272 réponses à ce sujet

[Majestic Jazz]

With a new lead writer this time, it would be interesting to see how a DA4 turns out....that is IF we even get a DA4. 

 

The only thing I would like to see done better in a possible DA4 is showing more and telling less. DAI was a perfect game to be able to show us the horrors of war, racism, discrimination, religious oppression etc. Instead, what we got was this sanitized "Disneyland" version of Thedas. I wanted to see the emotional impact of the suffering of the elves in this game. Instead, we get one small tribe of elves in which we have to chase Halla for and such. Everything else was told by finding notes/letters/journals on dead bodies explaining to us the horrors and suffering.....but we never actually got to see it. 

 

This is what gives Dark Fantasy games their niche, as they are the beacon for such topics and last time I checked, Origins was considered a Dark Fantasy game but the series is shifting into more of a High Fantasy like what we got with DAI. If anything, this is where I think the biggest difference is, that DAO was more of a dark fantasy RPG while DAI seems more like a high fantasy. Yes, DAI had it's darker moments, but it was nowhere near the level of intensity of that of DAO/Awakening. In essence, DAO is Robocop (1984) and DAI is Robocop 3 (1993) in terms of tone and intensity.

 

Finally, I believe the personality variance possibilities of the IQ was wasted. A lot of people like to use the excuse that the IQ was a religious figure leading a religious organization so being "bad" would not make sense. I find that funny because in older history, some of the greatest tyrants WERE religious leaders leading religious organizations. I am not saying that we should have had the option to be evil, no. But more options to show emotions/choices that reflect greed, selfishness, manipulative, and other dictator-style traits that has been used by many religious tyrants in history. Instead, what we got was a protagonist who could really just be Good.....or neutral. This is not only a distancing from Origins, but MOST Bioware games in which we could be Good-Neutral-Bad. Even when playing as an Elven IQ who hated the Chantry/Andraste, I was not given the options to really have that stance represented in any of my choices. I was always looking and waiting for that option to say,

 

"I could give a damn about the Chantry or Andraste as this human religion/deity is the scourge of this world! However, I will use the resources of the religion to save the world so that my people [Elves] do not have to suffer because of human ignorance!"

 

But no we never got such option. With my Dalish Elf in DAO, I was given ample opportunities to display my distrust or even hatred towards humans and their ways.

 

I think if there is a DA4, Bioware needs to make some serious chances from what they did with DAI. 

 

[Rekkampum]

I don't think DAI's depictions were sanitized. Perhaps limited to an extent due to whatever obstacles they had developing the game. I think some of the regions did a fantastic job of conveying the circumstances of the Mage/Templar War or the conflict in Orlais - the Exalted Plains especially - to the player. Even in the Hinterlands, you could find burning homes and mages and templars fighting each other on occasion. I think the overabundance of fetch quests really kept a lot of people from appreciating those details.

[robertthebard]

Minor point compared to the rest of my OP.
 
Trust me, it's less about being able to have gratuitous sex whenever you want and more about the series distancing itself from the darker aspects of it's own lore and story.

I'm curious, how is a brothel darker than watching a Warden get his throat cut in order to summon a demon, something, I might add, that you claim you never saw? It struck me as odd when I read that, since I can recall seeing two get sacrificed.

[Majestic Jazz]

I'm curious, how is a brothel darker than watching a Warden get his throat cut in order to summon a demon, something, I might add, that you claim you never saw? It struck me as odd when I read that, since I can recall seeing two get sacrificed.

 

I think people are taking the OP's comments about brothels a bit too literally. He doesn't mean we need more sex or nudity, but rather brothels shows some of the more lower/seedy sides of humanity in the context of society. 

[TheRevanchist]

With a new lead writer this time, it would be interesting to see how a DA4 turns out....that is IF we even get a DA4. 

 

The only thing I would like to see done better in a possible DA4 is showing more and telling less. DAI was a perfect game to be able to show us the horrors of war, racism, discrimination, religious oppression etc. Instead, what we got was this sanitized "Disneyland" version of Thedas. I wanted to see the emotional impact of the suffering of the elves in this game. Instead, we get one small tribe of elves in which we have to chase Halla for and such. Everything else was told by finding notes/letters/journals on dead bodies explaining to us the horrors and suffering.....but we never actually got to see it. 

