353 réponses à ce sujet

[Teddie Sage]

 

(If Hawke romanced Isabela)

 

Cassandra: What about Isabela? Will she...

Varric: Join her/him? Once she gets my letter she'll go whether Hawke likes it or not.

 

 

Yeah... no. She's too busy running circles in DAMP maps. 

 

Exactly... This sorta breaks the point of romancing her if the MP isn't going to acknowledge our choices. Any of the choices you make won't have any impact on the lines she'll have in the MP and this seriously bothers me a lot. This character doesn't belong there. The MP should be for original characters, just my opinion.

[AresKeith]

Exactly... This sorta breaks the point of romancing her if the MP isn't going to acknowledge our choices. Any of the choices you make won't have any impact on the lines she'll have in the MP and this seriously bothers me a lot. This character doesn't belong there. The MP should be for original characters, just my opinion.

 

Why should the MP reference your romance?

[Teddie Sage]

Why should the MP reference your romance?

Not just the romance. All the choices concerning Isabela. Wether she was taken by the Qunari or not, whether she was friends with Hawke, whether she was her rival, whether she had her ship or she didn't. All those little choices you made in the second game affected how she interacted with the player.

It's like they weren't thinking clearly when they selected her as a character, about the consequences it would have with people who actually cared about their choices with the said pirate.

[AresKeith]

Not just the romance. All the choices concerning Isabela. Wether she was taken by the Qunari or not, whether she was friends with Hawke, whether she was her rival, whether she had her ship or she didn't. All those little choices you made in the second game affected how she interacted with the player. It's like they weren't thinking clearly when they selected her as a character, about the consequences it would have with people who actually cared about their choices with the said pirate.

 

Her being taken by the Qunari wouldn't matter because she escapes again, none of those choices don't need to be referenced for Isabela to be Isabela

[X Equestris]

Not just the romance. All the choices concerning Isabela. Wether she was taken by the Qunari or not, whether she was friends with Hawke, whether she was her rival, whether she had her ship or she didn't. All those little choices you made in the second game affected how she interacted with the player.
It's like they weren't thinking clearly when they selected her as a character, about the consequences it would have with people who actually cared about their choices with the said pirate.

Those choices might be relevant if Hawke was around, but most of those seem rather irrelevant outside of that.

[caradoc2000]

I would have preferred that she (or any other party member from previous games) made an appearance in SP. It does feel odd that they'd be making an appearance in MP only. I can live with this, however.

[Teddie Sage]

Her being taken by the Qunari wouldn't matter because she escapes again, none of those choices don't need to be referenced for Isabela to be Isabela

References are always a good thing for people who played the earlier games. If she romanced Hawke, if she hooked up with Fenris, etc. For a game that is all about choices, making Isabela forget all about her years at Kirkwall would be just a terrible joke. Until I see the final result, I'm not going to be a happy customer about how they are handling a SP character in a MP segment of a video game franchise. I stand to my belief that she doesn't belong there -- NOT in the MP anyways.

[o Ventus]

I say bullsh*t. It's ruining headcanons of some people whether you agree or not. And next time you try to say something, be more elaborate please. How is this not "lore breaking" or breaking any headcanons we had with the single player mode? Mm? Do tell.

Ignoring that you're being confrontational for the sake of drawing attention....

 

The multiplayer doesn't break lore at all. You play as agents of the Inquisition, battling enemies of the Inquisition. Isabela being a multiplayer character simply means she joined the Inquisition. No lore is being broken here.

 

I do not care about someone's headcanon being ruined (though I would assume that anyone who isn't on the emotional level of a 4 year old would not actually feel that their headcanon has been "broken" by Isabela being in MP). It is literally impossible to protect the sanctity of one's made-up fan fiction story. Bioware aren't under any obligation to make sure you're made-up story fits the established canon, nor vice-versa. You are not the writer/director/developer/etc, you don't dictate how the story plays out.

