58 réponses à ce sujet

[nightscrawl]

Since (some) elements of the cancelled Exalted March expansion got incorporated into DAI, and we will never know what could have been and how DA2 might have been wrapped up with the expansion, I think calling DA2 a prolog is a bit of a stretch. As it exists now, I would agree, but that wasn't their plan when they made it.

 

From David Gaider...

It was indeed a difficult progress to let go of the DA2 expansion’s story. I mean, we never got very far past the planning stage, so I’m well aware that by the time it got to release it would undoubtedly have changed significantly — perhaps even to my great disappointment. Even so, it’s still hard to avoid thinking of what-might-have-been.
 
So you’ll have to forgive me if I say I never intend to go into detail on it. For my sake as well as the sake of fans, many of whom lack my perspective on such projects — if it’s hard for me, what might it be like for them?
 
Though they should be happy, to be perfectly frank. The ending we had planned for the expansion was brutal, insofar as some of their favorite characters are concerned…which would have been delightful for us writers, but maybe not so much for them. Maybe it’s better this way.
 
Or not. Whatever the case, I’ll just say that some basic plots were carried over, and naturally changed as the context for them changed. The Temple of Mythal is a good example. Beyond that, I’ll leave it to your imagination.

[Robert Trevelyan]

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. 

 

 

It does seem pretty clear that that is what Bioware were trying to do. 

 

Remember that during development it wasn't even called "Dragon Age 2". It was "Dragon Age Exodus".

[MaxQuartiroli]

I don't think that they real intention was to create a prologue to DA:I or a bridge between the first game and this one. I suppose they were forced to changed their plans, after the massive backlash and the partial insuccess of DA2. I still think that if they had released the already planned DLC "Exalting March" DA:I would have been slightly different.

[Heimdall]

Actually, if I recall Inquisition or some similar idea was originally how they planned to followup DAO, but they realized they couldn't do it with the technology and time available to them, to DA2 came into being with the idea of being a bridge story story.

 

That's not to say Hawke was supposed to be the Inquisitor, more that it was meant to move the world toward chaos and Mage-Templar infighting, away from the Blight.

[Heimdall]

It just seems unlikely (and extremely silly) to have Flemeth go on about Destiny and for them to market Hawke as the "most important person in Thedas", when all they really planned was just some minor transition game.

 

Excerpt:

 

Dragon Age 2 thrusts players into the role of Hawke, a penniless refugee who rises to power to become the single most important character in the world of Dragon Age. Known to be a survivor of the Blight and the Champion of Kirkwall, the legend around Hawke’s rise to power is shrouded in myth and rumor. Featuring an all-new story spanning 10 years, players will help tell that tale by making tough moral choices, gathering the deadliest of allies, amassing fame and fortune, and sealing their place in history. The way you play will write the story of how the world is changed forever.

I chalk that last bit to Bioware's marketing being sh*t and melodramatic, as usual.

 

As for Flemeth, well, maybe that had more to do with the Exalted March content we would have gotten.  I'm not saying it was "just" a transition game, just that they intended to use it as that.  Hawke does witness the spark for some pretty important events and I seem to remember a dev saying they thought of DA2 as an experimental piece, trying out ideas they never had before.

[Heimdall]

Well, I want narrative coherency...and a series with a real Identity. I don't want random experiments. It seemed like Hawke could've given the former.

 

DAI just carries the experiment further, I guess. "Lets set up this Hawke origin story, only to have some amnesiac bum swoop in and get worshipped in the first 45 minutes... even though most origin stories barely have anything to do with the surrounding events of the Chantry, Mage/Temp war, etc". 

 

And by "barely", I'm being generous. "He was a Merc at the Conclave." Are they intentionally trying to be absurd?

It was more an experiment in narrative structure, being tied to one place through time and being a personal level rather than world changing story.  I'd like to see more like that.  As for it being a Hawke Origin story, I still don't buy it though I can see how it would have worked.  Considering how many "let us kill Hawke" and "bring back race selection" threads there used to be around here during development, I don't think Hawke coming back was ever going to happen after DA2.

 

No arguments here.  Bioware messed up by not at least including a Conclave based Origin level to sell us on the origin of our Inquisitors, then lay the worship on way too much way too fast.

[Heimdall]

And now Patrick Weekes gets some balls and tells people to play another game, if they don't like DAI. Maybe they could have used him back then. Why listen to critics about DA2, but not here? *You don't need to answer that*

Mostly because those criticisms were a lot more common than the transphobic ones(Really only a tiny fringe of a tiny fringe group of people care) and there was a lot more negativity about the game in general.  And financially, while DA2 wasn't a flop, it wasn't the overwhelming success DAO turned out to be.

 

Sadly, DA2 will remain feeling rather unfinished.  Though I can't say I'm sad to have race selection back.

[Dieb]

I'm replaying DA2 right now.

 

Thanks guys!

[Heimdall]

I like race selection, but I like it to fit the story more (like with the Warden, which was a pretty open ended, neutral type of story). It's just tacked on here for the most part. This isn't exactly where I expected the story to lead after Asunder and DA2. All of that buildup, only to be solved with a hoaky Herald story and someone completely irrelevant to anything that came before. Completely. I was expecting a bigger, grander political plot with an Inquisitor that really earns the title or is more involved with the events. Not this.

And if it's just supposed to lend to the mystery and examination of "faith", then I don't see the point there either. In the end, they just make you look stupid if you bought into it. It's just a farce, and makes the people following you look ridiculous. Why would I want that? I want to like characters. Not pity them.

