414 réponses à ce sujet

[straykat]

I'd like both. That's what was good about Hawke... even if it was only one "origin". The whole game was an origin with personal threads throughout.

 

I find a lot of roleplaying value out of DAO though. I don't see possibility in DAI's approach. Or TES. I see a silly formula, with a prisoner turned savior thing going on. It's so absurd that whatever possibility lies with the general openness is spoiled. I don't want to play absurd characters. I want them to be part of a context or the general landscape or war or whatever. Something. Anything. I'll leave it to Bethesda to write this crap.

 

Take the City Elf, for example. Male or Female shapes it differently. The little dialogue you tell the kids about "Blargha" or "Tathas" adds some personality to your character.. or whether you help that family move or act like a jerk, whether you hate your bride or groom, etc.. Whether you kill Vaughn or not is a huge choice.. your character could feel self-righteous if you kill him... or racked with guilt the whole game if you don't. And so on. Then later there's the blood mage taking over the Alienage and other choices. Personally, I find it a good time to finally kick Morrigan out of my group. Because she wants you to take the deal. But then... imagine taking the choice. What does that say about a City Elf who would kill their own dad for a measley +1 Con?

[Nefla]

A couple years ago I think. I can't remember a specific time. Sorry.

Aw I was hoping it was a plan they had for future games or something.

[Nefla]

I'd like both. That's what was good about Hawke... even if it was only one "origin". The whole game was an origin with personal threads throughout.

I loved that Hawke had a family and that they were involved in his or her life rather than just being a mention in a text box before the game or being restricted to an Origin only. I didn't like how they got killed off one after another though and I wish there had been a playable intro type segment in Lothering to show the family's normal life and get you more attached to the sibling who dies.

 

 

I find a lot of roleplaying value out of DAO though. I don't see possibility in DAI's approach. Or TES. I see a silly formula, with a prisoner turned savior thing going on. It's so absurd that whatever possibility lies with the general openness is spoiled. I don't want to play absurd characters. I want them to be part of a context or the general landscape or war or whatever. Something. Anything. I'll leave it to Bethesda to write this crap.

 

Take the City Elf, for example. Male or Female shapes it differently. The little dialogue you tell the kids about "Blargha" or "Tathas" adds some personality to your character.. or whether you help that family move or act like a jerk, whether you hate your bride or groom, etc.. Whether you kill Vaughn or not is a huge choice.. your character could feel self-righteous if you kill him... or racked with guilt the whole game if you don't. And so on. Then later there's the blood mage taking over the Alienage and other choices. Personally, I find it a good time to finally kick Morrigan out of my group. Because she wants you to take the deal. But then... imagine taking the choice. What does that say about a City Elf who would kill their own dad for a measley +1 Con?

Totally agree!

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Aw I was hoping it was a plan they had for future games or something.

Well, it is a plan for future games. It was just in an interview from around a couple years ago. So after DAI came out. 

[Nefla]

Well, it is a plan for future games. It was just in an interview from around a couple years ago. So after DAI came out. 

I see, I mistook it as being from before DA:I came out and they decided not to implement it or something

[GoldenGail3]

I DONT CARE, BIOWARE, MAKE UP YOUR F****ING MIND ALREADY.

[AresKeith]

I DONT CARE, BIOWARE, MAKE UP YOUR F****ING MIND ALREADY.

 

I'm sure they already have 

[GoldenGail3]

I'm sure they already have

Yeah, well I hate them for letting us stew like this then.

[AresKeith]

Yeah, well I hate them for letting us stew like this then.

 

They can't tell us anything until the game is green-lit 
 

[GoldenGail3]

They can't tell us anything until the game is green-lit

So you want another one of these threads is what your telling me? At this point, there annoying me enough to make me want to know if Quiz is Progie or not.

[thats1evildude]

I'm pretty sure Bioware's game plan is still to use new protagonists in each game. It's just a few fans who keep pushing the issue.

But, y'know, they've been pushing for the Warden to come back for six years too, and so far, Bioware's response to that has been "meh."

