231 réponses à ce sujet

[PapaCharlie9]

 

As far as Leliana not being a romance option, David Gaider stated he didn't want to upset the diehard Warden fans who would call foul to Leliana's infidelity with another protagonist (assuming one romanced Leliana in DAO).

Now I wish I hadn't brought it up. That's a the lamest excuse ever. If they can have game logic that checks if Leliana was killed in DA:O worldstate, give additional monologue in Haven, they can certainly have game logic that checks if Leliana was romanced in DA:O, do not offer heart icon dialogue option. Jeez.

[PapaCharlie9]

TL;DR, add more player agency by letting us opt-out of the story if we want, and let us experiment with alternative solutions to problems in quests.

 

While a bit off topic, several responses have been about player agency, or lack of, in DA series games, or ME for that matter. There was a lot of discussion about the role of player agency in the context of The Last Of Us, particularly regarding the ending (no spoiler), but my take on that game is, what did you expect? The player doesn't get to make one single moral choice in the whole game (well, without terminating the game then and there), why should the ending be any different?

 

But that is not true of DA or ME. One of the the selling points of BW RP/action games is that they are all supposed to be about making moral choices. So it is completely fair to analyze/criticize the games on that basis.

 

IMHO, BW games in general and DA:I in particular haven't quite found the right balance. They tend trade off player agency for better storytelling. For example, there are a lot of threads about how the IQ can't really break bad. The setup is great for becoming the evil overlord of Thedas, but it's not an option, no matter how hard you try. The IQ is stuck in a kind of heroic role, where the moral game is rigged so that no matter what choices you make, someone approves. It doesn't matter that someone also disapproves as well, because either choice is a heroic choice. That means the story never deviates from a heroic arc so that it can resolve in a heroic conclusion. It is certainly easier to tell a story if you (the writers) control all the key decision points.

 

But it is also a shame and a waste of a great game engine and environment. 

 

It wouldn't take too much additional effort to really open the game up to making choices where either everyone disapproves or everyone approves. Or, better yet, nobody really cares. That's real freedom of choice, to do stuff that doesn't make a difference one way or the other. Like creating 500 rounds of cheese and rolling them off the nearest mountain just for yuks (real example: done in Skyrim).

 

A close cousin to player agency is emergent problem solving. Every problem posed in DA:I has a pre-ordained, scripted solution. Okay, I see why that's necessary for storytelling, but how about some opt-out alternatives for follow-up PTs? For example, in Whiskered Eyes, Wicker Hearts, how about letting the IQ just assassinate everyone in the palace? Toss in a few Earwig Grenades and lock the doors, just like the IQ jokes with Sera. Or the IQ assassinates all but one of the contenders and the lucky survivor gets to rule Orlais? Let players invent their own solutions to problems. If that means the story gets reduced to a least common denominator, like, the Inquisition takes over rulership of Orlais until the Breach is closed, that's fine. Letting us trade off story for emergent problem solving is a great feature for follow-up PTs.

 

I hate to keep mentioning Skyrim, but it's the best exemplar we have for how to balance storytelling with player agency. For one, it offers several different stories, not just one. Want to follow the main quest line? Great, go for it. Want to follow the assassin quest line? It's completely independent of the main quest, and you can do a whole PT without ever touching the main quest. Want to invent your own story? No problem. I once did a PT of Skyrim where my character was a wandering blacksmith that ran from fights and didn't do a single quest, not even to help people. I never started the main quest, so other than in the prologue, there were no dragons to be seen, anywhere. I just mined metals and made stuff to sell, exploring the whole region. Odd, I know, but satisfying in a way that DA never can be. I did it as much to try something new as to see if I could define and achieve my own victory conditions: earn 100,000 gold without completing a single quest. And I did.

[phaonica]

Because Revan does not bother to source anything:

 

Mark Darrah: If you've had a character in a previous game that was a romance option typically we won't bring them back because they carry a lot of extra baggage with them. You're not going to have a romance option come back and certainly not have them be a romance option again because there's a lot of baggage that comes with that. The player might get angry as well. “But they're in love with my previous character forever and ever and ever. How dare you?” I think there's validity to that. You can start to cross off a few characters because of that. We often don't bring back characters, at least not as followers, if they were previously romance options. http://www.pcgamer.c...n-world/#page-2

 

[midnight tea]

Well, the problem with Skyrim is that IF you choose to do the main quest, there's really only one way of doing it... Same with other faction-quest. The biggest choice we get is choosing to wipe Dark Brotherhood or join it, or pick either Ulfric or Empire.... that's it, really. Unless you count mods (customizability was always the main strength of TES games and I love them for it), but that's hardly fair.

