58 réponses à ce sujet

[CosmicGnosis]

I would enjoy another smaller and more personal game that transitions the series from the previous big game to the next big game. The "prologue games" would basically have a smaller scale and set up the events that will be the focus of the next major game in the series. It would be an interesting pattern to follow.

 

Dragon Age: Origins (big game) -> Dragon Age II (prologue to next big game) -> Dragon Age: Inquisition (big game) -> Dragon Age: "Prologue to Next Big Game" -> Dragon Age: "Big Game" -> etc.

 

I doubt that BioWare will do this; I'm not even sure if it's worth the time and money. But without this unique structure, Dragon Age II will forever be a weird game that feels inconsistent with the grand scale of Origins and Inquisition, and possibly even the next game. 

[katerinafm]

Hm...now that you mention it, now that DAI is out, DAII feels like sort of a spinoff, maybe. Like if you played DAI and you were interested in Hawke and DA2 was like a spinoff that followed his side of the story. I did enjoy the personal story. A lot more than DAI in parts. DA2 felt a lot more personal due to Hawke being much more detailed as a character. The Inquisitor feels even more of an empty husk than the Warden did, and I mention the Warden because he wasn't even voiced. 

[Ashaantha]

I feel DA2 was incomplete still when released, and after hearing the rumours of stuff they decided not to do in DLC etc for it I am not surprised by that feeling. Other then that I really enjoyed playing DA2 as something a bit different for a DA game now that DAI is out

 

I hope they do shift and change up game styles a little if they continue the universe for another 2-3 games. To me it keeps the series much more interesting, more then simply having different protagonists each game does.

[Aren]

 I don't like this formula is a complete failure because it means that games need to adress too many decisions,like DAI and become an underwhelming experiences in the end for the new protagonist.

[Donk]

I would enjoy another smaller and more personal game that transitions the series from the previous big game to the next big game. The "prologue games" would basically have a smaller scale and set up the events that will be the focus of the next major game in the series. It would be an interesting pattern to follow.

 

Dragon Age: Origins (big game) -> Dragon Age II (prologue to next big game) -> Dragon Age: Inquisition (big game) -> Dragon Age: "Prologue to Next Big Game" -> Dragon Age: "Big Game" -> etc.

 

I doubt that BioWare will do this; I'm not even sure if it's worth the time and money. But without this unique structure, Dragon Age II will forever be a weird game that feels inconsistent with the grand scale of Origins and Inquisition, and possibly even the next game. 

 

DA2 is unique in the fact that it differs from the "ultimate hero, save the world against all odds" type scenario (granted, DAI and DAO weren't *just* about that, but you get my drift).

 

Instead it is more of a personal story.. like a biography, told by Varric, detailing Hawke's life and the decisions he or she made, with some city politics thrown into the mix.

 

I think your idea is great, I would love another personal story, or stepping stone to bigger events, in the next DA. But the devs would have to do it a lot differently and would be taking a lot of risks.. mind you, the problem in DA2, from what I could understand, isn't about the story itself but other factors such as repetitive environments, and the fast paced, button bashing combat (which I loved btw)

[In Exile]

DA2's Exalted March expansion, while different, would have featured the Temple of Mythal sequence. And Hawke's marketing suggests - pretty strongly - that it would have been Hawke as the Inquisitor (Corypheus being your mess to clean up). DA2 was going to be a clever way of introducing a chosen one type of protagonist, who isn't very chosen at all. Becoming the Inquisitor would have just been the next subversion - instead of being literally chosen by the gods, Hawke - in usual Hawke fashion - opened a door at the wrong time of day. But DA2 tanked, so we got NotHawke McInquisitor. 

[Orian Tabris]

It's definitely a good idea OP, but I think it would just be detrimental to the continued success and existence of the Dragon Age franchise. It was looking shaky during the time between the second and third games' releases due to BioWare's finances and how bad people thought DA2 and ME3 were (most of the time forgetting that DA2 would have been much better with a longer development time, and would have thus more likeable). BioWare would have to actually make a press statement or whatever, saying that this is what they are doing, because people would assume otherwise: that BioWare is just getting sloppy with the series. The detriment would be due to the consistency being so unusual, that people might not accept it as a logical progression for a video game series (i.e. "Oooh! Something different! How weird and scary to me!").

