266 réponses à ce sujet

[Pavan]

You guys

 

What if we control Solas in DA4? Remember how they said they originally had the idea that we control Solas in Trespasser?

 

HHNNNNNGGGGGGgggg

 

 

 

But then we are all stuck being a bald elven mage = No Thanks!

[TheChosenOne]

*Ahem*

 

[KaiserShep]

But then we are all stuck being a bald elven mage = No Thanks!

 

 

More importantly, there are no choices to make. You just play him and do what Solas wants to do. At least with Leliana's Song, it was a short character prequel that wasn't important to the plot of Origins proper. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Ieldra, I like the thought and the topic. Kudos.

 

I do think that to get what you want- to be less 'heroic'- the scope and scale of the plot-problem will need to be mitigated somewhat. Heroic sacrifice tends to come with an expectation of sacrifice, after all- the messiah role, or save the world bit- and so stepping away from that would probably better allow more vanal self-interest or personal desires to be more palatable. Being selfish when the world is at stake is one thing- being selfish when a lot less than that is involved is another.

 

Awhile ago an old friend of mine shared an idea for a Mass Effect game that might fit that idea. It was basically Mass Effect: C-SEC. A cop-themed story between ME1 and ME2 in which the PC was a (human) member of C-SEC, and involved in the recovery of the ME1 attack on the Citadel and the subsequent roundup.

 

The story bounced between the Citadel and Omega. In the Citadel the PC was the law, and had the privileges of authority but the bindings of restrictions: back-up was never far away, but bureacrats and political machinations and everything else getting in the way as the post-ME1 political context played out as C-SEC (and everyone else) was involved in the hunt for Sovereign debris. In hunting Sovereign debris smuggling, the player would go undercover to Omega- where you were on your own, but free to do things how you wanted, without consequence.

 

The story revolved around the subtle power-struggles for Sovereign debris- every faction trying to get it for itself- and the PC choosing how they fit into it. While the end-game would focus on one macguffin in particular- something like a map to undiscovered relays Sovereign used, which would provide advantage to any faction that had these secret exclusive routes- the drama/role play was over how the PC would fit into these games. Would you be a good C-SEC officer and hand it over to the Council? A patriot and give to the Alliance? A good human and support Cerberus? Or even a sell them to Aria and become a lieutenant in her criminal empire?

 

What the player wanted was relevant- but what also stands out to me is that the plot, while significant enough to fight, die, and kill over, wasn't too big. The question of 'who gets this exclusive relay route' is significant to those involved... but hardly hijacks the larger story. Being selfish in this context is still selfish, but hardly at the cost of dooming countless persons to death or oppression. The stakes just aren't that high... and neither is the moral onus.

 

 

In a Dragon Age context, I imagine that such a story- where the player could be free to be a bit more selfish- would be best when the world isn't at stake. A sidestory, if you will- still significant, maybe even still saving the world from some great danger, but more in the form of Cassandra stopping a dragon rather than The Warden stopping a Blight.

 

Got a half-written scenario somewhere elaborating such a plot. Player framed for murder, stability of Rivain in question, a sort of side-story to Tevinter focus on Solas for DA4. I'll see what I have around.

[Ieldra]

@Dean_the_Young:

That's an interesting idea. Indeed save-the-world plots don't give themselves easily to playing a more self-centered character. DA2 had potential in that, only that the dialogue options were all bound up in personality options and there was too much "kill people for no significant gain" and general no-purpose assh*olery.

 

I'd like to see your "stability of Rivain" scenario.

[Xerrai]

You guys

 

What if we control Solas in DA4? Remember how they said they originally had the idea that we control Solas in Trespasser?

 

HHNNNNNGGGGGGgggg

I can deal with controlling a 'static' character (who has his story/choices written out ahead of time or has choices that don't matter in the long run) like Solas in a DLC. It is useful tool when trying to gain perspective on certain parts of the story. But a whole game is pushing it.

 

If we control Solas at any point in DA4 they better handle it like Ciri in the Witcher series--in very small intervals and mostly for the cinematic story experience.

[Pavan]

Ieldra, I like the thought and the topic. Kudos.

 

I do think that to get what you want- to be less 'heroic'- the scope and scale of the plot-problem will need to be mitigated somewhat. Heroic sacrifice tends to come with an expectation of sacrifice, after all- the messiah role, or save the world bit- and so stepping away from that would probably better allow more vanal self-interest or personal desires to be more palatable. Being selfish when the world is at stake is one thing- being selfish when a lot less than that is involved is another.

 

Awhile ago an old friend of mine shared an idea for a Mass Effect game that might fit that idea. It was basically Mass Effect: C-SEC. A cop-themed story between ME1 and ME2 in which the PC was a (human) member of C-SEC, and involved in the recovery of the ME1 attack on the Citadel and the subsequent roundup.