 

DAI is built differently from the way story is integrated to the plot though. It means sacrificing some agency or only introducing an illusion of choice sometimes, but honestly? While I'd like to see at least some of my choices affect the game, I'm willing to sacrifice some agency for the sake of good story.

 

Also - the Inquisitor is bound to be a hero in this story, but whether it is a genuine hero, well-liked by people and companions or a near-tyrant whose most companions will leave either before or after defeating Corypheus depends on how people play.

[leaguer of one]

Because Revan does not bother to source anything:

So that leaves only Cole to come back on a team for a new game 

[phaonica]

So that leaves only Cole to come back on a team for a new game 

 

I don't think he meant it as they could never be in the party again. I think he meant that they wouldn't make them an LI again (unless someone was inspired and they changed their minds).

[midnight tea]

I don't think he meant it as they could never be in the party again. I think he meant that they wouldn't make them an LI again.

 

Yup. Though romancing Cole would probably be possible if he was more human? It would be awkward though, IMHO - human or no, Cole is so child-like in many respects >_>'''

[phaonica]

Yup. Though romancing Cole would probably be possible if he was more human? It would be awkward though, IMHO - human or no, Cole is so child-like in many respects >_>'''

 

Possibly. And if someone on the Bioware team was so inspired to attempt to write such a challenging tale, then good luck to them.

[leaguer of one]

I don't think he meant it as they could never be in the party again. I think he meant that they wouldn't make them an LI again (unless someone was inspired and they changed their minds).

Added on that usually the li can die.

[XEternalXDreamsX]

Anyone else thinks that it would be an interesting idea if our new PC was one of mysterious Executors? We could be their agent, travelling all around Thedas in order to complete some sort of mission.



Don't we see the remains of old Redcliffe behind the ruined bridge?

Also - the franchise has to keep balance between creating for old players and inviting new ones. From that angle I see some of OPs point, even if I still think that calling continuity 'fanservice' or 'effect of fanservice' is a wrong way of looking at things.

Inquisition was my first game in series and you can't really expect me to care for NPCs like Connor before I actually got to know what happened in DAO - and I'm the type of person who goes out of her way to get to know more about things that interest me, from surfing wikis to playing older games if necessary and so on... but a large portion of players simply won't care at all. Therefore it would be just weird for writers to put much of spotlight at him, especially considering that it's not guaranteed that he survives (or doesn't get possessed), NOR that players will choose going to Redcliffe in the first place (as they can skip it and go for templars instead). Taking in consideration all those variables, I'm actually surprised that he got a small cameo.

Sorry, the lines between story cohesion and fan service blends sometimes for me. Like you said about being new to the series, it may not matter. The fact that they put those choices in the Keep to make choices relevant for no reason is really what bothers me. If they just put tiles in for larger focused choices (Ex. Dark Ritual), it would not feel like fan service.

[midnight tea]

I never said that there's no fanservice at all. I'm only against the OPs notion that it's all (or most) about fanservice, rather than continuity, or that DAI was popular predominantly because of fanservice.

 

The fact that they put those choices in the Keep to make choices relevant for no reason is really what bothers me. If they just put tiles in for larger focused choices (Ex. Dark Ritual), it would not feel like fan service.

 

You have to keep in mind that the Keep is also sort of compromise - they CAN'T just put only relevant choices in there, because they risk spoiling plot elements of upcoming games. 

[In Exile]

Can't do that in this game. Since its set in stone that the character is either a reluctant hero of the people, or a willing hero of the people. Given how often the game + cutscenes takes control of the character, the Inquisitor ended up being nothing more than an NPC.

That's silly and no different from any other RPG, except for the fact that "violent psycho that's largely unsuppressed in game" is not an option.

[XEternalXDreamsX]

I never said that there's no fanservice at all. I'm only against the OPs notion that it's all (or most) about fanservice, rather than continuity, or that DAI was popular predominantly because of fanservice.


You have to keep in mind that the Keep is also sort of compromise - they CAN'T just put only relevant choices in there, because they risk spoiling plot elements of upcoming games.

You're right. It would give too much away without the fluff. Honestly, I like the fluff choices and when you put it that way.. it makes sense. Thanks, bro.

[Revan Reborn]

So Morrigan, Flemeth, and Cassandra add no value to the story? Good to know all that foreshadowing and build-up should be thrown out the window as fan service.

