14 réponses à ce sujet

[Meredydd]

Once Bioware is done with the current Dragon Age story line (i.e. qunari invasion and whatever Solas is up to), I was thinking it would be great if we could have a game set before the events of DA: Origins. Some interesting events include the First Blight and Andraste's war against Tevinter. 

 

Instead of just reading about these events, we can actually take part in them. It would allow for some great story telling and epic in-game moments that would satisfy new players and lore buffs alike. What do you guys think? I would personally love a game set during the First Blight or maybe during one of the Exalted Marches.

[Excella Gionne]

The thing about doing prequels is that the choices provided in the prequel will need to be linear and can't, in no way, contradict nor alter any events that happened in DA:O to Inquisition, and also other side-lore and events that don't take place in the games. Basically, it can't alter anything we already know, and that isn't fun. Prequels are a bad idea in these sort of games, because there's too many variables to take into account especially when the universe is larger than it was at the start. What has been mentioned before DA:O needs to stay that way to avoid what I mentioned above.

 

Let's say that there was person during the first blight that died at a certain battle, but in the prequel, you saved that person, and so, that person lived and didn't die as mentioned in the previous games. Things like that will screw up the lore that was already mentioned in the previous games. The games must go forward only. 

[Ashaantha]

The Chantry's accepted history is spotty enough to make it work. Having events that are true, and many that have been changed for political reasons. Leaves enough stuff open for another story.

[Meredydd]

The thing about doing prequels is that the choices provided in the prequel will need to be linear and can't, in no way, contradict nor alter any events that happened in DA:O to Inquisition, and also other side-lore and events that don't take place in the games. Basically, it can't alter anything we already know, and that isn't fun. Prequels are a bad idea in these sort of games, because there's too many variables to take into account especially when the universe is larger than it was at the start. What has been mentioned before DA:O needs to stay that way to avoid what I mentioned above.

 

Let's say that there was person during the first blight that died at a certain battle, but in the prequel, you saved that person, and so, that person lived and didn't die as mentioned in the previous games. Things like that will screw up the lore that was already mentioned in the previous games. The games must go forward only. 

Sure, there are some things that will have to remain unchanged in order for the future to make sense. However these periods are shrouded in so much mystery and unknowns, they allow for enough flexibility for branching decisions and creativity. The player isn't a god. They don't have control over everything that happens in the world, but I believe Bioware can make it work. Just because there are some things the player can't change it doesn't necessarily result in the story being linear.

[Excella Gionne]

Sure, there are some things that will have to remain unchanged in order for the future to make sense. However these periods are shrouded in so much mystery and unknowns, they allow for enough flexibility for branching decisions and creativity. The player isn't a god. They don't have control over everything that happens in the world, but I believe Bioware can make it work. Just because there are some things the player can't change it doesn't necessarily result in the story being linear.

It would be interesting, but the reason to even visit events of the past needs to justify the reason for wanting to make an entire game surrounding those events. You're right, the player isn't a god, but the character that the players control is a strong figure that shapes and influences events. The fact that every game is not a prequel allows the universe to be shaped by the player thus altering the future and situations in the next game. If you make a prequel, you are severely limited to what can be altered. If, in the prequel, we do learn of something that wasn't known in the present time, it would still remain irrelevant and would serve no purpose in the universe other than being an irony where only the players know and not characters in the universe. There's no way the characters in the present time would actually know what happened in the prequel unless they time traveled or learned it through some other means. These sort of "past revelations" need to happen in the current game or in the present to have any sense of relevancy. 

[NoForgiveness]

I'm pretty sick of prequels. Just saying.

[Meredydd]

Well...that didn't last long.

[Andromelek]

The only ways it could work would be if it's about a "ghost threat" that no one ever heard about, the other, would be making another type of game in Thedas, something like a RTS could work.... I guess.

