24 réponses à ce sujet

[JadeDragon]

Does anyone miss how in Origins we actually got like a "Meanwhile with Loghain" segment after every main quest? I understand they wanted to keep some of the mystic of Cory but they could have accomplished giving us cutscenes of his Inner Circle while not exposing him before we got to Skyhold then when we did we could have gotten cutscenes of him outright. What made Cory the weakest villain(not in terms of power) to me in the series was the lack of follow up with him.

 

Even in Dragon Age 2 we could at least Interact and take quest from The Arishok Act 1 and 2 then Meredith in Act 3. Talk to them, get there viewpoint or backstory on what is currently going on and in the Arishok case even earn there respect then face them in a One on One duel. Something else I wish we could have had, The Warden could have dueled Loghain and Hawke the Arishok while the Inquisitor I feel should have at least had the option to duel Calpernia or Samson.

 

But really it was cool seeing Loghain address the nobles, plot with Howe, contract Zevran to kill the Warden. Since we could not interact with Loghain until after the duel if he survived these scenes was a nice little update on our villain to keep it fresh in our minds that even though are helping mages, dwarves and elves this guy is still our direct problem before we can get to the Archdemom.

 

We know the Shrine of Dumat was his base so before skyhold, we could have seen cutscenes of Cory plotting in the shadows with the Envy Demon and promising Alexius he can help him with his issue(curing his son). Then after we recruit either side we at least could have gotten a cutscene hint of Cory(still shadowed out) talking to Calpernia or Samson about the success of there plan and moving to the next phase which was attacking Haven. Cory was the only villain to have a real inner circle at least even though his circle was truly just him and himself because he lied to all those guys, but seeing how Erimond, Florianne, Maliphant, Samson, Lucius, Calpernia, Alexuis, Envy, even Imshael and Nightmare all interacted with him and each other would have really upped the value of his villainy and character as a whole.

[In Exile]

I thought it was a good way to keep the villain involved in the plot. That was a source of some criticism however because it effectively was knowledge the character could not have.

[Fiskrens]

I mostly agree with the critics, since those scenes took you out of character. But there was too little intervention with Cory in DAI, and that would probably have been the case with DAO as well, if not for those scenes (and the dreams). Hope they can balance that in DA4, perhaps easier if they choose the dual protagonist route?

[Andromelek]

Those cinematics of "meanwhile with Loghain" and the nightmares with the Archdemon were good to explore the villains on DAO, and same goes for DA2, they would been great to explore Corypheus, however, the villain of the next game will be Solas, I think we don't need those, as he was a mandatory companion on DAI, only in the case that Solas is not alone and has some evil lineutenant ala Arkham Knight on his side, then we would need those scenes to understand the lineutenant's beliefs.

Edit: Not only scenes can be handy, on the example villain I mentioned, the Arkham Knight, you can retrieve audio logs and monitoring his comms to have a better insight of his personality.

[AlanC9]

In general, I don't like knowing things that my PC doesn't know. This is a problem when showing the villain.

[vbibbi]

I would have liked more scenes with him, sure, but really the "meanwhile at Loghain Headquarters" sounds like a scene from the cheesy 1960's Batman show. I liked the information we got from those scenes but we should have been able to get them in another way that would be realistic to the PC. Have Zevran relating it as a flashback, for example. Have Erlinda relate what she overheard before Anora was locked up, etc.

 

Maybe they could have done more with those memory/sending crystals that we find in Calpernia's quest. Both the journal of Corypheus and the messages he would send his agents. Couldn't he have recorded a message and sent it to Florianne or Erimond that we can retrieve when we judge them?

[thats1evildude]

There were also "Meanwhile with the Mother/Architect" scenes in DA: Awakening.

 

I think they worked well to convey information, so long as they're used sparingly.

[Abyss108]

Nope. I don't want to see scenes my character has no knowledge of in a role playing game.

[JadeDragon]

I would have liked more scenes with him, sure, but really the "meanwhile at Loghain Headquarters" sounds like a scene from the cheesy 1960's Batman show. I liked the information we got from those scenes but we should have been able to get them in another way that would be realistic to the PC. Have Zevran relating it as a flashback, for example. Have Erlinda relate what she overheard before Anora was locked up, etc.

 

Maybe they could have done more with those memory/sending crystals that we find in Calpernia's quest. Both the journal of Corypheus and the messages he would send his agents. Couldn't he have recorded a message and sent it to Florianne or Erimond that we can retrieve when we judge them?