 

The story bounced between the Citadel and Omega. In the Citadel the PC was the law, and had the privileges of authority but the bindings of restrictions: back-up was never far away, but bureacrats and political machinations and everything else getting in the way as the post-ME1 political context played out as C-SEC (and everyone else) was involved in the hunt for Sovereign debris. In hunting Sovereign debris smuggling, the player would go undercover to Omega- where you were on your own, but free to do things how you wanted, without consequence.

 

The story revolved around the subtle power-struggles for Sovereign debris- every faction trying to get it for itself- and the PC choosing how they fit into it. While the end-game would focus on one macguffin in particular- something like a map to undiscovered relays Sovereign used, which would provide advantage to any faction that had these secret exclusive routes- the drama/role play was over how the PC would fit into these games. Would you be a good C-SEC officer and hand it over to the Council? A patriot and give to the Alliance? A good human and support Cerberus? Or even a sell them to Aria and become a lieutenant in her criminal empire?

 

What the player wanted was relevant- but what also stands out to me is that the plot, while significant enough to fight, die, and kill over, wasn't too big. The question of 'who gets this exclusive relay route' is significant to those involved... but hardly hijacks the larger story. Being selfish in this context is still selfish, but hardly at the cost of dooming countless persons to death or oppression. The stakes just aren't that high... and neither is the moral onus.

 

 

In a Dragon Age context, I imagine that such a story- where the player could be free to be a bit more selfish- would be best when the world isn't at stake. A sidestory, if you will- still significant, maybe even still saving the world from some great danger, but more in the form of Cassandra stopping a dragon rather than The Warden stopping a Blight.

 

Got a half-written scenario somewhere elaborating such a plot. Player framed for murder, stability of Rivain in question, a sort of side-story to Tevinter focus on Solas for DA4. I'll see what I have around.

 

 

@Dean_the_Young:

That's an interesting idea. Indeed save-the-world plots don't give themselves easily to playing a more self-centered character. DA2 had potential in that, only that the dialogue options were all bound up in personality options and there was too much "kill people for no significant gain" and general no-purpose assh*olery.

 

I'd like to see your "stability of Rivain" scenario.

 

 

 

They are good ideas,

 

But I do think it is possible to have the darker story we are looking for, with a large scale story.

 

Example it could be a war between nations of Thedas. Maybe Tevinter vs a another nation/multiple nations. ---------- World War Thedas. With no cut and dry evil side, but our protagonists gets to see the dark sides of the war and all the innocents caught up in it.

 

And that could trigger this more broody, vengeful personality.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But Ill be honest, What I want most for DA4 - We get to play as the Warden trying to combat the calling - Ohgren and Zevran are with him as companions fom the start.

Ohgren is a Warden anyway so makes sense he would be with his Warden commander and buddy.

At the end of DAO main story, Zevran says he will stick around with the Warden.

[Fiskrens]

If we control Solas at any point in DA4 they better handle it like Ciri in the Witcher series--in very small intervals and mostly for the cinematic story experience.

Please, no! I understand why they did that in TW3, to be able to flesh out the events around Ciri. But I never thought it worked very well, and fast became one of the boring parts of that game.

[Pavan]

Please, no! I understand why they did that in TW3, to be able to flesh out the events around Ciri. But I never thought it worked very well, and fast became one of the boring parts of that game.

 

 

I know it really takes you out of the role - totally unimmersive.

 

Its what I hated most about AC games - leaving the animus was such a chore.

[Dai Grepher]

I think they could make a game with multiple branches between righteousness and evil in the beginning, and then just have many quests and storylines throughout the game that will all be different to reflect those choices. It will be the same story, the same quests, but with a different theme to each based on who your character is as a person. Being of a certain moral stance will close some possibilities off but open new ones.

DA4 may need to be single origin for this, similar to Hawke's, but I think it could be done even with multiple races if there is a winnowing process where each origin character goes through different stages of an act. Some origins will converge.

Like if you are a warrior who is evil, you get a high position defending Minrathous. If you are between neutral and good leaning, you get sent to Seheron where you must defend a front line. If you are righteous, you get put in prison.

If you are an elf, and not a mage, you are a slave. So the righteous human and the elf may end up in the same path.

If Qunari is an option, then a Qun loyal Qunari will be sent to attack Minrathous. A Qunari with doubts will be sent to Seheron to prove him or her self either in battle or in recon. So the evil Tevinter and the loyal Qunari will be sent into the same path. The doubting Qunari will be sent into the same path as the neutral and good leaning Tevinter.

A dwarf commoner/carta might end up in the same path as a runaway elf slave. A dwarf noble might end up in the same path as a Tevinter assassin.

So basically, numerous origins converging with others in certain locations, and then going from there to another location, and then based on events will be found, saved, contacted by the (ex)Inquisitor or allies, or be tasked with helping him, or perhaps the person will defy all this and decide to help one of several factions, such as Calpernia, or the fog warriors, or even the Qunari. But all of these factions will eventually have to determine that the game's main objective is worth completing above and beyond anything else. So the main character will end up on the game's main path, but he or she will be adequetly defined by this point.

Each new mission will further define the character based on choices made in the past and new choices made during the mission, as well as skill set and build.