 

That content happens to appease fans does not mean that content was designed strictly to appease fans, which is typically when fan service is referenced. If Bioware created Flemeth with the intention of having her being the tie connecting all these stories together, that's not fan service. That's called telling a coherent story. If fans happen to fall in love with the Flemeth character along the way, well, that's simply how the cookie crumbles.

 

It's your inability to recognize this that makes your attempt at claiming objectivity amusing.
 

Cassandra is not fan service, which is obvious by her minor role in DA2 and the buildup to something more substantial. Morrigan is a bit of a split. We knew she'd have some sort of role if the player performed the dark ritual and if one played Witch Hunt. However, to what degree see would be crucial to the story was never established. Even her role in DAI is relatively minor and short. Flemeth is much in the same way as Morrigan, having some relevance but not actually being that crucial to the story. The truth of the matter is the latter two are in part fan service, because they aren't absolutely necessary and people wanted them to return, but they also have minor plots that needed to be resolved.

 

Your subjective view on Flemeth's role has no value. She plays a minor role in all of the games and is arguably only really relevant in DAO. Otherwise, she's merely a familiar face that continues to return. Your definition of "fan service" is also flawed. The content doesn't have to be implemented entirely just to please fans, although it often is. I've already provided you with a definition above. Fan service is rather broad in its reach and what it can be applied to. It's interesting you are so vehemently opposed to the contents of the OP and try to insult me through your conceited and narcissistic nature.

 

If you disagree, that is all that needs to be said. The immature and condescending attitude is not necessary, and merely undermines your argument. Again, Dragon Age is not Mass Effect. The main stories largely are separate and have little connection to the other titles. Outside of Corypheus, Cassandra, and Varric, BioWare could have done many things with the rest of the game. You over-exaggerate continuity when, unlike Mass Effect, that doesn't matter nearly as much nor have an impact on the story. Throwing in characters like Alistair to check in and Dagna to be the Enchanter for the Inquisition is nice, but purely fan service. They aren't needed and add little value to the experience, but it is BioWare's way of giving player choices meaning and substance. In other words, fan service is a useful tool to make the game more tailored to what the player desires. Whether you want to recognize its existence or not is your prerogative.

 

Now I wish I hadn't brought it up. That's a the lamest excuse ever. If they can have game logic that checks if Leliana was killed in DA:O worldstate, give additional monologue in Haven, they can certainly have game logic that checks if Leliana was romanced in DA:O, do not offer heart icon dialogue option. Jeez.

Developing a love interest with the VO and all the dialogue that comes with it is incredibly expensive (content would have needed to be cut somewhere else). Not to mention, it would only be an option for those who did not romance Leliana in DAO. BioWare decided that was not a useful nor adequate delivery of resources and looked elsewhere.

 

Because Revan does not bother to source anything:

Do I need to provide a source for every post now? Interesting considering nobody else ever provides sources for their assertions, yet they hold more "weight" apparently. I was under the impression Leliana not being a love interest was obvious and common knowledge as BioWare had brought it up before when people asked about her.

 

Well, the problem with Skyrim is that IF you choose to do the main quest, there's really only one way of doing it... Same with other faction-quest. The biggest choice we get is choosing to wipe Dark Brotherhood or join it, or pick either Ulfric or Empire.... that's it, really. Unless you count mods (customizability was always the main strength of TES games and I love them for it), but that's hardly fair.

 

DAI is built differently from the way story is integrated to the plot though. It means sacrificing some agency or only introducing an illusion of choice sometimes, but honestly? While I'd like to see at least some of my choices affect the game, I'm willing to sacrifice some agency for the sake of good story.

 

Also - the Inquisitor is bound to be a hero in this story, but whether it is a genuine hero, well-liked by people and companions or a near-tyrant whose most companions will leave either before or after defeating Corypheus depends on how people play.

That's not necessarily true. You can choose to side with the Blades or the Grey Beards, and certain opportunities will be open to you based on which faction you side with. Inevitably, your destiny is still to defeat Alduin, but there is a lot more choice in Skyrim than you give it credit. Dawnguard is another example of DLC that allowed you to see an entire experience from two different perspectives. You just don't receive that kind of variance and diversity of perspectives in BioWare games these days. That's not to say Skyrim is perfect, but it offers many choices. Whether they have actual weight and consequence or not is a discussion for somewhere else.

 

The most linear aspect of most of BioWare's games is the hero archetype. It's something they have always relied on and severely limits what a player is capable of doing. The only time you could consciously not be the hero was in KotOR. Due to being the former Dark Lord of the Sith, there was a story to tell where you could reclaim that title and overthrow Malak, instead of just defeating him and saving the galaxy. What's really the issue with DAI, however, is the story seems to stagnate the Inquisitor too much.