 

This is what gives Dark Fantasy games their niche, as they are the beacon for such topics and last time I checked, Origins was considered a Dark Fantasy game but the series is shifting into more of a High Fantasy like what we got with DAI. If anything, this is where I think the biggest difference is, that DAO was more of a dark fantasy RPG while DAI seems more like a high fantasy. Yes, DAI had it's darker moments, but it was nowhere near the level of intensity of that of DAO/Awakening. In essence, DAO is Robocop (1984) and DAI is Robocop 3 (1993) in terms of tone and intensity.

 

Finally, I believe the personality variance possibilities of the IQ was wasted. A lot of people like to use the excuse that the IQ was a religious figure leading a religious organization so being "bad" would not make sense. I find that funny because in older history, some of the greatest tyrants WERE religious leaders leading religious organizations. I am not saying that we should have had the option to be evil, no. But more options to show emotions/choices that reflect greed, selfishness, manipulative, and other dictator-style traits that has been used by many religious tyrants in history. Instead, what we got was a protagonist who could really just be Good.....or neutral. This is not only a distancing from Origins, but MOST Bioware games in which we could be Good-Neutral-Bad. Even when playing as an Elven IQ who hated the Chantry/Andraste, I was not given the options to really have that stance represented in any of my choices. I was always looking and waiting for that option to say,

 

"I could give a damn about the Chantry or Andraste as this human religion/deity is the scourge of this world! However, I will use the resources of the religion to save the world so that my people [Elves] do not have to suffer because of human ignorance!"

 

But no we never got such option. With my Dalish Elf in DAO, I was given ample opportunities to display my distrust or even hatred towards humans and their ways.

 

I think if there is a DA4, Bioware needs to make some serious chances from what they did with DAI. 

 

I would honestly disagree with this. Because honestly DAI had sections in this game that were worse, imo, than any DAO sections. The best example would of course, be the Failed Future, in Redcliffe. Frankly that is Dark in ways I cannot even describe, that is a penultimate example of showing, rather than telling. You see, with your own eyes, the horror that will occur if you fail. Priests, Prisoners being tortured with Red Lyrium, forcing them to ingest it until they break and embrace the Elder One. You can hear Lelianna being beaten as you approach her cell, and see her physical state as a result of those treatments, which includes being infected with Blight, btw. "Just to see what would happen." This is not a sanitized Disneyland on display here, no matter how you try to spin it. Frankly so is Here Lies The Abyss. There is very little "telling" going on there. You see with your own eyes, the depths to which the Wardens are willing to go, you see, with your own eyes, that there is nothing they consider forbidden, for good or for ill. The horrors of DAI are absolutely there, they are simply expressed differently, in ways besides the most Blunt and Obvious "LETS BEAT YOU OVER THE HEAD WITH THE GRITTY GRIMDARK!" methods. That is how DAO comes off to me, at this point. As a Try Hard, as someone explaining horror to a child who would not understand subtly. DAI has tons of horror, it is simply in many cases subtle. This is not a fault, not by a long shot. Some of the greatest horrors ever created were subtle, where the implications, rather than what you saw, was what was truly horrible.  

[Majestic Jazz]

I would honestly disagree with this. Because honestly DAI had sections in this game that were worse, imo, than any DAO sections. The best example would of course, be the Failed Future, in Redcliffe. Frankly that is Dark in ways I cannot even describe, that is a penultimate example of showing, rather than telling. You see, with your own eyes, the horror that will occur if you fail. Priests, Prisoners being tortured with Red Lyrium, forcing them to ingest it until they break and embrace the Elder One. You can hear Lelianna being beaten as you approach her cell, and see her physical state as a result of those treatments, which includes being infected with Blight, btw. "Just to see what would happen." This is not a sanitized Disneyland on display here, no matter how you try to spin it. Frankly so is Here Lies The Abyss. There is very little "telling" going on there. You see with your own eyes, the depths to which the Wardens are willing to go, you see, with your own eyes, that there is nothing they consider forbidden, for good or for ill. The horrors of DAI are absolutely there, they are simply expressed differently, in ways besides the most Blunt and Obvious "LETS BEAT YOU OVER THE HEAD WITH THE GRITTY GRIMDARK!" methods. That is how DAO comes off to me, at this point. As a Try Hard, as someone explaining horror to a child who would not understand subtly. DAI has tons of horror, it is simply in many cases subtle. This is not a fault, not by a long shot. Some of the greatest horrors ever created were subtle, where the implications, rather than what you saw, was what was truly horrible.  