This way, having multiple outcomes for the different origins will not require completely unique levels and scenarios. Anywhere between 2 and 4 different origins will be able to share the same scenario, but from different perspectives.

For example, the evil Tevinter general might defend a shoreline from invading Qunari, while the loyal Qunari warrior will be invading that same shoreline.

An altus mage might be at the top of a Circle tower defending it from demons, while a dwarven noble fights his way to the top of the tower.

Same areas, different perspectives. Same scenarios, different motives.

[Ahriman]

I think in a game like that you should be rewarded with gaming power (higher stats, greater wealth, more powerful items) but the NPCs should also hate you more.  

 

While a more self-sacrificing character should have less of all that (lower stats, less wealth, less powerful items) but the greater support of NPCs.

 

I think it would actually be interesting to have the "bad" guy be personally a badass that doesn't need people... while the good guy is less of a lone wolf and relies on more powerful NPC companions. 

That actually would work fine in fantasy setting with it's typical artifacts, relics and other stuff.

- This dark cult stole our Sacred Branch, could you retrieve it?

- Sure.

...

- Was your mission a success?

- Naturally, this thing complements my collection perfectly. Thanks.

- Whaaa...

"Punishing" player by making all factions turn against PC in order to take him down would feel like reward, if you are given means to deal with it.

[ModernAcademic]

I'm so tired of playing the hero. I want something darker.

 

- They'll hunt you.

 

- You'll hunt me. You'll condemn me, set the mabari on me. Because that's what needs to happen. Because sometimes…the truth isn't good enough. Sometimes people deserve more. Sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded.

 

- Inquisitor? Inquisitor! Why is he running, Dad?

 

- Because we have to chase him.  

 

- He didn't do anything wrong.

 

- Because he's the hero Thedas deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So, we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. 

 

[Andreas Amell]

Wait for a new Game of Thrones.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Please, no! I understand why they did that in TW3, to be able to flesh out the events around Ciri. But I never thought it worked very well, and fast became one of the boring parts of that game.

 

Yeah, didn't help that Ciri's moveset was even more limited than Geralts, and her objectives amounted to ''go there, kill stuff if it gets in the way''. 

 

As for being able to play as an anti-hero, I don't have anything against it, but not a lot of plotlines really suit themselves to that. Obsidian's upcoming Tyranny uses the evil protagonist (or at least workingfor an evil cause) as a major feature, but I'd wager they built the game around it. It's not just a question of making the player a jerk, the story has to react properly to it, or you get Origins where you can murder half the people you meet in cold blood and everyone's completely fine with it so long as you toss enough gifts in their general direction afterwards. Which for me is worse than the most cliché save-the-world-from-teh-evulz story possible.

[CoM Solaufein]

I want to play as a nug and be neutral in the game. Just kick back and watch good vs evil have their thing.

[Addictress]

I want to play as a nug and be neutral in the game. Just kick back and watch good vs evil have their thing.

A Nug DLC

or a Nug King: Quest for Ascension mobile game app

[Terodil]

Just popping in here to say YES, ME TOO.

 

TBH I think Bioware can do it, if they want. They've shown their ability in both Knights of the Old Republic and, to a lesser degree, in Star Wars - The Old Republic, for example, though to be frank, I'm not sure how well they would do nowadays with most of the 'old guard' gone.

 

In fact, I still think KoTOR was a masterpiece in regards to allowing very diverse hero/anti-hero paths. If you haven't played it yet, you should, and I don't want to spoil for that reason, but I think it's safe to say that you could either free the galaxy from the evil oppressor or oust the evil oppressor to crush the galaxy under your own boot (possibly together with your LI, which was lovely, especially since she was still untouched by the plague that is gendergated LIs today). You had a lovely ending cinematic with your darkside character (and possibly your LI) watching over a huge fleet of starships leaving to conquer known space, and an epic orchestral music track of course ^^ The whole game also offered lots of of options to take evil paths for the sidequests as well (the droid quest on Dantooine is still one of the best sidequests ever in that regard: A woman was frantically looking for her caretaker droid who she thought stolen by raiders. You later happen upon the droid getting itself mangled by the wildlife --  a conscientious decision by the machine, because it had realised that it was actually harming the woman who had come to love the droid as a surrogate for the husband she had recently lost. You had a multitude of options to solve this dilemma: force the droid to go back, allow the droid to get 'killed', or even destroy the droid and then tell the woman that it was still out there, looking for her, which netted you lovely darkside points). Aaaah, such a lovely game. And really diverse in the way you could play it. Very satisfying.

 

SWTOR is also done pretty well, at least for some classes, with regard to a true choice between hero/anti-hero. I never liked how most of the republic-side content seemed aimed at maximising the number of rainbows puked per minute (though I realise there were some exceptions, e.g. for the trooper, who had a somewhat reasonable dark side option). The imperial agent was brilliantly done (canon would be dark side, probably, because, you know, empire etc., but the light side path worked really well story-wise too). Those were real choices, rather than being shoehorned into the hero role yet again. I'm so tired of it... =/