 

BioWare did not provide him with a personality and the options provided in game do not allow much variance. Thus, we may as well not have choice at all as the Inquisitor will always end up in the same place. Headcanon is not a good excuse for a poor protagonist constricted by the story. Getting back on topic though, I think BioWare realized they were taking a gamble with the story. Especially since it is so heavily connected to a DAII DLC, it made it that much more important to try to create continuity as well as provide ample fan service. This was merely a means of providing more variety to the player rather than receiving what is arguably BioWare's most linear story to date.

[Torgette]

DAI was a success because it was a huge upgrade over DA2, and people respond to that kind of stuff.

[PapaCharlie9]

This was merely a means of providing more variety to the player rather than receiving what is arguably BioWare's most linear story to date.

I've said it in other threads, so pardon the broken record, but I suspect this has a lot to do with the uproar over the ME3 ending (including lawsuits) and the disappointment with the story experimentation of DA2 (the PC at various points in his/her life, more-or-less in one location) in comparison to DA:O. Fans were clearly unhappy, so, give the fans more of what they wanted. Don't take any chances, play it safe.

[Revan Reborn]

DAI was a success because it was a huge upgrade over DA2, and people respond to that kind of stuff.

Define a "huge upgrade." DAII was rushed, thus a lot of features and content was cut from the experience. If BioWare was setting the bar that low, anything would have surpassed DAII. My argument is that BioWare used fan service especially to entice people to return and say "hey this is still the Dragon Age you love." In other words, BioWare was really trying hard to repair Dragon Age's perception amongst gamers after DAII.

 

I've said it in other threads, so pardon the broken record, but I suspect this has a lot to do with the uproar over the ME3 ending (including lawsuits) and the disappointment with the story experimentation of DA2 (the PC at various points in his/her life, more-or-less in one location) in comparison to DA:O. Fans were clearly unhappy, so, give the fans more of what they wanted. Don't take any chances, play it safe.

The story was definitely safe, even with how it ended. That certainly more than likely played a role in development as BioWare wasn't nearly as adventurous as they have been in the past with DAI. It's unclear how much of an impact it would have had considering DAI was already in development even before DAII was released. Without a doubt, this is part of the reason why fan service was so pronounced in this game. BioWare needed to prove to EA that Dragon Age was still a major franchise. When you take out much of the fluff that isn't actually crucial to the story, there isn't a lot of depth there. Hence, fan service (if you actually understand what the term means) is present throughout the game in a variety of ways.

[Torgette]

Define a "huge upgrade." DAII was rushed, thus a lot of features and content was cut from the experience. If BioWare was setting the bar that low, anything would have surpassed DAII. My argument is that BioWare used fan service especially to entice people to return and say "hey this is still the Dragon Age you love." In other words, BioWare was really trying hard to repair Dragon Age's perception amongst gamers after DAII.

 

The "huge upgrade" of DAI is that it was at minimum up to par with other rpg's in recent years, whereas DA2 felt empty and cheap when it came out.

[Rawgrim]

That's silly and no different from any other RPG, except for the fact that "violent psycho that's largely unsuppressed in game" is not an option.

 

Its the truth. The Inquisitor (and Hawke) felt like NPCs because of it. Too few options for personality and choices, and too much auto-dialogue.

[Handsome Jack]

Everything in it's either garbage, fanservice, or SJW pandering.

 

No self-respecting Origins or DA lover in general would like Cisquisition.

 

Not to mention the Inquisitor is one of the most flat, boring, lifeless PCs to ever be in an RPG ever. The ****** Warden didn't even have dialogue audio and they still felt a hell of a lot more lifelike than the Inquisitor.

[The Elder King]

Everything in it's either garbage, fanservice, or SJW pandering.

No self-respecting Origins or DA lover in general would like Cisquisition.

Not to mention the Inquisitor is one of the most flat, boring, lifeless PCs to ever be in an RPG ever. The ****** Warden didn't even have dialogue audio and they still felt a hell of a lot more lifelike than the Inquisitor.

Of course. Because you rapresent a perfect model of a self-respecting DAO/DA fan, right?
Besides, didn't you say you returned the game after a few hours? Did you watch multiple playthroughs to see everything and come to that conclusion? You sure have a lot of time to spend on a game you loathe.

[AresKeith]

Everything in it's either garbage, fanservice, or SJW pandering.