[Lady Artifice]

 How is this not "lore breaking" or breaking any headcanons we had with the single player mode? Mm? Do tell.

 

A few of us have offered explanation for why we believe it meshes with the SP.

[Teddie Sage]

Ignoring that you're being confrontational for the sake of drawing attention....

 

The multiplayer doesn't break lore at all. You play as agents of the Inquisition, battling enemies of the Inquisition. Isabela being a multiplayer character simply means she joined the Inquisition. No lore is being broken here.

 

I do not care about someone's headcanon being ruined (though I would assume that anyone who isn't on the emotional level of a 4 year old would not actually feel that their headcanon has been "broken" by Isabela being in MP). It is literally impossible to protect the sanctity of one's made-up fan fiction story. Bioware aren't under any obligation to make sure you're made-up story fits the established canon, nor vice-versa. You are not the writer/director/developer/etc, you don't dictate how the story plays out.

So, having a conversation is being confrontational... Interesting. *sighs*

I agree on the third paragraph on some levels, however like I said, I don't believe she belongs in the MP at all. She was a SP character and she deserve better than being put there.

 

[Teddie Sage]

A few of us have offered explanation for why we believe it meshes with the SP.

I read those and I said it many times, if our choices don't matter then she doesn't belong there. She was written as a SP character and should remain a SP character.

[caradoc2000]

Isabela being a multiplayer character simply means she joined the Inquisition.

That is not the impression a couple of my Hawkes had (who romanced Isabela) when Inky asked.

[AresKeith]

I read those and I said it many times, if our choices don't matter then she doesn't belong there. She was written as a SP character and should remain a SP character.

 

Your choices isn't the only thing that makes Isabela, Isabela

[Teddie Sage]

That is not the impression a couple of my Hawkes had (who romanced Isabela) when Inky asked.

The only way my concerns could be fixed would be if we had the chance to talk to Isabela in the SP once we unlock her and after we meet Hawke, so we can actually have conversations with her. However, I highly doubt that would work because once you unlock her as a character with lines, most people would want more lines for all the MP characters that walk around Skyhold. Imagine if Fenris or Anders became some MP character and walked in the Skyhold of someone who killed Anders or Fenris in their playthroughs. Total chaos.

[Teddie Sage]

Your choices isn't the only thing that makes Isabela, Isabela

You still don't get what I'm saying. She's the same character sure but our choices influenced her lines. If our choices don't matter anymore, there's no character development, there's no "I got the boat" or "I was a bad girl but you made me better, Hawke", etc. SP characters should remain SP characters and MP characters should remain MP characters.

[Broganisity]

Headcanon breaking?

DA:I is the story of the Inquisition, not the story of Hawke. Hawke's affiliation with the Inquisition is temporary and potentially fatal. If Isabella knows about Hawke's involvement with the Inquisition she is either happy, indifferent, or upset about it but she's still there; her reasons are her own. Maybe she saw the mess at Kirkwall and thought to help stopping the madness of the Breach, or maybe she's in it for the high price tag she negotiated for her skills? Maybe she followed after Hawke? I believe the multiplayer, time-wise, occurs somewhere after the Western Approach is unlocked (One of the announcers of the Multiplayer is the captain of a Griffin Wing Keep.). . .could be before, during, or after the situation at Adamant Fortress. Thus, Isabella could have joined, been hired, or been recruited by the Inquisition after the Fade incident. Hawke has either died or left.

Regardless: Isabella probably has little to nothing to say about Hawke or Kirkwall in general to the other Agents of the Inquisition, other than 'I was there'. They don't need to know the details; Kolgrim and the others don't need to know her life's story if she has no interest in telling it to a complete group of strangers. Some people are more open about their pasts and their present motives than other people are. It's kept vague or an avoided issue due to the relatively stable state of Isabella (alive regardless) barring Romance and Betrayal.