 

Something like that.

[Orian Tabris]

 I don't like this formula is a complete failure because it means that games need to adress too many decisions,like DAI and become an underwhelming experiences in the end for the new protagonist.

If I get what you're saying properly, the original poster is not saying each game should be an introduction to the game that follows. They're saying that DA2 could be considered a prologue to Inquisition, and DA4 could be a prologue to DA5.

[Shaftell]

It'll never work even though I do agree with your idea op. I feel like people won't be fully invested into it because it's a smaller scale game in scope and plot lines are left unresolved. It is great for character development and lore, but many aren't interested in side characters.

[ElementalFury106]

DA2's Exalted March expansion, while different, would have featured the Temple of Mythal sequence. And Hawke's marketing suggests - pretty strongly - that it would have been Hawke as the Inquisitor (Corypheus being your mess to clean up). DA2 was going to be a clever way of introducing a chosen one type of protagonist, who isn't very chosen at all. Becoming the Inquisitor would have just been the next subversion - instead of being literally chosen by the gods, Hawke - in usual Hawke fashion - opened a door at the wrong time of day. But DA2 tanked, so we got NotHawke McInquisitor. 

 

They also mentioned (I believe Gaider did in an interview) that what they had planned regarding the exalted march expansion was absolutely brutal. I assume this means your companions would've died.

 

That would make a lot of sense as to why Hawke as the new Inquisitor would get new companions/inner circle (aside from Varric) instead of bringing his/her old trusted posse of Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Bethany/Carver, and Aveline. Come to think of it, Aveline wouldn't leave her post and Isabela's loyalty is always in question, even romanced. But Merrill and Fenris both express they would not leave Hawke, and Hawke's sibling always joins them in the end.

 

It would've also given Hawke extra incentive to accept the Inquisitor's role and resources, as vengeance against Corypheus for destroying those he/she loved.

 

Would also explain why Varric actually decided to stick around to the end despite his tendency to flake when the going gets tough. Varric has unconditional loyalty to Hawke. Instead we get the reason of "It would be easier to just go home and pretend this isn't happening...but I won't do that."

 

While I did like having a new protagonist, especially one with a unique feature about them ASIDE from being an excellent fighter and leader, I do think the original plan of Hawke becoming the Inquisitor would've made a more fleshed out, impactful story.

 

/rant

 

 

EDIT: ...and Male Hawke and Cassandra would've finally gotten the romance Cassandra's been hoping for *sigh*

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 meh, more like Inquisition is an epilogue/denouement to Dragon Age II.

[Al Foley]

I think the problem here is that they intended for DA 2s Hawk to become the Inquisitor.  I think that is so clear given the amount of time they poured into the character and certain pointers within DA I itself.  But given how badly Hawk was panned for in DA 2 and since they seem to be going with a new protagonist each game, I really do not think they will go that route in the future.  Heh.  DA 2 had 'origin story' written all over it.  Pun intended.  

[Ashaantha]

I still think DA2 was a wonderful lead up to the whole Conclave blown up thing. It doesn't help it's status that Bioware completely changed where they were originally planning to take the Thedas tale after DA2 was already released. My opinion on how the shake up in game style was still a nice change still stands however.

[Al Foley]

I still think DA2 was a wonderful lead up to the whole Conclave blown up thing. It doesn't help it's status that Bioware completely changed where they were originally planning to take the Thedas tale after DA2 was already released. My opinion on how the shake up in game style was still a nice change still stands however.

I loved DA 2 and wouldn't mind more games like it in the future...though maybe spin offs in the case of DA games considering the main series is, and should be established as having big epic narratives.  Of course it is possible to have your cake and eat it to, small personal narratives involved in much larger grander quests, but the question is has video games evolved as a medium well enough in terms of technical ability and metaphysical talent to pull it off?  

[ShadowLordXII]

As long as they didn't rush future games in the same-vein as DA2, then it should be good.

 

Any story idea can be interesting and engaging as long as it's properly thought out and developed. But DA2 shows what happens when you rush what was supposed to be a "spin-off" in order to try and market the game to cash in on the very successful predecessor.