 

Fair point, but still in my opinion, DAI was a very light game in terms of the gritty nature. Especially when you throw in the dull personality of the IQ which really makes things worse. The IQ was just too goody-2-shoes!

[TheRevanchist]

Fair point, but still in my opinion, DAI was a very light game in terms of the gritty nature. Especially when you throw in the dull personality of the IQ which really makes things worse. The IQ was just too goody-2-shoes!

 

I don't see the protagonist lacking the ability to ****** in their companions breakfast ceral "For de lulz" as being a bad thing, really. Most of the "evil" options in DAO just come off as being a spoiled child who was given too much responsibility. Being "Evil" in DAO just feels pathetic and sad to me. Every Bioware game before it did Evil better, and even DA2 did it better, imo. Because Hawke can be "Aggressive" rather than "evil". DAO goes so far into the Evil bit it goes into "Stupid Evil" like you can be a mustache twirling bastard in all but name, and it's frankly ridiculous. Alistair is not so docile and passive that he would let behavior like that go, imo. The fact they made him behave that way disgusts me. There was no personal consequences for you acting like a complete dick to everyone you met. I frankly see no positives from this play style.      

[Rekkampum]

I don't see the protagonist lacking the ability to ****** in their companions breakfast ceral "For de lulz" as being a bad thing, really. Most of the "evil" options in DAO just come off as being a spoiled child who was given too much responsibility. Being "Evil" in DAO just feels pathetic and sad to me. Every Bioware game before it did Evil better, and even DA2 did it better, imo. Because Hawke can be "Aggressive" rather than "evil". DAO goes so far into the Evil bit it goes into "Stupid Evil" like you can be a mustache twirling bastard in all but name, and it's frankly ridiculous. Alistair is not so docile and passive that he would let behavior like that go, imo. The fact they made him behave that way disgusts me. There was no personal consequences for you acting like a complete dick to everyone you met. I frankly see no positives from this play style.      

 

<------ Made out with the desire daemon possessing Connor while in the Fade. I have no regrets.

[Erstus]

Definitely agree on showing more of and delving deeper into the racism and persucution of the DA universe. DAO and DA2 did a much better job of that.

My biggest gripe if COMBAT though. It is just a boring mess. I can't tell what is really happening with the bright red enemy outlines, flashy effects, and terrible clipping/collision. I just press buttons until victory.

[Majestic Jazz]

I don't see the protagonist lacking the ability to ****** in their companions breakfast ceral "For de lulz" as being a bad thing, really. Most of the "evil" options in DAO just come off as being a spoiled child who was given too much responsibility. Being "Evil" in DAO just feels pathetic and sad to me. Every Bioware game before it did Evil better, and even DA2 did it better, imo. Because Hawke can be "Aggressive" rather than "evil". DAO goes so far into the Evil bit it goes into "Stupid Evil" like you can be a mustache twirling bastard in all but name, and it's frankly ridiculous. Alistair is not so docile and passive that he would let behavior like that go, imo. The fact they made him behave that way disgusts me. There was no personal consequences for you acting like a complete dick to everyone you met. I frankly see no positives from this play style.      

 

Again, you are focusing too much on the "evil" aspect instead of the bad/anti-hero/selfish aspect. The IQ could have led the Inquisition with an iron fist, eliminating those who pose threats to him as well as stomping out territory aggressively and not be "evil". 