[Donquijote and 59 others]

New protagonist every game is fine so long as i have new companions every game, a true refresh.

New protagonist with plenty of returning characters nope.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

I'd like both. That's what was good about Hawke... even if it was only one "origin". The whole game was an origin with personal threads throughout.

 

I find a lot of roleplaying value out of DAO though. I don't see possibility in DAI's approach. Or TES. I see a silly formula, with a prisoner turned savior thing going on. It's so absurd that whatever possibility lies with the general openness is spoiled. I don't want to play absurd characters. I want them to be part of a context or the general landscape or war or whatever. Something. Anything. I'll leave it to Bethesda to write this crap.

 

Ok but Batsheda has a point,they admit that the focus of their game is not the story

[Smudjygirl]

So you want another one of these threads is what your telling me? At this point, there annoying me enough to make me want to know if Quiz is Progie or not.

 

I would say it's safe to assume the Inquisitor won't be PC in any future game.  But the way Trespasser left of gave mixed messages and made it so the Inquisitor seems too heavily invested in what Solas is doing to be sat on the sidelines. And since people hated how Hawke turned out, they don't want the Inquisitor as NPC. Just having mentions of the Inquisitor would also be unsatisfactory. Hence people want the Inquisitor back as PC.

 

I don't think any amount of noise made on our part will change the "new PC is coming with a mop, don't worry past PC's" thing they have going.

 

New PC's aren't bad, but the way they have been doing it isn't working too well, so if anything changes, i hope it's that.

 

Origins to DA2 worked really well. We know what the Warden was up  to (if you played Origins) and the plot had nothing to do with blights.

2 to Inquisition worked less well. Through out Varric and Cass' conversations it was made clear Hawke was super, mega awesome and "the only person" who could stop the mage/templar war and restore peace. Hawke also has a slight connection to Cory, but nothing all that interesting. But because they had to bring in the Inquisitor because "reasons", the story of Inquisition suffered in 2 big ways that many agree on. 1) The mage/templar war was anti-climactic and 2) Cory was boring, trite and felt like a mid level "boss".

 

So, since the formula of having a new person come into a story when another is already heavily invested seems to be making the story (and game) suffer, i don't think a new PC every time is always the best option. But i also don't want the same hero to solve all the world's problems.

 

Really i think Bioware needs to clean up how they do this. If they are dead set on a new hero, then they really need to give us a new place to see, new people to meet and new stories to be told. A mention of characters is already a nice connection. And a cameo if it makes sense. Do i really need to see Alistair in every game? If i go to Tevinter i could see Fenris or Dorian, and get a mention to former friends and people i know. If i go to Kirkwall maybe i could meet the Champion or the Captain  of the Guard.

 

I have said this thread isn't about this, but i do want the Inquisitor as PC in the next game. In my opinion, they should deal with Solas and the events caused by him. That's because i think a Tevinter PC would have more than enough issues stopping a Qunari and trying to change/keep Tevinter. They don't need Solas to have an interesting story that is in no way connected to what the three previous "most powerful person in Thedas" was doing.

[In Exile]

Wanting to get to know a little of your character, what is normal for them, where they come from and what their life was before the Call to Action is not the same as wanting to experience their entire life from birth. If DA:O had started at Ostagar and you were simply told in dialogue or in an introductory paragraph during character creation (the way DA:I did it) that your character was a dwarf noble who had one brother kill the other and betray you it would not be anywhere near the same as playing that Origin yourself.

 

The only Origin I can see as undermining the plot is the Dwarf Noble since you have unfinished business that doesn't involve the Wardens or the Human land. DA:O and DA:I had the same "motivation" for the plot: save the world from evil things that are trying to kill it. There are no personal stakes. I would say the premise of both games is weak but for me DA:O more than made up for it with characters, world building and roleplay and DA:I didn't.

