Seeing how the player (my son in this case) could interact with the PC companions is what made me go out and buy DA:O, DA2 and later DA:I. If it was just another 3 companions fighting along side the PC I doubt if I would have bought all three DA games since my RPGs at that time was the Final Fantasy series, the Lord of The Rings series and other like games..
The DA series is two steps above your average 3 companion and PC walking through various screens attacking and being attack.
Spoiler
You mention the books: my OP was caused by the fact that I consider DAI an average game, while I really love Asunder and The Masked Empire. I started wondering how can be that Bioware writers are still great with books, while they have lost their touch with games (at least IMHO). This thread contains one of the answers that I found. There are others of course (two others in fact), but that is material for another thread.
You mention the books: my OP was caused by the fact that I consider DAI an average game, while I really love Asunder and The Masked Empire. I started wondering how can be that Bioware writers are still great with books, while they have lost their touch with games (at least IMHO). This thread contains one of the answers that I found. There are others of course (two others in fact), but that is material for another thread.
Maybe playing it live for you just isn't as much fun. For me, playing a Bioware game is like stepping into a movie where I get to be one of the characters. I don't get the same boost from other games. Is being in a "movie" as rich an experience as reading a book? Probably not.
The only movie I ever felt came up to the same level as its book was The Godfather. But being in the "movie" is a whole different experience from being submerged in a book. I don't expect them to be the same. I love playing a game for the upteenth time and having something happen that I haven't experienced before and going "Whoa, where did that come from?" It's what makes replaying the game fun.
We all wanted Morrigan to appear once again in DAI, didn't we?
No, we did not "all" want that. Why is it SO hard for people to understand that not everyone wants the same thing in these games, plays the games the same way, gets the same type of enjoyment from these games, and on and on with fifty different personal preferences.
There is not a SINGLE thing in the entire universe that EVERYONE agrees on. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
Sorry if my response seems out of proportion when you were just trying to make a point. But I am sick to death of people on these forums presuming to speaking for every single player of these games, or of talking about their own opinion or personal preference as some universal truth.
As for Morrigan specifically, on my second (with meta knowledge) and all successive DAO plays afterward I used her as a tool to ensure my Warden's survival. I don't really care one way or the other about her, or the Old God Baby (Kieran), or the new Mythal thing (if you allow her to drink), or any of that. I would not have cared one whit if she hadn't been in DAI. However, I didn't mind her presentation in DAI, and I did like what her presence brought to the story in that case. I did think it was plausible for the circumstances. And I will admit to quite a bit of excitement when I recognized Claudia Black's voice on the very first DAI E3 trailer.
Do I have some burning need to check up on her in every installment, and also perhaps see the child that I forced Alistair to conceive? No, I don't. But if she comes along anyway, that's fine too.
Problems come when characters overstay their welcome because they need to be available as part of the fighting group at all times. How much content needs to be created just to prepare for the fact that any of your 6-10 companions can be present at any time in any quest? How much party banter? How many reaction phrases to say during key plot points? How many side quests just to give character development to every single NPC? How many interactions between companions at your base, to let you see that you are leading a real group of people? Not to mention the fact that everyone needs to have an opinion about every choice you make and let you know.
Uhm, no? There are many quests and plot points where the various followers don't say anything at all or offer an opinion (no, I'm not counting approval points). There are some quests and plots where only certain followers will say something. And yes, there are some where the player has the opportunity to hear from everyone, such as with the Well choice. If anything, there have been numerous complaints on these forums from players who want even more reactivity from followers, about everything.
Ok, Bioware has great writers, but I'm sure that they would work much better if they weren't forced to write complete story arcs, party banter, reaction phrases and so on for each and everyone of your companions (and Advisors, in DAI).
How about they're making the game they want to make, the way they want to make it? You seem to be under the impression that they sit around the writers pit bemoaning the fact that they have all of these followers to write, when all they really want is to focus on a juicy plot for the player protagonist. But they enjoy writing the followers too, you know.
This allows them focus on meaningful content, without being forced to fill up the holes with uninspired stuff.
Again, that is your own opinion. Many players greatly enjoy all of the companion content, some want even more, and there are others that want certain companions to be an integral part of the plot in addition to the current amount of content they already have as a companion.
For myself, I will say that the amount of follower content we got in DAI is just enough for me. Perhaps the only things I would change would be to have the addition of (a very few, easily located) banter trigger points out in the world, while still keeping the banter system as it was, and fully cinematic base conversations (I don't need these for every NPC, but followers, yes). There might be more, but those are the two main issues I had with followers in DAI.
Companions are most of the reason I love BioWare games. One of the reasons the Neverwinter Nights main campaign is my least favourite thing they've ever made is that you only have one barely-controllable henchmen. I vastly preferred the expansions purely on the grounds that they contain Deekin and Valen. (Also a much more interesting plot, which seems to go against the theory that less companion stuff would lead to better writing elsewhere ...)