 

And again, if being "evil" is something that came across as lulz in the past, then thats Bioware's fault. Perhaps they need to do a better job at crafting protagonist who aren't always a goody-2-shoes hero which is basically what the IQ is. Again, the theme of DAI was ripe the opportunity to play as a tyrant/selfish hero who is at the end of the day a Hero who saves Thedas, but does it in some of the most risky and vile ways.

[Erstus]

Yeah, but those opitions were hilarious. Playing a City Elf and telling your cousin to buy a cage for his bride as a present due to her being unattractive....haha.

[Qun00]

DAI already borrows much from DAO, most likely due to complaints about DA2.

If you want a full clone, just go play Origins again.

[TheRevanchist]

Again, you are focusing too much on the "evil" aspect instead of the bad/anti-hero/selfish aspect. The IQ could have led the Inquisition with an iron fist, eliminating those who pose threats to him as well as stomping out territory aggressively and not be "evil". 

 

And again, if being "evil" is something that came across as lulz in the past, then thats Bioware's fault. Perhaps they need to do a better job at crafting protagonist who aren't always a goody-2-shoes hero which is basically what the IQ is. Again, the theme of DAI was ripe the opportunity to play as a tyrant/selfish hero who is at the end of the day a Hero who saves Thedas, but does it in some of the most risky and vile ways.

 

As I said before, that does not fit the tone of the game presented. It simply does not work. Options should not exist simply for the sake of having more options. If you want to be that way, you would literally be what the Envy Demon wanted to do. Which was an antagonist. Just as Alistair should not have let the Warden get away with childish bullshit, the Inquisition definitely would not have. People like Cullen, Cassandra and Josie would not simply sit by and let you act like a Tyrant. Good people don't just let bad people do whatever they want because they happen to be in charge. I understand WHY you want these options, but as I said before in my Wall O Text post. You do not get those anymore, because it is easier to carry forward into the next game with less inconsistencies. If Bioware had to account for 3 entirely different ways of handling the game then resources get used that could go to other aspects of the next game. I want a more consistent experience, even if it means less options.   

[correctamundo]

Yeah, but those opitions were hilarious. Playing a City Elf and telling your cousin to buy a cage for his bride as a present due to her being unattractive....haha.

 

So it is more comedy than evil then?

[robertthebard]

I think people are taking the OP's comments about brothels a bit too literally. He doesn't mean we need more sex or nudity, but rather brothels shows some of the more lower/seedy sides of humanity in the context of society.

He equated the lack of brothels as being less dark. There is no jumping to conclusions needed, one reads his post, and wonders how having a brothel would make a game darker than watching a Warden get his throat cut to summon a demon, especially when the OP claims that that event isn't even in game...

[MattH]

I do agree the tone of inquisition doesn't quite match the previous two games. Yes, we deal with demons, regicide and mass murder, but somehow it still feels a little safe. There was too much telling and not enough showing.

[ShadowLordXII]

He equated the lack of brothels as being less dark. There is no jumping to conclusions needed, one reads his post, and wonders how having a brothel would make a game darker than watching a Warden get his throat cut to summon a demon, especially when the OP claims that that event isn't even in game...

 

Read the whole OP and you'll understand my point rather than jumping on the brothel thing which I've already clarified.

 

As for wardens being sacrificed, neither of those scenes were as gripping or edgy as the Joining Scene in Origins. Why? Because as I've said before, the game either quickly hurries past them, or the actual killing is done off-screen and little time is given to absorb the gravity of the situation. Which is what I meant, most of the time (with a few exceptions) Inquisition seems all to happy to distance itself from the darker aspects of Thedas and as others can agree, it appears to rely on a "tell rather than show" approach which just doesn't work especially in a series where previous games have used a "show and tell" approach.

 

In Origins on the other hand. The music, the setting and the tone all captured a fairly dark and chilling scene. Duncan bluntly tells the party that they're going to drink Darkspawn blood to become Grey Wardens and that while there are benefits, this ritual locks you into being a Warden and has a risk of death. A risk of death confirmed when Daveth painfully dies from the Joining. The tension has now increased and especially when Jory draws his sword  out of fear and there's a camera play between Jory's clear terror and Duncan's determined, icy stare. Then Duncan stabs Jory, we see Duncan stab Jory, we see Jory's pain, we see Duncan's sadness, then Duncan pulls out his sword and we see Jory struggle in vain against death and then die. We then cut to the shocked faces of Alistair and the Warden before going back to Jory's bleeding body while Duncan continues the Joining.

