149 réponses à ce sujet

[vertigomez]

So for those who have indicated that they won't play DA4 if there is no race selection, - what comparable game might  you play?

DAI. Origins.

[Nefla]

So for those who have indicated that they won't play DA4 if there is no race selection, - what comparable game might  you play?

We'll see what's out at the same time (maybe a new TES) but if nothing interests me then I don't need to always have a new game, I can play the ones I have. Also race selection is only important to me in game worlds where there are various non-human races in the world/universe/lore. If there's a fantasy game that has multiple interesting races and I'm stuck as the super common and default human then it's like being a kid looking through the candy shop window and seeing every other kid have a good time while I'm outside being snowed on.

[BabyPuncher]

I am continually baffled as to why players care, often to the point of neurotic fixation, about this sort of thing.

 

Does a character suddenly become interesting by virtue of being a dwarf or an elf? You take a poorly written dullard like the Inquisitor and make him an elf and suddenly things are fine and dandy?

[Nefla]

I am continually baffled as to why players care, often to the point of neurotic fixation, about this sort of thing.

 

Does a character suddenly become interesting by virtue of being a dwarf or an elf? You take a poorly written dullard like the Inquisitor and make him an elf and suddenly things are fine and dandy?

A poorly written character is poorly written no matter what, however humans in DA are so incredibly dull to me that at least that poorly written character would have something going for them if they were a non-human. At least they'd have an interesting culture and possible social struggle vs being the default, the equivalent of the white, upper-middle class suburban household. The reason the inquisitor was boring and poorly written had nothing to do with the ability to choose a race and everything to do with the fact that 1) The whole game was poorly written, and 2)There was not enough variety of choice in our dialogue options and choices. Your options were either neutral, neutral, and neutral, or nice, neutral, and neutral. Occasionally cranky or slightly joking. Never ruthless or inappropriate, etc...

 

Why do so many people think that having a human only protagonist will automatically make that protagonist deep, interesting, well developed, etc...? The Spirit Monk wasn't, Revan wasn't, Shepard wasn't (and she had 3 whole games), Hawke certainly wasn't.

[Ieldra]

I am continually baffled as to why players care, often to the point of neurotic fixation, about this sort of thing.

 

Does a character suddenly become interesting by virtue of being a dwarf or an elf? You take a poorly written dullard like the Inquisitor and make him an elf and suddenly things are fine and dandy?

I don't share your opinion about the Inquisitor, but I agree about the obsession with race selection. Basically every race amounts to "human in everything that counts, only with an odd appearance". Playing a human from Tevinter is as different from playing a human from Ferelden as playing a Dalish. The other differences are superficial. Race selection is desirable only because elves, dwarves and qunari can have different cultures. Realize backgrounds as different for a human, and they become superfluous.  

 

@Nefla:

I agree there was not enough variety of choice for the Inquisitor, but as opposed to ME1/2/3, I always found an option that works for me.

[Sirocco]

Well, the Inquisitor's life was far more interesting to live and better written than the warden's life was. Wait, no, the warden's "adventure", there's no "life" involved once the couple first hours of the game are done.

 

But well, to me race based interactions were so great that I'd really enjoy having the choice. It's not essential, I'll buy and play the game no matter what but playing a human in the dragon age universe, well, in the southern countries at least, has been incredibly dull so far.

[BabyPuncher]

Why do so many people think that having a human only protagonist will automatically make that protagonist deep, interesting, well developed, etc...? The Spirit Monk wasn't, Revan wasn't, Shepard wasn't (and she had 3 whole games), Hawke certainly wasn't.

 

Shepard was incredibly well developed. And about as deep as possible without putting in personality the player didn't want. Perhaps too deep. Look at how angry players were over Shepard being upset in ME 3.

[vertigomez]

I don't share your opinion about the Inquisitor, but I agree about the obsession with race selection. Basically every race amounts to "human in everything that counts, only with an odd appearance". Playing a human from Tevinter is as different from playing a human from Ferelden as playing a Dalish. The other differences are superficial. Race selection is desirable only because elves, dwarves and qunari can have different cultures. Realize backgrounds as different for a human, and they become superfluous.

@Nefla:
I agree there was not enough variety of choice for the Inquisitor, but as opposed to ME1/2/3, I always found an option that works for me.

I gotta disagree with this. It's the main reason, sure... if you love Orzammar or the Dalish or whatever, you're probably gonna be more excited to be a dwarf or elf. But sometimes it's just a superficial appearance thing, and there's really nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people want to have pointy ears or be seven feet tall because it's more fun for them than being an average, run-of-the-mill human.