@Rahelron. Firstly I do think your title is more provocative than it needs to be because (your not really arguing that Bioware has been undone or even tells bad stories), but perhaps that was intentional.
While I don't really agree that the points you listed are problems in Inquisition, and while companion character relationships and party rpg mechanics are part of the reason I prefer this series to most live-action rpgs, there are some interesting points here that I think are worth acknowledging:
First the idea that you can have too many playable characters in a game and that this waters down the effectiveness of those characters is on point. One of my favorite games from childhood, Chrono Cross, would have benefited immeasurably from winnowing down the playable cast and focusing on those few who were actually interesting. Where I disagree is with six being a bloated number however. In a 20-120 hr game you have quite a lot of time to work through that number of character arcs. In a game where you can carry around 3 additional characters, 6-8 party members seems pretty reasonable, 10 is probably pushing it, and 12 is going overboard unless there is some mechanism that might reduce that number (like a suicide mission).
Your also presenting the idea that characters pull attention away from the main narrative. Again, I'd say this is probably true, but I'm also not convinced it is a problem. A lot of things detract from even the best game narratives. The most obvious factor is that the user is playing a game. Game mechanics in general reject traditional story arcs, and I don't think game writers should strive to tell stories that mimic novels or movies. I generally prefer having a greater focus on characters than narrative, because good characters breath life into an otherwise clunky storytelling format.
Finally, I think you are correct that a good companion can steal the spotlight from the main character. Again, where I disagree is that a shifting focus contributes to poor game design. This might be a problem for some, but I rather enjoy it. Back in my Final Fantasy playing days, a lot of folks complained about how the focus of FF12 shifted from the young boy Vaan to the princess Ashe. I thought this was fantastic. Ashe was a much more interesting character, and there is nothing inherently wrong with a story starting from one perspective and moving to another. Some of my favorite stories in any medium do this. With Bioware games this tends to be more subtle because they are not as linear, but I for one am happy to see Dorian or Cass or Merrill or any character jump up and steal the show for a little while. If the characters are that interesting, I don't mind them stealing some of the main character's shine.
So I don't think you are entirely off base here, but I can see where myself and others come to different conclusions about what constitutes a well-designed game story. There are unquestionably limitations with party characters, but they also add things to the game experience that wouldn't otherwise be there. On the whole, I prefer the games that include party characters, limitations notwithstanding. The experience feels richer to me.
character development and relationships is BWs cornerstone. Don't go there.
I think for me maybe the point is that the OP sees certainly elements of the game as being somehow problematic, while I see them as wonderful aspects of Bioware's game that adds to the experience and not detracts from it.
Um... their companions are why Bioware is the best developer out there right now and why I keep going back to their games over and over and over, even when an ending or game is disappointing to terrible (granted, only ME3's ending and DA2 "qualify" for this, and even then they are still great games). Hell, this is the main reason why Inquisition is the best RPG of the past few years over the likes of Fallout and Witcher.... though Fallout 4 took some really good steps toward mimicking Bioware in terms of companions.
Just give me more great companions and interactions with them and Bioware will keep being the best out there.
I have to side with the majority of posters on this one.
One of the main things that keeps me hooked and coming back to the games is the companions. I have put more time into this game than any other I have ever played. This is because I actually feel like the companions are fleshed out and that they are all living lives outside of what we see in game.
I love how you get a sense of what they are like with each other from banter during quests. How Dorian always heckles Solas or how Solas and Cole freak out all the other companions with their spirit talk. How Blackwall always seems so concerned that everyone is doing good and how Bull and Sera are like best buds and love talking about hot women and killing stuff. I could go on.
It breathes life into the game I haven't experienced in any other game and continually keeps me coming back for more. I feel like you saying the writers are "forced" into companion writing is proven wrong by just how individual each companion is and how unique their interactions are. You don't put that much care and dimension into a character you are forced to spit out.
This is a provocatory title of course, but i really do think that the party mechanic poses some real problems to the development of good stories in bioware RPGs. That is because it requires the existence of the so called "companion characters", meaning the NPCs that can be recuited to join your fighting party. I can summarize those problems in three bullet points:
What are you talking about?
Good stories require good characters. Video games are interact-able stories, and there are no characters in the video game that the player character spends more time with than companion characters.
Most time spent in video games is spent going off killing beasts and baddies. For every minute spent engaged in conversation, there's at least an hour spent wordlessly exploring new areas and fighting random NPC's. Your companions are the characters out there exploring and fighting with you, so I think most people like getting to know their companions rather than just dragging around nameless, wordless automatons.
If the characters that the player spends the most time with are also the least interesting, compelling, and/or enjoyably written compared to the random NPCs they pop in, talk to for a few minutes, then leave to spend the next several hours fighting random monsters in random dungeons for, people probably won't find the overall story of the video game as compelling.