 

Not to say that nothing's going on in the warden sacrifice scene since it all hinges on a heroic order being deceived and having it's own code used against it. Especially if that elf girl that you persuade to join is being sacrificed since you unknowingly sent her to her death. But it's just too clean and quick compared to Origins, there's not much time to savor the depravity of the situation nor does the mood/tone convey as much horror, shock or dread.

 

Here's the joining video and other videos with the warden sacrifices for reference and comparison.

 

Joining:

 

Western Approach sacrifice: 

 

Adamant sacrifice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hauk5JguB3c

[correctamundo]

Yeah, great scenes. Still the Adamant one is - to me - the strongest one. As a side point I like how small the Axe of green edges was in the hand of the Qunari compared to the hands of my Cadash =)

[Majestic Jazz]

As I said before, that does not fit the tone of the game presented. It simply does not work. Options should not exist simply for the sake of having more options. If you want to be that way, you would literally be what the Envy Demon wanted to do. Which was an antagonist. Just as Alistair should not have let the Warden get away with childish bullshit, the Inquisition definitely would not have. People like Cullen, Cassandra and Josie would not simply sit by and let you act like a Tyrant. Good people don't just let bad people do whatever they want because they happen to be in charge. I understand WHY you want these options, but as I said before in my Wall O Text post. You do not get those anymore, because it is easier to carry forward into the next game with less inconsistencies. If Bioware had to account for 3 entirely different ways of handling the game then resources get used that could go to other aspects of the next game. I want a more consistent experience, even if it means less options.

Here you go again with this idea that being a hero that resorts to bad or selfish behavior doesnt fit the tone of the game. Like I said, there have been MANY religious leaders that were bad, tyrants, selfish and so on. Why was DAI so special to where it needed a goody goody as the protagonist?

[Narcosynthesis]

People like Cullen, Cassandra and Josie would not simply sit by and let you act like a Tyrant. Good people don't just let bad people do whatever they want because they happen to be in charge. I understand WHY you want these options, but as I said before in my Wall O Text post. You do not get those anymore, because it is easier to carry forward into the next game with less inconsistencies. If Bioware had to account for 3 entirely different ways of handling the game then resources get used that could go to other aspects of the next game. I want a more consistent experience, even if it means less options.   

 

First of all: I totally agree with most of your posts in here, really. With many of the things you wrote, my sole question would be “Where do I sign?”

 

However, I’m not sure if this particular line of argument here is necessarily true. Agreed: I wouldn’t want those “stupidly evil” or “mean just for the sake of it” options which were possible in DA:O to reappear. It wouldn’t make much sense. BUT: Morally questionable stuff which is still in accordance with the character and does not actually hinder the Inquisition’s success? Why not? Say, torturing prisoners to get information? Demanding tribute from provinces under your protection (even if they are starving) in order to support the Inquisition’s war efforts? I could see stuff like that being implemented in the game in a meaningful manner (for example the tribute thing could bring you a huge boost in gold, but also earn you lots of disapproval with your followers and disable quests people would ask a “good” Inquisitor to do), even if I’d probably not use them. But it would enhance the options to choose from without any problem in terms of carrying it forward into the next game – it’d basically just change a few lines from “Oh gosh, the Inquisition were really saints. Wish they were still around!” to “The Inquisition? Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad they defeated the Elder One, but Maker be praised they are gone now”.

 

The same goes for the characters you named: As long as we’re not talking cartoonlishly evil, I could see Cullen being critical about it, but accepting it as part of “doing it for the greater good”. Cassandra already has a scene where she’s frustrated and drunk because of her constant disapproval of the Inquisitor’s actions. And Josie could go to “I didn’t sign up for this. As soon as the threat is dealt with, I am out of here.”