[JadeDragon]

Id rather a concurrent storyline. Like a tales of the dragon age game. Were we play as heroes from different countries that took place during the games. and using the keep for example if we play a hero in Antiva we get word that the HoF killed the archdemon but survived or Hawke killed the arishok or the Inquisiton was reformed. I doubt every was all peace except of the regions we played.

[riverbanks]

The thing about doing prequels is that the choices provided in the prequel will need to be linear and can't, in no way, contradict nor alter any events that happened in DA:O to Inquisition, and also other side-lore and events that don't take place in the games. Basically, it can't alter anything we already know, and that isn't fun. Prequels are a bad idea in these sort of games, because there's too many variables to take into account especially when the universe is larger than it was at the start. What has been mentioned before DA:O needs to stay that way to avoid what I mentioned above.

 

To be fair, the DA games have become more and more streamlining as we go, so we already are at a place where no matter how differently you approach a problem, the final outcome is always the same. Your Warden did the dark ritual or the ultimate sacrifice? Irrelevant, the Warden is gone either way and Kieran doesn't matter anymore. Your Hawke supported the mage rebellion or helped the Templars stop it? Irrelevant, the war happened anyway and Hawke's role in it was peripheral at best. Your Inquisitor supported the mages or the Templars? Irrelevant, the Circles have been rebuilt into Colleges anyway. Your Divine was Leliana, Cassandra or Vivienne? Irrelevant, she's always named Divine Victoria, and her term is always met with resistance and controversy. We could factor a thousand different little details into each of our playthroughs, but at the end of the day the world has largely come to the same place for all of us.

 

So at this point, a game set two hundred years in the past or two hundred in the future would use the same principle: lots and lots of smaller variables, generally same larger outcome for everyone, so it doesn't contradict the overarching lore of the world. History has been told; this Divine did this thing in this year and the outcome was that - but what else aren't we being told? Why did she do this, who were her allies, who were her enemies, did some big hero support her and that's why that response, did some big hero oppose her and that's why that response, etc. There's a lot of story you can work into historical events giving players all sorts of choices without changing much of the final outcome.

[Excella Gionne]

To be fair, the DA games have become more and more streamlining as we go, so we already are at a place where no matter how differently you approach a problem, the final outcome is always the same. Your Warden did the dark ritual or the ultimate sacrifice? Irrelevant, the Warden is gone either way and Kieran doesn't matter anymore. Your Hawke supported the mage rebellion or helped the Templars stop it? Irrelevant, the war happened anyway and Hawke's role in it was peripheral at best. Your Inquisitor supported the mages or the Templars? Irrelevant, the Circles have been rebuilt into Colleges anyway. Your Divine was Leliana, Cassandra or Vivienne? Irrelevant, she's always named Divine Victoria, and her term is always met with resistance and controversy. We could factor a thousand different little details into each of our playthroughs, but at the end of the day the world has largely come to the same place for all of us.

 

So at this point, a game set two hundred years in the past or two hundred in the future would use the same principle: lots and lots of smaller variables, generally same larger outcome for everyone, so it doesn't contradict the overarching lore of the world. History has been told; this Divine did this thing in this year and the outcome was that - but what else aren't we being told? Why did she do this, who were her allies, who were her enemies, did some big hero support her and that's why that response, did some big hero oppose her and that's why that response, etc. There's a lot of story you can work into historical events giving players all sorts of choices without changing much of the final outcome.

 

Those decisions are made in the present time and they are changeable variables. It is fact that the Warden, Champion of Kirkwall, and the Inquisitor are actual people and figures in Thedas and their actions are canon. The Inquisitor, for example: Closed the breach, stopped the Wardens, saved Orlais, took the knowledge from the Well of Sorrows, defeated Corypheus, and a member from the Inquisition was elected Divine. Those are all canon and within lore, but the decisions and outcomes aren't. Basically, the events happened.

 

 

What I'm actually saying is that learning about what happened in the past, especially a game that is a prequel, will not benefit the series. It would be a filler, yes, and filling the blanks in the lore would be interesting but the problem is: Who benefits from this in the universe? If the characters in the present time don't know anything about what happened in the prequel, then it serves no purpose to exist other than to add irony where the players know, but not the characters. The only way a prequel would work is if the characters in the present time learn of these "revelations," and then it would be relevant to make a prequel, because the present characters are aware of the revelations. 