There is something to all these points, but not to the point where they're "Bioware's undoing". Details:This is a provocatory title of course, but i really do think that the party mechanic poses some real problems to the development of good stories in bioware RPGs. That is because it requires the existence of the so called "companion characters", meaning the NPCs that can be recuited to join your fighting party. I can summarize those problems in three bullet points:
- Quantity problems: in order to let the player build a party you need to have at least two NPCs for every class in the game, that is to say 6 characters. That is the bare minimum since, as we have seen in the past, people have complained when presented with only 6 companions to choose from (ME3 without the "From Ashes" DLC). This means that every game Bioware has to write a lot of new characters and, as we know, quantity is the greatest enemy of quality.
- Fans grow attached to companions: when a companion is well written fans grow attached to him, want to see him appear in every game. This forces developers to shoe-horn characters into plots that have nothing to do with them, creating convoluted side quests and having to take into account all the different possible branching paths that players could have chosen to take in the past games. This transforms development into an effort to check all the boxes in order to satisfy everyone. We can see how this goes against creating compelling and coherent stories.
- Companions steal the spotlight: we have seen this happen in Dragon Age 2. Sometimes well-written companions are so compelling that start driving the plot by themselves, while the supposed main character becomes just a follower that kills monsters in order to keep the story progressing. Since the player indentifies with the main character and not with his companions, we can see how this goes against creating good games.
I don't really think they should change much in how they handle companions, I like how things are.
I admit, I do feel uneasy reading the level of attatchment some people feel towards companions, almost makes me embarrassed to admit loving the games sometimes. I dislike that kind of obsession that some people have but its got to be good for business, and not everybody gets to that level anyway. They make just as much money from more casual players who just enjoy their RPG games as they do the obsessed -insert character here- lovers.
I think some people avoid the community on the forums for the reasons you stated - I know I avoid posting here often and just lurk instead, because there is vicious people about, lol. I don't think it makes people avoid the games though!
This is a provocatory title of course, but i really do think that the party mechanic poses some real problems to the development of good stories in bioware RPGs. That is because it requires the existence of the so called "companion characters", meaning the NPCs that can be recuited to join your fighting party. I can summarize those problems in three bullet points:
- Quantity problems: in order to let the player build a party you need to have at least two NPCs for every class in the game, that is to say 6 characters. That is the bare minimum since, as we have seen in the past, people have complained when presented with only 6 companions to choose from (ME3 without the "From Ashes" DLC). This means that every game Bioware has to write a lot of new characters and, as we know, quantity is the greatest enemy of quality.
I don't think people complained that there were "too few" characters so much as their favorite character wasn't available (more on this later) As for the necessity of two per class minimum being needed, this is a factor, but it is largley dependent on how important trinity play is. Or how important classes are. I mean, would the perceived minimum number be altered if Bioware made a classless system? Something like Jade Empire?
Fans grow attached to companions: when a companion is well written fans grow attached to him, want to see him appear in every game. This forces developers to shoe-horn characters into plots that have nothing to do with them, creating convoluted side quests and having to take into account all the different possible branching paths that players could have chosen to take in the past games. This transforms development into an effort to check all the boxes in order to satisfy everyone. We can see how this goes against creating compelling and coherent stories.
This one is true. Players seem to love returning characters. Then get angry at how different they are when they do (Anders). Or how their roles are so tiny (Zevran). Or how they've become a Sue because they're so important (Leliana). Or how they can't romance them(ironically, also Leliana). Or get p*ssed because their favorite didn't return (every companion in DAO or DA2 who didn't return). Frankly, I think returning characers are more trouble than they are worth and should be done away with entirely. Each game a clean slate.
Companions steal the spotlight: we have seen this happen in Dragon Age 2. Sometimes well-written companions are so compelling that start driving the plot by themselves, while the supposed main character becomes just a follower that kills monsters in order to keep the story progressing. Since the player indentifies with the main character and not with his companions, we can see how this goes against creating good games.
The only character I've seen doing this is Tallis in Mark of the Assassin. To the contrary, I've seen complaints that companions are too needy for the player character, who depend on them to solve all their problems.
At any rate, compelling characters has always been Bioware's thing.
Since FF12 was mention.. It would have been super game if the PC could interact with the companions like the DA series instead of the cut and paste routine of most RPGs.
I spend more time playing one of the DA games then I do FF10 and FF12. Take away the ability to interact with the PC companions and I don't think I would consider buying DA:4.
This is sort of like asking Bethesda to not have an open world in their games.