I agree, race selection felt very tacked on, but I think that "out of nowhere" feeling would have been mitigated a great deal of they'd included a pre-explosion segment unique to each Inquisitor, establishing their character pre-chosen-one shtick. I don't have a problem with the common people believing you're the chosen one on principle.

There was altogether too much ego-stroking from the advisors and companions, that's what really killed the religious angle for me and kept me from taking the Inquisitor very seriously.

(On the whole, I still enjoye the game)

[rapscallioness]

....I feel like David. It's hard not to think of what might have been.

 

Especially when Hawke's hands are all over everything in DAI. Mage/Templar war; Corypheus--the villain; even the Qunari, and if that dlc leak is to be believed...Qunari war incoming. Just as the Arishok promised with his dying breath and finger pointed at Hawke. It's like Hawke came into DAI and just touched All the Things.

 

Instead we get Blandy McHurrDurrInquisituur. The icing on the cake is when they decided to trot that imposter Hawke back out to be a friggin npc. Whose head they-ever so delightfully-offer up to you on a silver platter.

 

It would have been so much cooler if when Cory walked out of that fire at Haven, the one he faced off against was Hawke. And Hawke being like, "Oh, shite!!" and Cory saying, "Yeah. Hey fvckr. I'm back."

 

Alas, I think I must take Flemeth's advice about not clinging to regret. Shame, though.

[DuskWanderer]

Wanna know an interesting pattern I saw?

 

DA: O took place in Ferelden

DA2 took place in the Free Marches, but the hero was from Ferelden

DA: I took place in Orlais (mostly), but the hero was from the Free Marches.

 

Does DA: Next Game mean the hero must be from Orlais?

[Youknow]

If DA:2 was an origin game, that would have been incredible. You can play a game with a character that's already GOT their backstory which means that you don't have to shape your character when you go in the next one. You can start out knowing the situation and move on. That would have been awesome. If the next game was nothing but an origins game, with say... A 20 hour campaign for 3 or 4 different races, and I KNEW the next one was going to be a full game, I'd buy if for like $20-40. Sounds delightful. 

[Big I]

If DA:2 was an origin game, that would have been incredible.

 

If I'd known DA2 was going to be an origin story, I'd have given it far less grief than I did. I was constantly disappointed by my lack of control over Hawke's actions in DA2; for instance, there is no good reason given for not being able to kill Petrice in Act 1 and Meredith in Act 2 other than "they're needed for the story later on". If the whole game was about setting up the Inquisitor's backstory then that sort of railroading is a little more understandable; few people complain about the DA:O origins leading inevitably to the PC becoming a Grey Warden.

[Dieb]

If I'd known DA2 was going to be an origin story, I'd have given it far less grief than I did. I was constantly disappointed by my lack of control over Hawke's actions in DA2; for instance, there is no good reason given for not being able to kill Petrice in Act 1 and Meredith in Act 2 other than "they're needed for the story later on". If the whole game was about setting up the Inquisitor's backstory then that sort of railroading is a little more understandable; few people complain about the DA:O origins leading inevitably to the PC becoming a Grey Warden.

 

That is mostly because rather DAO is the last remainder of a past gaming generation, which unexpectedly made it into a trilogy mostly in the next compartment.

 

Nobody Not the majority of players has problems with the lack of choices when controlling Commander Shepard, cause the transition was "Illusion of choice / binary choices --> Slightly less choices in favour of more rigid plot / More strongly expressed personality, thus less "choice" over expression" The technology got better and brought some contextual limitations, but the approach didn't change fundamentally.

 

In Dragon Age, it was "Oldschool RPG with silent protagonist floating merrily through the narrative for the writers to go crazy about literally anything -> Modern game with binary choices / fixed plot because of high production value cutscenes"

 

I mean, I love DA2 the most out of the three, but I understand why those who adore DAO don't like it.

[Dabrikishaw]

I don't agree with calling ][ a prologue. It's more or less a coincidence that things ended up looking that way.

[Ninna]

It kind of felt like a prologue, yes. I disliked Dragon Age 2 when I first played it. I didn't get what was the point of the story, it was just all over the place and the ending frustrated me.

 

I liked Inquisition. After finishing it, I felt compelled to go back to DA2 and was able to actually enjoy it and understand everything better. Although I used a cheat to avoid fighting because I didn't want to waste my time with that, I just wanted to see the story.

[ComedicSociopathy]

Yeah, pretty much.

 

Dragon Age 2 does feels as if it was only meant to set up the introduction of red lyrium, the release of Corypehus and the Mage-Templar war, all of which would be more relevant and interesting in Inquisition. Then again, Inquisition feels like it was only meant to set up Evil God Solas and introduce the idea of the dwarves, elves and qunari all now having mysterious origins that will be explained in DA 4. 

[Hollie]

IMO, DA2 was definitely exposition to DAI. I feel like Bioware was stuck: they needed to rush out something to capitalize on the positive response from Origins and there was information relevant to the story they wanted to tell that players would need. So they put together this story to bring the mage-templar conflict to the forefront, but of course that wasn't going to be enough. So they created the story around Hawke and then put together something quickly and sent it off to focus on the real story they wanted to tell.

I think that it was needed. It would have been a little jarring to go from fighting the blight to the mage-templar war. But they didn't do it well. So DA2 ends up feeling unfinished filler. I could see the potential in some of the storylines, the characters, and even the setting, small as it was, but it was all wasted.

I hope that doesn't happen again, and that the next DA game isn't just another filler to keep our attention while they work on the "big" game.