 

Well I consider the majority of DA:I's story to be weak, so I definitely wouldn't call pre-Haven an "origin done right." It's a random nobody with no past and no connections washed up on a beach, granted a special power out of nowhere and told to save the world. I don't know who they are, what kind of person they are, how the Call to Action could have affected their personality. You clearly don't care about these things but I do. DA:I started with an action and combat sequence that I didn't care about. I felt zero tension about my surroundings being destroyed or the random dead troops because I didn't know anything about any of them. It was just a thin excuse for the game to send me to go kill stuff and see moar action.

 

I don't. I found Corypheus to be utterly useless and generic.

There's an important clarification to my last post: I mean to write Skyhold, not Haven. The Inquisitor has an origin: that's the story between Wrath of Heaven and In Your Heart Shall Burn. Everything before that is irrelevant - it's the equivalent of what the Cousland was doing at the tournament, what the Aeducan was doing as a child, how Brosca got involved in the plot that led to exile, etc. etc. The story between WoH and IYHB is the story of how you get to be Inquisitor.

 

The introductory paragraph simply does not work in DA:O. Because it does not introduce the right story. There's no motivation to become a Grey Warden. In fact, I would say that the Aeducan story gives you the most motivation, in the sense that you can never go back home - the same applies to the CE Origin. The only real story that forces you to actually perform the Joining is the Dalish origin. 

 

But none of these stories ever give you a reason to identify with or want to become a Grey Warden as an identity. Some of them don't even give you a reason to give a **** about Ferelden. As a CE it makes sense - your family is in Denerim. As a Cousland it makes sense to want to save Ferelden even as you don't want to adopt the Grey Warden identity. But as a Dalish elf? Or Dwarf?

 

Even if you want to stop the Blight, there's no reason to want to save Ferelden. In fact, there are lots of great reasons to abandon Ferelden to go to Orlais and the rest of the Wardens. This is the problem - the Origins do give you personal stakes. Personal stakes in a story that is never followed up on for the majority of the game, a reason to actively not want to get involved in the main plot. 

 

If you don't know what person your PC is, that's your failing, that's not the game's failing. The game can't tell you who your character is - what it should tell you is what your character is allowed to be. This is where DA:O fails miserably - the only game that fails more as an RPG in this regard is KoTOR 2, which doesn't just fail to tell you what you're allowed to express, but actively hides it from you.

 

But DA:O gives you every motivation but one to become a Grey Warden in full or save Ferelden, and then gives you no option after Ostagar but to want to do both. The CE origin doesn't tell me anything about my character - I decide personality, views, feelings. Background is irrelevant to everything that matters about my character - whether he or she is assertive, brave, smart, caring, angry, violent - whatever. 

[In Exile]

Take the City Elf, for example. Male or Female shapes it differently. The little dialogue you tell the kids about "Blargha" or "Tathas" adds some personality to your character.. or whether you help that family move or act like a jerk, whether you hate your bride or groom, etc.. Whether you kill Vaughn or not is a huge choice.. your character could feel self-righteous if you kill him... or racked with guilt the whole game if you don't. And so on. Then later there's the blood mage taking over the Alienage and other choices. Personally, I find it a good time to finally kick Morrigan out of my group. Because she wants you to take the deal. But then... imagine taking the choice. What does that say about a City Elf who would kill their own dad for a measley +1 Con?

 

Completely irrelevant. That doesn't "add" personality - that's the personality you've chosen. You get to express that throughout DA:O, with a multitude of choices, right after the origin. A brilliant quest that does the same in ME is "I Remember Me" - and that's about a 6 minute back and forth dialogue quest. 

[Wulfram]

Completely irrelevant. That doesn't "add" personality - that's the personality you've chosen. You get to express that throughout DA:O, with a multitude of choices, right after the origin. A brilliant quest that does the same in ME is "I Remember Me" - and that's about a 6 minute back and forth dialogue quest.

Good early quests do help add personality for me at least, by posing interesting questions about my character. If you've really got a detailed portrait of your character before starting that's not so valuable, but I tend to start with fairly broad strokes.

I don't know if you need an "origin" for that, but something less "in media res" than DAI helps. I'd also appreciate a bit more time before becoming super-important.