[riverbanks]

What I'm actually saying is that learning about what happened in the past, especially a game that is a prequel, will not benefit the series. It would be a filler, yes, and filling the blanks in the lore would be interesting but the problem is: Who benefits from this in the universe? If the characters in the present time don't anything about what happened in the prequel, then it serves no purpose to exist other than to add irony where the players know, but not the characters. The only way a prequel would work is if the characters in the present time learn of these "revelations," and then it would be relevant to make a prequel, because the present characters are aware of the revelations.

 

I guess I'll just fundamentally disagree that everything has to be done to benefit future characters. We've got backstory novels, comics and encyclopedias that flesh out the series for the players but add nothing to the future heroes, but I think they're worth and relevant too. Who benefits from us knowing about Loghain and Maric's past? Who benefits from the backstory of Rhys, Evangeline and how the White Spire fell? Who benefits from us learning about Michel's past and how it half set in motion a war? The Warden didn't benefit from Stolen Throne or The Calling, Hawke and the Inquisitor didn't benefit from Asunder or Masked Empire, no one benefits from us reading about Minor Character #37's life in WoT, but we as players understand the world we're playing in much better because of these stories.

 

No, a game set in the past would not directly benefit any of our future heroes, but... so what? We'd be all the richer to be able to know and influence how the muddy history of Thedas unfolded. Not every part of the lore needs a specific in-game use or purpose, a good story is still worth telling.

[Excella Gionne]

I guess I'll just fundamentally disagree that everything has to be done to benefit future characters. We've got backstory novels, comics and encyclopedias that flesh out the series for the players but add nothing to the future heroes, but I think they're worth and relevant too. Who benefits from us knowing about Loghain and Maric's past? Who benefits from the backstory of Rhys, Evangeline and how the White Spire fell? Who benefits from us learning about Michel's past and how it half set in motion a war? The Warden didn't benefit from Stolen Throne or The Calling, Hawke and the Inquisitor didn't benefit from Asunder or Masked Empire, no one benefits from us reading about Minor Character #37's life in WoT, but we as players understand the world we're playing in much better because of these stories.

 

No, a game set in the past would not directly benefit any of our future heroes, but... so what? We'd be all the richer to be able to know and influence how the muddy history of Thedas unfolded. Not every part of the lore needs a specific in-game use or purpose, a good story is still worth telling.

I disagree that it should be done as a game though. Unless it's some sort of DLC like Awakening, then I'll probably be fine with that, but resources are resources. Unless it's actually crucial that we "do" need to know of this backstory, I disapprove of a prequel game. As I said in my OP, a prequel will not offer decisions that will have much impact because the events have already happened. If these decisions somehow affect events directly in any of the games, it would start contradicting events. For RPGs, players want their choices to matter and how it will affect the future, but given that prequels are already events that have taken place, choices will mean very little. Of course, there is always the option to not give the players control over decisions, but that wouldn't end well with the fans.

[WidePaul]

For me personally I don't mind the idea of prequels, but if you know the lore surrounding the time it's taking place even a bit then you will know how things are going to play out mostly anyway, which would spoil the game for a lot of people.

[ArianaGBSA]

Once Bioware is done with the current Dragon Age story line (i.e. qunari invasion and whatever Solas is up to), I was thinking it would be great if we could have a game set before the events of DA: Origins. Some interesting events include the First Blight and Andraste's war against Tevinter. 

 

Instead of just reading about these events, we can actually take part in them. It would allow for some great story telling and epic in-game moments that would satisfy new players and lore buffs alike. What do you guys think? I would personally love a game set during the First Blight or maybe during one of the Exalted Marches.

Andraste, great.

But I would really want a game from the time of the ancient elves kingdom, a truly magic world and stuff.