 

One of the great things about DA: Inquisition's presentation is that they took their time and didn't feel the need to rush in order to meet some kind of popularity deadline. They even delayed the game twice just to ensure that the game was as good as it could have been and it payed off, despite some technical bugs that were eventually fixed.

 

Also, be honest about the game being a spin-off rather than trying to market as the Next "Big" Dragon Age game. That's just inviting a hype train that's bound to crash.

[BraveVesperia]

I really enjoyed DA2 and I'd love for them to alternate between personal stories and more 'epic' stories. However, I wouldn't want that to mean that the personal story is just a prologue to the main event. Instead it could be a way of showing us something interesting in an area that might not necessarily affect the rest of Thedas. For example: if we played in Antiva and had a major storyline about the Crows. It wouldn't be on the same scale as a Blight or Qunari invasion, but it would affect Antiva and our character, depending on their story.

[Absafraginlootly]

Of the problems I had with da2 the smaller plot scope was never one of them.

 

I'd happily have a plot that wasn't 'save the whole world', variety being the spice of life and all that. That dragon age rebellion idea thats been circulating about would be cool, playing a slave and leading a revolt in Minrathous.

[robotnist]

1 simple thing would have REALLY increased the fun i had with DA2.... having armor/upgrading all your companions gear!!!

mind you, i actually loved DA2 when it came out.

 

and i am a HUGE fan of that skill tree system from DA2!!! although i was hoping for just 1 more per class in DAI!!!

i would LOVE IT//LOSE MY MIND, if they released a full blown boxed x-pack (which is my hopes since they announced all future releases will be next gen only) and added a new sub class/skill trees for each class!!!

 

because the way your skill trees work, IMO, is, say you're a 2H warrior, that immediately makes 1H shield tree useless. therefore every class chooses a weapon type and it immediately shuts down one of the trees. and then all NON mage classes are only working with 3 skill trees, while mages still have 4.

 

and then this issue is compounded by the fact that you have 9 characters, and not a whole lot of options when it comes to diversifying skill trees.

 

sorry, my post is kinda all over, but that's where my head is at. meanwhile i'm in the middle of yet ANOTHER campaign in DAI, having no less than 250+ hours (if not more) spread between PC and PS4 and this game gets better with time!!!!!!! 

 

cheers!

[Dieb]

"I had information that the Devine was planning to start an Exalted March towards Kirkwall, so I left, thinking it would force them to split up their forces to hunt me down. But I might as well have not; the Exalted March never came, and the war started anyways."

 

Sometimes, you have to get it out of your system somehow I guess.

[Dieb]

As much as I personally love Hawke, the majority has spoken.

 

It is not just the game DA2 itself, from what I'm getting, I think the majority of players did not like Hawke him/herself either. However, I personally couldn't rightfully advocate LGBT representation / multiplayer / no hot barbie wimminz in DAI, by stating enough people seem to be okay with that; and then damn them to hell for not liking something else. The only time this has happened to me before was with the removal of the Mako in ME2, so it's a good lesson to realize how it feels being on the "other side" of these kinds of issues.

[mkess]

Dragon Age II is a a very bad game. Storywise and technical. From the lazyiest developement team you ever seen. -> Dungeonrecycling.

 

I hope for the existance of Bioware this kind of game does not happen ever again, because it almost killed their new franchise.

 

Even the main villlian of DAI is only known to the players, who bought the still overprized DLC. So I dare to think, that most of the players don't even know this sucker in the first place. I, so far am not impressed very much with this villian. For me, he came totally out of thin air, because I will never ever pay for DLC that costs more than the main game. How dare they do that, putting such an important thing only in a DLC.  It's like Mass effect 3 all over again. -> From the ashes DLC.

 

One thing I know for sure: Every character except Varic and Cassandra, that comes from DA II sucks big time. Maybe because they put more effort into them, because they basicly tell the unimportant main story of DA II.

 

The only important part for the real story is: "Red lyrium is bad, don't use it at home, kids. And the mages finally rebelled against the opressing chantry, and caused a civil war. Seen from the perspective of an unimportant member of the Hawke family, a hillbilly from Lothering.".

 

That could have been one origins chapter in DA:I. Nothing would have been lost. DA II is meaningless for the epic story... and as a game.