[In Exile]

Good early quests do help add personality for me at least, by posing interesting questions about my character. If you've really got a detailed portrait of your character before starting that's not so valuable, but I tend to start with fairly broad strokes.

I don't know if you need an "origin" for that, but something less "in media res" than DAI helps. I'd also appreciate a bit more time before becoming super-important.

 

I never have detailed portraits of my characters. I have traits. I don't think traits depend on background. This is why I don't care for origins, and why In Media Res works for me - because it doesn't matter where that choices comes in.

 

But I favour In Media Res for a more important reason - it tells you exactly what your character is allowed to be and believe in before you get in so deep that the lack of choices completely break your character. DA:O constantly broke my characters, making it impossible for them to do the very thing that was key to their personality. If for some miracle DA:O didn't break my characters, DA:A made sure to break every single one of them. 

 

DA2 didn't, but it easily could - if you played a meddler - someone who would get involved in e.g. the mage-templar war for example, then a Hawke who sits on his or her ass for almost a decade is character breaking. 

[Blood Mage Reaver]

I'd say that Dragon Age needs a definitive protagonist for it's definitive adventure.

 

The problem of this series is that none of the games up until now reached the real threat whereas Mass Effect sets the Reapers as the greater scope villains since the first installment.

 

So far each DA game had it's own story which allowed for it's own protagonist but when the final conflict sets in we will need a definitive protagonist, remember that the ME trilogy is more about the legend of Shepard than that of the setting itself so they will likely play out the legend of the MC in a similar fashion.

 

A more or less definitive setting of companions would also be welcome, so long as they are well written that is.

 

There is hardly anyone who would complain about Garrus Vakarian being on every ME game but there can also be base breakers like Liara and Tali, however, it's arguably better than just shoe-horning in James Vega while putting Jack and Miranda on the sidelines.

 

On DA we have had a slightly negative mixed run in this department, Oghren ruined the life we helped him rebuild, Anders basically shifted from a likeable and interesting character into an annoying and psychotic one but Varric sort of tied in rather well with at least part of DAI's story despite not doing much for the latter half of the game.

 

All in all, we need a set of characters who can remain constant while making relationships more flexible for the plot to flow.

 

Bioware should follow what Bethesda did in Fallout 4 and ditch monogamic relationships as mandatory so that your MC doesn't have to break a previously established relationship in case a new interesting LI appears in the next installment.

 

In hindsight, it's hilarious that in a setting promiscuous and edgy as Thedas our MCs can't remain in a polyamorous relationship and must commit to a single LI whether they are a saint or a sociopath.

 

My recommendation would be:

 

-Keep a single MC with an escalating plot (Solas -> Evanuris/Titans -> Maker/Blight)

 

-Keep a core set of six LI companions comprising all sexual preferences (straight male/straight female/bisexual male/bixesual female/gay male/gay female)

 

-Make some LIs ok with polyamory but also make relationships breakable and rekindable.

 

-Rotate additional companions who aren't romanceable and make all non-core LIs polyamorous.

[Mistic]

Background is irrelevant to everything that matters about my character - whether he or she is assertive, brave, smart, caring, angry, violent - whatever. 

 

You may feel that way, but personality is only one of the dimensions of a character. Background is another one, since past experiences can affect the perception of actions and situations as much as your personality traits. I can start DA:O with a City Elf, a Human Noble, a Noble Dwarf or a Dalish Elf with exactly the same personality, and reach Ostagar with very different people. Their past matters. That's the beauty of origins.

 

Good early quests do help add personality for me at least, by posing interesting questions about my character. If you've really got a detailed portrait of your character before starting that's not so valuable, but I tend to start with fairly broad strokes.

 

Questions like the ones Josephine asks make up for the lack of origins, but personally, from a narrative point of view, it's a case of "telling" instead of "showing". I'd rather play it, but I understand that game development has its needs too.

 

My problem with headcanons is that they can be very detailed in our minds, but the actual result in-game tends to be generic and bland. Why? Because a video game is not a tabletop RPG. The actions and dialogues available to the players are limited by the programming. In that case, I prefer when games like DA:O offer set past situations, since it's easier for the programmers to include dialogues and situations related to them. And even then the typical complaint is "the elf/dwarf/mage feels mostly like a generic human with some colourful lines from time to time". Are we really asking to make the characters even more generic?