It doesn't help that humans are the dominant race in Thedas. No matter how bad off you are, no matter how poor or persecuted you are, an elf or casteless dwarf or giant-horned-person-in-human-lands will always have it worse, and people like to play the underdog.

[Ieldra]

Shepard was incredibly well developed. And about as deep as possible without putting in personality the player didn't want. Perhaps too deep. Look at how angry players were over Shepard being upset in ME 3.

Shepard came as close to making me hate them as is possible without throwing away the games in disgust.

 

Incredibly well developed? I could make a long list of mind-numbingly stupid lines they gave Shepard, some of which weren't even optional. If that was "well developed" I can only conclude they wanted their protagonist to have an IQ of 70.

[BabyPuncher]

Shepard came as close to making me hate them as is possible without throwing away the games in disgust.

 

Incredibly well developed? I could make a long list of mind-numbingly stupid lines they gave Shepard, some of which weren't even optional. If that was "well developed" I can only conclude they wanted their protagonist to have an IQ of 70.

 

And a far greater number of intelligent, charismatic, and well argued lines. There are thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of lines confronting a huge number of topics. Some being poorly written is inevitable.

 

It's an immensely superior system to Inquisition's approach of apparently not even attempting to demonstrate the supposed qualities of their character in dialogue.
 

[Ieldra]

And a far greater number of intelligent, charismatic, and well argued lines. There are thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of lines confronting a huge number of topics. Some being poorly written is inevitable.

Well argued? I'd be hard-pressed to find a topic that wasn't simplified to the point of becoming mired in gross falsehoods. If there was an intelligent exchange here and there, that was such an exception that it was highly remarkable.
 

It's an immensely superior system to Inquisition's approach of apparently not even attempting to demonstrate the supposed qualities of their character in dialogue.

It appears you'd rather watch a movie. In movies static detailed characterization is a virtue. In an rpg, it's a liability. In an rpg, if you can't make the character malleable through explicit optional player lines, you're better off with less characterization overall.

[Ghost Gal]

I don't share your opinion about the Inquisitor, but I agree about the obsession with race selection. Basically every race amounts to "human in everything that counts, only with an odd appearance". Playing a human from Tevinter is as different from playing a human from Ferelden as playing a Dalish. The other differences are superficial. Race selection is desirable only because elves, dwarves and qunari can have different cultures. Realize backgrounds as different for a human, and they become superfluous.  

 

Bolded: The same could be said for gender selection.

 

I'm serious. Men and women are "human in everything that counts, only with an odd appearance" difference. In-game, apart from the occasional pronoun difference, "superficial" graphics of a male or female body, and a male voice actor verses a female voice actor, there's virtually no difference. The story's still the same, your role in the story is the same, and for the most part people treat you the same, so why bother including gender selection when it doesn't really come down to much besides "superficial" different body models and voice actors?

 

Because it means a lot to the people playing it. You can instill meaning, and imagine how social and cultural and psychological and whatever differences influenced who your character is and how they see the world based on their gender.

 

Your avatar image... I assume it's a character you've played in a previous playthrough? Can you honestly say it would have been the exact same character with the exact same upbringing and worldview and roleplay experience if that character had been male instead of female? Would your experience in that game have been 100% the same if the game had forced you to play a male character because female was deemed to superficial a difference to include?

 

It's the same with race selection. You can argue till the cows come home how "superficially" the differences between race aren't that great ("elves are just humans with pointed ears" and all that jazz), but the roleplay differences and experience enjoyable enough that people who enjoy playing non-humans can make meaning out of it.

[ilikesocks]

NO.

*inserts Arishok meme*

[GoldenGail3]

Please, gosh, i don't want to play as Hawke point 2. And i usually like playing humans...

[Cobra's_back]

I love playing different races. I was glad the Qunari didn't look like Iron Bull. I have to say I liked the DA2 Qunari better than Iron Bull ( little head Big Body).

[Ballax]

If we have to go one race (yeah, human) I think we should at least go with different origins/cultures. Tevinter is the birthplace of human civilization (or so it seems at least) and probably the most nationalistic, your location could determine an immense amount.

 

• A Tevinter Warrior or Rogue could be a grumbling soporatti or even a freed slave with special dialogue to talk about the problems of a magocracy and quests to help their people or lead slave revolts whilst a Tevinter Mage can have special political dialogue and quests to either change the system from within or grab for power.
• An Orlesian could be met with scorn as an outsider and the great usurper of their power you could be a respected diplomat, a runaway victim of The Game or even a Bard working to advance Orlais' influence in the North and either take on quests to work your political mastery in a new country or make a difference as a voice of reason in Tevinter's halls of power.
• A Rivaini or Seheronite could be an ardant supporter of the Qun....or a freedom fighter and scoundrel like Isabella, or perhaps even a runaway human saarebas if you roll mage. With your old horned friends on the warpath do you want to help spread the qun amongst the disenfranchised of Tevinter or will you work against your old comrades and embrace the freedom and excess Tevinter offers you?
• A barbarian/auger. The fops of Tevinter look at you like an illiterate fool....and perhaps they're correct, most human tribes are pretty primative but it isn't much of a concern you can always remind them of the last time a 'savage' came into Tevinter. But if anyone invites you to a bonfire say no and politely excuse yourself.

