fare was ever made for her to be forced in to the next game...Unlike Cullen was.

[phaonica]

Not at all. "Fan service" would be raising Leliana back from the dead just to tie her into DAII and then make her a major character in DAI. That being said, my personal Leliana lived, but this is an example of how BioWare will use previous assets and bring them back when it's not entirely necessary. I feel I should make a further distinction between traditional "continuity" and just "fan service."

 

There is obviously going to be continuity with any game that has a save import/keep and is going forward into the future. The point is to what degree should that dictate the next installment? Fan service would imply many of these inclusions aren't actually necessary for the plot and are merely done in order to make the fans happy. I believe there should be a balance to this fan service and continuity and how much it dictates a future title. DAI has far more of this than any BioWare game to date and it's an interesting question of whether that's a good idea or not.

 

Oh, am I not on your ignore list, after all? I was so sure...

 

Anyway, so anything "unnessesary" to the main plot that calls back to events/characters in previous games is fanservice? Meh, if that's what you want to call it. I think fanservice is fine in moderation. I like that each game has events here and there that recognize the world states that I've built in previous games. For the most part, I like character cameos, and I like the idea of NPCs of one game becoming party members in later games.

[Eelectrica]

Re-using characters in a series is not fan service.
Seems silly to toss perfectly good, established and interesting characters aside needlessly.

BioWare have shown they will override player choices if it will benefit the story. And that's ok.

Of course the writers shouldn't be afraid to kill off fan faves either if it makes sense and advances the story.

[Gothfather]

I find the OP's logic flawed. It assumes that everyone likes DA:I for the exact same reasons that the OP likes the game. It assumes zero diversity in the community with regards to what aspects of the game people enjoyed. So while the Op likes DA:I for its "fan service" others have clearly shown that they like the game for other reasons. I also think the premise that using previous characters in the series automatically equates to fan service, is not proven by the OP to begin with.

[caradoc2000]

I'd just like to preface this isn't an attack of BioWare's method with respect to DAI, but rather an analysis of why so many fans, especially those who played DAO and DAII, enjoyed DAI. It was after over 120 hours of play time that I realized why DAI was so entertaining to me. It wasn't because of the Inquisitor, the Inquisition, or anything remotely tied to the main story, but primarily reasons I had experienced previously in the Dragon Age franchise.
 
Leliana. Hawke. Cassandra. Morrigan. Flemeth. Varric. Dagna. It was familiar characters such as these, due to my playthroughs in DAO and DAII that brought credence and legitimacy to my world in Dragon Age Inquisition. They made the game entertaining, memorable, engaging, and kept my attention.

It is called continuity.

[phaonica]

I find the OP's logic flawed. It assumes that everyone likes DA:I for the exact same reasons that the OP likes the game. It assumes zero diversity in the community with regards to what aspects of the game people enjoyed. So while the Op likes DA:I for its "fan service" others have clearly shown that they like the game for other reasons. I also think the premise that using previous characters in the series automatically equates to fan service, is not proven by the OP to begin with.

 

Agreed. The argument seems based on a false consensus. OP asserts that DAI was a success largely because of an aspect that s/he personally significantly liked, thus implying (without evidence) that those who liked it for "fanservice" are in the majority.

 

I agree that there are lots of cameos, returning characters, and various events that recognize the worldstate the players built, and that this was probably, for me, the best part of the game. But I'm not going to try to claim that this one thing was the reason the majority of players liked the game. Without sources to back up that claim, I'd just be making stuff up.

[Bfler]

Hm, I prefer the companions in DA:O. They are the most natural ones. In DA2 and Inq there are too many freaks and chars with forced character traits.

 

And I guess if the game would be "fan service", we would have a DA:O 2 now.

[Eelectrica]

Hope we get Shale in the next game, that could be awesome.

[AWTEW]

 A part  of it was fan service but the biggest imo reason, is because they had practically 0 compition when they released. If they released this year they would be computing with  Final Fantasy XV' and The Witcher III.

[SabreTastic]

I would not consider the inclusion of past plot elements/characters to always be fan service. References to 'Swooping is bad,' sure! King!Alistair showing up to scold mages, no. The way I look at it, it seems weird to take the time to establish a bunch of characters and then adopt a 'one-and-done' protocol for handling them. That strikes me as an awful lot of effort for a rather minimal return. As someone who reliably favors characters who are either considered 'less important' or die horribly (or both!), I am constantly torn between the idea that 'no news is good news' and 'no news is just that--no news.' At some point, catching a writer's attention could mean that this character I enjoy will come to a grisly end and this may or may not be worth more to me than a lack of confirmation either way.

 

Before Inquisition came out, there was a short list of characters I was very concerned about. My 'Need to Know' people. In my primary worldstate, only one was directly involved and the other was mentioned but pretty much fell into a plot hole by my reckoning. So the lack of attention paid to what I felt was incredibly important, while disappointing, was not unexpected simply because it is unreasonable for me to think that BW can/will always both read my mind and view the same characters with the same level of importance.

1. Cullen

2. Nathaniel Howe

3. Regalyan D'Marcall

4. Anders/Justice/Vengeance

 

Note that isn't to say that I think everything and everyone should be tied neatly together so that there are no loose ends or that every cameo is significant to the plot, I would have just preferred it if those four had been featured. In fact, I might have the opposite opinion if I understand the OP correctly in that it was the return of familiar characters they found most satisfying about the game. I like the specific characters I like (such as those listed above) and I am somewhat tired of hearing about others (like Leliana, Morrigan, and Flemeth). Does that mean I would rather they be/stay dead or that I never want to hear from them again? No, but I am getting tired of them being so important.