 

Like I said: Not a big fan of “evil” playthroughs myself, so I’d probably not go down that road, but it would’ve definitely enriched the experience in terms of option and added a dark side to the game without becoming ridiculous and/or inconsistent.

[Almostfaceman]

With a new lead writer this time, it would be interesting to see how a DA4 turns out....that is IF we even get a DA4. 

 

The only thing I would like to see done better in a possible DA4 is showing more and telling less. DAI was a perfect game to be able to show us the horrors of war, racism, discrimination, religious oppression etc. Instead, what we got was this sanitized "Disneyland" version of Thedas. 

 

 

It's not any more sanitized than the previous two games and thus does a better job of showing us what Thedas looks like while at the same time delivering consistent story telling in the visuals department. 

[Almostfaceman]

Here you go again with this idea that being a hero that resorts to bad or selfish behavior doesnt fit the tone of the game. Like I said, there have been MANY religious leaders that were bad, tyrants, selfish and so on. Why was DAI so special to where it needed a goody goody as the protagonist?

 

You can lop people's heads off, personally. That's not goody-good. I also sent my troops to the dark spawn and they got slaughtered. That's not goody-good. I let Solas slaughter the mages who summoned a spirit, that's not goody-good. In as far as, as dark as you want to go... I'm not sure I want to know what that may be. 

[Almostfaceman]

Here's the joining video and other videos with the warden sacrifices for reference and comparison.

 

It's a matter of taste, I don't find the scene with Duncan any more "dark" than the scene where the one warden sacrifices the other in the Western Approach. Poor guy gets it right in the chest and for what? To summon a demon. 

[TheRevanchist]

First of all: I totally agree with most of your posts in here, really. With many of the things you wrote, my sole question would be “Where do I sign?”

 

However, I’m not sure if this particular line of argument here is necessarily true. Agreed: I wouldn’t want those “stupidly evil” or “mean just for the sake of it” options which were possible in DA:O to reappear. It wouldn’t make much sense. BUT: Morally questionable stuff which is still in accordance with the character and does not actually hinder the Inquisition’s success? Why not? Say, torturing prisoners to get information? Demanding tribute from provinces under your protection (even if they are starving) in order to support the Inquisition’s war efforts? I could see stuff like that being implemented in the game in a meaningful manner (for example the tribute thing could bring you a huge boost in gold, but also earn you lots of disapproval with your followers and disable quests people would ask a “good” Inquisitor to do), even if I’d probably not use them. But it would enhance the options to choose from without any problem in terms of carrying it forward into the next game – it’d basically just change a few lines from “Oh gosh, the Inquisition were really saints. Wish they were still around!” to “The Inquisition? Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad they defeated the Elder One, but Maker be praised they are gone now”.

 

The same goes for the characters you named: As long as we’re not talking cartoonlishly evil, I could see Cullen being critical about it, but accepting it as part of “doing it for the greater good”. Cassandra already has a scene where she’s frustrated and drunk because of her constant disapproval of the Inquisitor’s actions. And Josie could go to “I didn’t sign up for this. As soon as the threat is dealt with, I am out of here.”

 

Like I said: Not a big fan of “evil” playthroughs myself, so I’d probably not go down that road, but it would’ve definitely enriched the experience in terms of option and added a dark side to the game without becoming ridiculous and/or inconsistent.

 

Perhaps, but again look how Hawke turned out. Everyone hates how Hawke ended up, this was partially due to Hawke being able to have 3 different ways of dealing with people. When the Inquisitor shows up again in the future, there is little chance of the Inquisitor acting out of character, because there are less options for them to try and account for. I feel this is why it was done, and why I approve of it overall.

[TheRevanchist]

You can lop people's heads off, personally. That's not goody-good. I also sent my troops to the dark spawn and they got slaughtered. That's not goody-good. I let Solas slaughter the mages who summoned a spirit, that's not goody-good. In as far as, as dark as you want to go... I'm not sure I want to know what that may be. 

 

Give it up, unless he can give his companions the finger and cackle manically while wiping his ass with their clothes, I doubt he will be satisfied.