 

No self-respecting Origins or DA lover in general would like Cisquisition.

 

Not to mention the Inquisitor is one of the most flat, boring, lifeless PCs to ever be in an RPG ever. The ****** Warden didn't even have dialogue audio and they still felt a hell of a lot more lifelike than the Inquisitor.

 

lol

 

Try harder

[midnight tea]

 

That's not necessarily true. You can choose to side with the Blades or the Grey Beards, and certain opportunities will be open to you based on which faction you side with. Inevitably, your destiny is still to defeat Alduin, but there is a lot more choice in Skyrim than you give it credit. Dawnguard is another example of DLC that allowed you to see an entire experience from two different perspectives. You just don't receive that kind of variance and diversity of perspectives in BioWare games these days. That's not to say Skyrim is perfect, but it offers many choices. Whether they have actual weight and consequence or not is a discussion for somewhere else.

 

The most linear aspect of most of BioWare's games is the hero archetype. It's something they have always relied on and severely limits what a player is capable of doing. The only time you could consciously not be the hero was in KotOR. Due to being the former Dark Lord of the Sith, there was a story to tell where you could reclaim that title and overthrow Malak, instead of just defeating him and saving the galaxy. What's really the issue with DAI, however, is the story seems to stagnate the Inquisitor too much.

 

BioWare did not provide him with a personality and the options provided in game do not allow much variance. Thus, we may as well not have choice at all as the Inquisitor will always end up in the same place. Headcanon is not a good excuse for a poor protagonist constricted by the story. Getting back on topic though, I think BioWare realized they were taking a gamble with the story. Especially since it is so heavily connected to a DAII DLC, it made it that much more important to try to create continuity as well as provide ample fan service. This was merely a means of providing more variety to the player rather than receiving what is arguably BioWare's most linear story to date.

 

The only thing that siding with Blades or Graybeards decides is the fate of Paarthurnax in exchange for a couple of side-missions for Blades (and what - one follower?)  - it had no other effect on the world... which you'd think it would, seeing how amazing Paarthurnax is. IMHO, Bethesda has wasted that character and mentioning that choice only showcases how low impact our choices can be in Skyrim (I also dislike what they did to Delphine - she seemed to be a fairly reasonable sort before that, but after arriving to talks she's just "Nope! Kill him, or the Blade take their toys and go somewhere else!")

 

Dawnguard definitely gives us a lot more interesting options, but even its scope is not as big or impactful as, say, picking either mages or templars as allies (it also results with the same ending - we side with Serana and kill Harkon, no matter who we choose to side with).

You also seem to conveniently forget that Dawnguard is a.) a DLC, b.) it was released 1,5 year after the original game. Therefore to truly say that DAI never provided us with any experience like it and be fair about it, you're going to have to wait for Bioware to release similar DLCs in span of next year.

 

I also love the irony of the fact that your'e quick to point out the limitations of the story brought by DAI, but completely omit the limitations of the patch chosen for our hero by TESV.

 

After all, how is it that even though the Dragonborn slain legendary, god-like figure and completed many other amazing things, the game doesn't allow him/her to become more than just glorified adventurer?

 

Logically, if he/she only wanted to, the Dragonborn could be sort of new Talos - yet the game doesn't even allow him/her to be an arbiter between warring nations. No matter which side we pick at what point or what have we done before that, it has little to NO impact whasoever on resolution of Civil War - either kill those or those.... it's a clear showcase of how limited our choices can be in Skyrim.

 

Anyway, what I mean to say is that there are limitations to each path taken by particular game - and while I adore Skyrim, I really like DAI as well, simply for being so different and offering a story of a person that is NOT just a glorified adventurer and is on his/her way to becoming one of the most prominent figures in Thedas. 

 

Yes, they can't be anything else, but the amount of things to do to establish HOW they are (whether they're well-likedor despised, faithful/skeptical OR use faith as a tool to get allies or lackeys, how hard they work to not just consolidate power but help others, how good they are at playing political games or not) provided by the game is enough to refute your "Bioware did not provide our PC with personality" with ease.

[KaiserShep]

Everything in it's either garbage, fanservice, or SJW pandering.
 
No self-respecting Origins or DA lover in general would like Cisquisition.
 
Not to mention the Inquisitor is one of the most flat, boring, lifeless PCs to ever be in an RPG ever. The ****** Warden didn't even have dialogue audio and they still felt a hell of a lot more lifelike than the Inquisitor.

Why you...you...shemlen!

[AresKeith]

Why you...you...shemlen!

 

Check your Dalish privilege