[Silcron]

If the goal is to explore the world I feel multiple protagonists is better. You get to see different points of view, in different places, doing different things but all in the same universe. From DA:O to DA2 I think it worked well, but that was because the Warden's story got wrapped up nicely and then new problems showed up, but they were there in Kirkwall, and in Kirkwall we had Hawke, the Warden was here on Ferelden doing its own thing.

But from DA2 to DA:I I don't think it worked. The ending wasn't wrapping up Hawke's story, it was a flashback, the prologue for this war that we never saw, and then we got a new protag that was lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time and goes in what? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? from prisioner to leader. DA:I didn't sell the Iquisitor to me. Where is Hawke? Why was Hawke so important aside from being there at the start?

And then, from what I've heard of Tresspasser (haven't played it yet, bought the dlcs this week, just finished JoH) It sets it all up for this major conflict against Solas, for the Inquisitor working against him, as with Hawke it feels their respective DA games were Act 1, then at the ending **** either hits the fan or is about to, setting things up for Act 2 in the next game, but we won't get that right? DA4 will be it's own story that will probably link to Solas and then we'll take him down. Tada, DAI act 1 of Solas and DA4 Act 3, just as the first part off DA:I was Act 3 for the Mage-Templar war.

Edit: whoops, hit the submit button on accident before I was finished, sorry

Anyway, my opinion is that I'd like to have different protagonist and that their stories link together because they share the same world. Example being the refugee problem in Kirkwall, the Blight of DA:O affected our story, but it made sense, we weren't dealing with the Warden's story, or solving something he didn't, we were suffering consequences that made sense given that the protagonists shared the same world. If in DA4 we are in Tevinter and there is political unrest because of what has been going on with the Chantry in Inquisition that will make sense and I'd like that. It's just that I'm afraid in this franchise we'll have a problem of stories not being finished properly.

[Smudjygirl]

.And then, from what I've heard of Tresspasser (haven't played it yet, bought the dlcs this week, just finished JoH) It sets it all up for this major conflict against Solas, for the Inquisitor working against him, as with Hawke it feels their respective DA games were Act 1, then at the ending **** either hits the fan or is about to, setting things up for Act 2 in the next game, but we won't get that right? DA4 will be it's own story that will probably link to Solas and then we'll take him down. Tada, DAI act 1 of Solas and DA4 Act 3, just as the first part off DA:I was Act 3 for the Mage-Templar war.

 

I would suggest trying to go into Trespasser not expecting closure or continuation. Try to pay attention to the events of it. I'd be interested in seeing if you thought it was an ending or beginning.

 

But from what has been said, Inquisition has been split in half, so there are many loose ends with the Inquisitor. I do fear the next game will be as weak as Inquisition because of them repeating their decisions to have another PC wrap up the mess of another. Solas' story is so interesting, i'd hate him to be Cory 2.0

[Silcron]

I would suggest trying to go into Trespasser not expecting closure or continuation. Try to pay attention to the events of it. I'd be interested in seeing if you thought it was an ending or beginning.
 
But from what has been said, Inquisition has been split in half, so there are many loose ends with the Inquisitor. I do fear the next game will be as weak as Inquisition because of them repeating their decisions to have another PC wrap up the mess of another. Solas' story is so interesting, i'd hate him to be Cory 2.0

And thing is that Cory had it all lorewise to be a really interesting villain. Even before we start playing DA:O he was mentioned (Duncan in his monologue mentions the magisters.)

And I was thinking of making a thread about my opinion on JoH as I just finished it thtis morning (the only thing left in that area for me is to find all the places I can claim), but maybe I'm also considering waiting until I finish the other two.

[Smudjygirl]

And thing is that Cory had it all lorewise to be a really interesting villain. Even before we start playing DA:O he was mentioned (Duncan in his monologue mentions the magisters.)