I sort of see the OP's point though in that the Inquisitor is something of weak blank slate with no in-game backstory of any consequence while all the companion characters are rich in backstory, emotion, personal stakes and scenes meant solely for the purpose of advancing their arcs. The only time I ever really fault for my Inquisitor was the scene with the advisers in Trespasser where you can choose to scream about all the anxiety and resentment your character is currently feeling. Even Origins was never able to pull something like that off and I hope that in DA4 for any other Bioware products they take the time to have more scenes like that for the PC.
That all said, I still don't think we have to remove companions to accomplish that.
I don't really think they should change much in how they handle companions, I like how things are.
I admit, I do feel uneasy reading the level of attatchment some people feel towards companions, almost makes me embarrassed to admit loving the games sometimes. I dislike that kind of obsession that some people have but its got to be good for business, and not everybody gets to that level anyway. They make just as much money from more casual players who just enjoy their RPG games as they do the obsessed -insert character here- lovers.
I think some people avoid the community on the forums for the reasons you stated - I know I avoid posting here often and just lurk instead, because there is vicious people about, lol. I don't think it makes people avoid the games though!
Have you never become attached to a character in a book or a movie? Have you never gone back to a book you loved from time to time just to revisit? Great characters touch us because they either represent something we wish to see in real people or something we love and cherish in real people. I doubt that few actually get "too" attached. There are certain books in my life that I reread every couple of years or so, just to say "hello again" to characters and themes that I loved and admired while knowing that they are just the wonderful figment of some writer's imagination.
I agree with the third point but i only think that was a issue in DA2
Carman_Willow I agree.. Tidus and I date back to my D&D days in the mid 80s and whenever I use his name in any RPG and I get into Tidus's character and enjoy the game more. I "feel" his pain and rage when he find Shianni was raped by Vaughan. I "feel" his rage when he finds out his father, friends and family has been sold into slavery. To my mind its part of the fun of playing RPGs. No shame.
.
That **** you're smoking - must be some pretty dank stuff. Mind hooking me up?
Methinks he was smoking some bad elfroot.
No, like everyone else is saying, companion NPCs are what sets Bioware games apart from most other developers (Obsidian being the other notable developer that uses companions the same way). And they are what keeps the game fresh. Your character handles something one way in a playthrough, and you can discuss it with everyone in your party and hear banter about it; handle that same situation differently in the next playthrough, and you have entirely different conversations. I loved The Witcher 3, but it felt very lonely by comparison -- Geralt's friends have set-piece conversations as part of quests, but otherwise they just repeat canned lines. You can't go up to Zoltan and hear his opinion of the ongoing campaign the way you can with Varric or the rest of the cast.
As far as companions driving the plot, the only Bioware game where that was significant is in DA2. I thought it worked perfectly there; the story wouldn't have worked very well at all if Anders hadn't been a party member. It wouldn't have made sense for Hawke to force the conflict between the Mages and Templars, and if Anders had just been some random mage that Hawke didn't know, there would have been no impact and it would have felt like a Deus Ex Machina. Instead, Hawke is able to have an evolving relationship, be it friend or rival or romance, with Anders, and at the story's climax we see that he really does take his convictions to the extreme. It was impactful and great story telling.
Good and interesting companions and NPCs are part of what set Bioware and Obsidian games apart from the generic run of the mill RPGs and make them interesting.
Since FF12 was mention.. It would have been super game if the PC could interact with the companions like the DA series instead of the cut and paste routine of most RPGs.
I spend more time playing one of the DA games then I do FF10 and FF12. Take away the ability to interact with the PC companions and I don't think I would consider buying DA:4.
Yes it would have been nice. This is, however, a bit like OPs argument in that cut/paste routines and linear stories are kind of Final Fantasy's MO. And while that certainly cuts into the replay value, frankly, its what they do best. If we are talking about a series that carries a millstone of fan expectation around its neck, we need not look much further than the Square Enix flagship. They already have a hard enough time diverting from the formula without getting walloped by the backlash. BSN is downright cordial in comparison.
The principal reason I moved on from JRPGs (more or less - I'll still fire up a classic now and then) to game like those Bioware produces was the richness of character interaction. Its what Bioware does best; its the thing that sets them apart from other developers of similar games. This is probably the biggest reason I disagree with spirit of this thread even though the OP is making some lucid points. Like you, I would be pretty leery of DA sequel (at least true, non-offshoot sequel) that lost that character interaction dynamic. Its the reason I can easily to 10-12 playthroughs of the same game without getting tired of it. I don't think FF would do this as well because it isn't really in their DNA.
I guess the point I'm driving at is that different people want different things in their RPG experience, and there's a market to match that, so do we really need to change what anyone developer does best? I get little confused with talk about molding a franchise to fit a specific paradigm when the game people are asking for already exists. I mean there already is a single player, story driven, dark fantasy action RPG series that releases games on pretty similar schedule. If companion interaction isn't your thing, you have options, and the inverse is also true. I would rather see each of these developers focus on what they do best.
Retour en haut