 

If anything, this gives the player a chance to see another side of Isabella in the form of new dialogue and interactions with different characters than those witnessed in Dragon Age: II. She's had a colorful past, it's not as though her entire life revolves around Kirkwall and Hawke. Maybe she's suspicious of the Katari due to his being a Qunari, which he then corrects by stating he doesn't follow the Qun. Perhaps she finds the Alchemist amusing while most people either pity her or just outright find her annoying. Maybe we'll hear more about her past or the (made vague) events that transpired between the end of DA:II and the present? Maybe she was out sailing, maybe she was evading the Qunari in Nevarra or- who knows? Give it a chance, you may be pleasantly surprised.

. . .Now, it'd be MUCH worse if they came up with some sort of 'Default' Isabella for the Multiplayer that insists certain events happened the way they did.

[o Ventus]

So, having a conversation is being confrontational... Interesting. *sighs*

Yes, considering all you're doing is being a pedant and attacking my syntax rather than my point. And you responding to me like a parent talking to a child with condescending and passive-aggressive statements like "Hmm, do tell" and straight-up saying "I say bullsh*t" [sic] like you've backed me into some corner aren't exactly what one says when they claim to be open for a debate. 

 

That is not the impression a couple of my Hawkes had (who romanced Isabela) when Inky asked.

 

Because there's no way Isabela could have joined after Hawke departed.

[Dio Demon]

I say bullsh*t. It's ruining headcanons of some people whether you agree or not. And next time you try to say something, be more elaborate please. How is this not "lore breaking" or breaking any headcanons we had with the single player mode? Mm? Do tell.

The day that any writer cares about people's headcannons is the day that the quality of writing declines.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The day that any writer cares about people's headcannons is the day that the quality of writing declines.

Spoiler

So like how the supposed ME:Next game has it being set in another galaxy, throwing all established lore about our cycle's spacefaring capabilities away, so as to not touch on the endings and headcanons of events after?

[BronzTrooper]

Because for me the MP doesn't belong in this game, it should be a separate game, a standalone project and away from the original franchise. Which is why I call it garbage.

 

If you don't like the MP, why play it?

[AresKeith]

The day that any writer cares about people's headcannons is the day that the quality of writing declines.

 

I didn't know about headcanon until I came to BSN, shows how much it really matters

[BronzTrooper]

Spoiler

So like how the supposed ME:Next game has it being set in another galaxy, throwing all established lore about our cycle's spacefaring capabilities away, so as to not touch on the endings and headcanons of events after?

 

ME3's endings were controversial enough.  I don't think BW wants to add to it.

[Teddie Sage]

If you don't like the MP, why play it?

You got me wrong there, I don't "hate" it, I don't like that it's part of this game as most of the SP was built with the same gameplay and both SP and MP influenced one another. What I said a few times is that I hate that SP characters are being put in the MP because they were SP characters to begin with. I also mentioned that I'd rather have a MP style Dragon Age as a separate game so the Dragon Age team could focus on a whole different battle system that wouldn't feel like it's ripped off from the MP. I like that the tactical menu is there in SP, it saves me a lot of trouble sometimes, but I do miss the old combat system from DAO sometimes or DA2. DAI isn't that bad, it just feels like it was built around MMO in mind, which is a bit alienating. 

In other words, I just wish MP stopped influencing SP in BioWare games.

[MyKingdomCold]

Simple solution to the supposed "breaking of headcanon"- don't play MP. That way Isabela is off doing whatever your "headcanon" says she's doing. Or you could always just not give a **** about trivial matters

[Dio Demon]

Spoiler

So like how the supposed ME:Next game has it being set in another galaxy, throwing all established lore about our cycle's spacefaring capabilities away, so as to not touch on the endings and headcanons of events after?

So they have to spend extra resources ensuring that the previous choices are given enough justice? That would take resources away from other stuff. Synthesis ending has those weird golden lines on everyone another one has the Geth and another has the Reapers? How the hell could BioWare account for stuff like that without doing it halfassed?