And I was thinking of making a thread about my opinion on JoH as I just finished it thtis morning (the only thing left in that area for me is to find all the places I can claim), but maybe I'm also considering waiting until I finish the other two.

 

Yep. I was so interested in what Cory could have been. But most of his lore was uncovered with Hawke, there was really not time for the Inquisitor to re-learn all of it. If he had had more time to shine, and had been more involved in the plot he could have been amazing. I think the open world and seperation between that and the story put a real dent in his potential. But the fact Inquisitions story felt rushed also damaged his potential, because we met him about 3 or 4 times before we defeated him.

 

You should probably finish all 3 and have an overall feedback thing, instead of say, making one of each

[Nefla]

There's an important clarification to my last post: I mean to write Skyhold, not Haven. The Inquisitor has an origin: that's the story between Wrath of Heaven and In Your Heart Shall Burn. Everything before that is irrelevant - it's the equivalent of what the Cousland was doing at the tournament, what the Aeducan was doing as a child, how Brosca got involved in the plot that led to exile, etc. etc. The story between WoH and IYHB is the story of how you get to be Inquisitor.

Seeing what the character's normal life was like before they are thrust into the action might be irrelevant to you but it's important to me. What kind of person were they? How did they break or rise above when put into extreme circumstances? What did they leave behind, what did they lose?

 

 

 

The introductory paragraph simply does not work in DA:O. Because it does not introduce the right story. There's no motivation to become a Grey Warden. In fact, I would say that the Aeducan story gives you the most motivation, in the sense that you can never go back home - the same applies to the CE Origin. The only real story that forces you to actually perform the Joining is the Dalish origin. 

The HN origin also forces you into becoming a warden if you refuse and say you want to stay and help defend your parents/home. Most of the motivations at the most basic level end with the HoF joining the Wardens in order to save their life. The Dalish was tainted, the mage was going to be executed or made tranquil for helping Jowan, the CE would have been executed for killing an Arl's son, the Dwarf commoner would have been executed or imprisoned for fighting in the proving, the DN was already in the deep roads with no way to survive but join the Wardens. The Dwarf noble's motivation could be "I'll use the wardens for their diplomatic immunity and to get stronger and then I'll come back and kill Bhelen (which you can do)" the Dwarf commoner could finally earn the respect that they've never gotten through being a warden, the mage could want a freedom they never would have gotten without being a warden, etc...

 

 

Even if you want to stop the Blight, there's no reason to want to save Ferelden. In fact, there are lots of great reasons to abandon Ferelden to go to Orlais and the rest of the Wardens. This is the problem - the Origins do give you personal stakes. Personal stakes in a story that is never followed up on for the majority of the game, a reason to actively not want to get involved in the main plot.

The only reason the inquisitor has for "wanting" to save the world is that their special snowflake hand makes them the only one capable of doing it (and I hate this kind of thing). Otherwise I don't see why a random mercenary with no ties to the world wouldn't just move on to somewhere safer while someone else sorts everything out. I'd say not wanting the blight to consume those people I grew attached to in the Origins is good enough motivation to want to stop the blight. With the HN, circle mage, and CE Ferelden is also your home.

 

 

If you don't know what person your PC is, that's your failing, that's not the game's failing. The game can't tell you who your character is - what it should tell you is what your character is allowed to be. This is where DA:O fails miserably - the only game that fails more as an RPG in this regard is KoTOR 2, which doesn't just fail to tell you what you're allowed to express, but actively hides it from you.

Ah, is this another case of "it's not the writer's responsibility to write a good story, it's the player's responsibility to headcanon everything?" That's all well and good for a game like TES where the story isn't the focus but I used to think BioWare was better than that. DA:I did tell me who my character was allowed to be: generally polite and neutral, no racial pride or prejudice, no extreme emotions even if the situation would call for it, no past. Look, we obviously like opposite things in our games and neither of us is right over the other. You're free to disagree with me but you're never going to convince me that your way of thinking or playing is the way to go. I don't even know why we have these discussions, our replies to each other might as well just be "I disagree with everything you've said."