[We'll bang okay]

Yes Human only. and if there is race selection you should only be able to choose between Human and Dwarf only playing as an Elf would brake the lore and same goes for The Qunari if we are going to be going up against them in DA4

[correctamundo]

Yes Human only. and if there is race selection you should only be able to choose between Human and Dwarf only playing as an Elf would brake the lore and same goes for The Qunari if we are going to be going up against them in DA4

 

Brake the lore? To standstill?

[We'll bang okay]

Brake the lore? To standstill?

ha Still now awake yet

[Amirit]

Bolded: The same could be said for gender selection.

 

I'm serious. Men and women are "human in everything that counts, only with an odd appearance" difference. In-game, apart from the occasional pronoun difference, "superficial" graphics of a male or female body, and a male voice actor verses a female voice actor, there's virtually no difference. The story's still the same, your role in the story is the same, and for the most part people treat you the same, so why bother including gender selection when it doesn't really come down to much besides "superficial" different body models and voice actors?

 

Not exactly the same. In the lore equal rights of men and women are stated as a fact supported with a lot of in-game examples. (same goes for the sexual orientation, btw, but was really supported by in-game examples only in DAI)

While the very same lore declares (and it is supported by in-game examples) difference between races. So, asking for supporting that race difference is asking to follow the lore and game rules - nothing else. And if game is unable to to do so - it's a gap between lore and gameplay, which might not bother some people, but does disturb others.

 

You want to see cosmetic yet well implemented races? Look at SWTOR (or SW in general). On Imperial side any non-human race is "dirty alien", while Republic never bothers to mention your race at all. DA is not like this, race requests consequences.

[Nefla]

Shepard was incredibly well developed. And about as deep as possible without putting in personality the player didn't want. Perhaps too deep. Look at how angry players were over Shepard being upset in ME 3.

Any development Shepard had came from the time we spent with her over the course of 3 games, from the variety of dialogue options and actions she could take, and the fact that she could have more extreme stances and opinions that "pleasant" vs "neutral." It had nothing to do with those selectable backgrounds that a human only inquisitor would have had. Shep's background was even less defined and came up less often than the inquisitor's. IMO there has been zero benefit to having a human-only protagonist in BioWare's games which have had it.

[stop_him]

Any development Shepard had came from the time we spent with her over the course of 3 games, from the variety of dialogue options and actions she could take, and the fact that she could have more extreme stances and opinions that "pleasant" vs "neutral." It had nothing to do with those selectable backgrounds that a human only inquisitor would have had. Shep's background was even less defined and came up less often than the inquisitor's. IMO there has been zero benefit to having a human-only protagonist in BioWare's games which have had it.

Yeah, Shep's background could have just been, "He buttered his toast this morning, and ate it along with his scrambled eggs, while sipping his Earl Grey, hot."

[Schizya]

I really doubt that if they restrict us to one race, the character will be better developed

They will just find some other more important things to put resources in...

And it is not just superficial choice for me, I don't like DA humans, don't wanna play them, especially if we are noble again.

 

So no, I want my races

[Super Drone]

I doubt they will remove race selection. It's one of the few things about DAI that consistently garners more praise than criticism.

 

I love everybody who is pushing for Human and Elf only, though. "I would be fine with removing race selection... except for the race I like personally".  Very mature. 

 

They will find a way to implement races in a way that is no more jarring than they did in DAI. 

[Cyrus Amell]

The single race selection worked out well for Mass Effect because that series was basically the story of mankind meeting an entire galaxy of new people and how those interactions resulted in conflicts and their aftermath. That theme would have been dulled if you could have been a Turian, or indeed any other race that has already engaged with the wider universe and has just mellowed out. 

 

By contrast, the Dragon Age series takes place in a world where everyone be they human, elf, dwarf and even qunari have existed together for centuries. The story of Thedas is the story of all of these races, whether their collective destinies are represented in the ranks of the Grey Wardens or in whose member the chosen Herald of Andraste was and what that means for everyone else. If DA2 taught us anything, it's that Bioware cannot do in Dragon Age what they did in Mass Effect to quite the same extent.