I think the memory crystals could have been the best way to display it in-game. I never minded seeing what Loghain was doing because for the most part it those scenes just gave a beforehand explanation. After we left the wilds we seen Loghain spread the rumors of the wardens then when we got to Lothering we seen the effects. Same with Zevran we seen Loghain recruit him to kill us so that set up a RP situation were our Warden could just fall in the trap or we can try to have our warden see thru it since we the player know its a trap. As long as the beforehand knowledge is not spoliery or something that could interfere with our roleplay but majority of it was simply just a update on Loghain the character still doesnt know what is going on. But definitely the memory crystals could have been the best way to combine the two.

[Abyss108]

How is telling you you are walking into a trap when your character doesn't know, not the definition of a spoiler?

[nightscrawl]

I thought it was a good way to keep the villain involved in the plot. That was a source of some criticism however because it effectively was knowledge the character could not have.

 

I completely agree with the criticism. To me, it brings in a passive media (film) storytelling device and injects it into an active one (the RPG) where I don't think it has a place.

 

There are ways they could have kept Corypheus in the forefront of the player's mind without resorting to the use of such devices. In fact, one of the benefits of taking the Champions of the Just path is that it adds more nuance to Corypheus as a villain. Aside from his absence throughout most of the game, another fault is the great excitement and build-up of What Pride Had Wrought, which has the unfortunate effect of making the final fight with Corypheus seem anti-climactic.

[thats1evildude]

How is telling you you are walking into a trap when your character doesn't know, not the definition of a spoiler?

 

Well, the cutscene where Zevran is hired only informs you that an assassin has been hired, not the nature of the trap he will set.

[Al Foley]

Didn't this only happen essentially once, maybe twice, and the second time was more of a way to introduce Zevran the friendly elf and just involved Loghain staring kinda blankly at the screen and twirling his mustache? 

[nightscrawl]

There were also "Meanwhile with the Mother/Architect" scenes in DA: Awakening.

 

I think they worked well to convey information, so long as they're used sparingly.

 

OK, I'll admit to liking these, if only for the fact that the Mother was so delightfully crazy and the VA totally hammed it up and seemed to relish the performance. XD

[vbibbi]

OK, I'll admit to liking these, if only for the fact that the Mother was so delightfully crazy and the VA totally hammed it up and seemed to relish the performance. XD

 

I did like the scenes, but really, I think the reveal of who the Mother actually was could have been more shocking if we only see her at the end. Keep referring to a mysterious enemy called the Mother, but we don't know if she's a darkspawn like the Architect, some mage controlling darkspawn, what. And then when we see that she is a hulrlock broodmother gone insane, it's more alarming than when we see her spouting cliche dialogue to other darkspawn.

 

 

To go really dark, she could have mentioned her former life, recalling Hespith's poem from the Deep Roads, and show how the Architect's plans, however altruistic he thinks he's being, are still monstrous to humanity.

[thats1evildude]

 

 

In case anyone needs a reminder. Based on some other Youtube videos, that's apparently the VA's (Dee Dee Rescher) normal speaking voice.

[Aren]

I thought it was a good way to keep the villain involved in the plot. That was a source of some criticism however because it effectively was knowledge the character could not have.

Loghain was an archdemon since you could see his schemes against you through your GW dreams.

[Beerfish]

I like the meanwhile scenes a lot.  I find it more important to flesh out things like the bad guys motive and his/her personality than to preserve my I shouldn't know this aspect.  Some of these scenes in BG2 with Jon Irenicus were important in his overall character development.

[Aren]

 

 

In case anyone needs a reminder. Based on some other Youtube videos, that's apparently the VA's (Dee Dee Rescher) normal speaking voice.

For the mother at least we could try to use the escamotage of the taint,we are all linked through the taint thus i can see you form your dreams and you can see me after all this is no ordinary broodmother.

[In Exile]

Loghain was an archdemon since you could see his schemes against you through your GW dreams.

It's funny you say that because an original plot of DAO was that Loghain was tainted and was being influenced by the AD, hence his anti-GW paranoia and betrayal of Cailan.

[thats1evildude]

For the mother at least we could try to use the escamotage of the taint,we are all linked through the taint thus i can see you form your dreams and you can see me after all this is no ordinary broodmother.

What the hell is ""escamotage"? I tried Google and all I came up with is the French word for juggle. :I

[nightscrawl]

It's apparently "ploy" in Italian.

An example from Wikipedia:

After World War I, the Italian government increased the taxation of variety shows, thus causing many authors to devise a mixed type of show that would complement songs with dramatic acting, in order to circumvent such duties. This escamotage is sometimes credited to Enzo Lucio Murolo...

The taint by itself isn't a ploy or scheme though; that would depend on how it's used in the narrative by the writer. Perhaps a more accurate phrasing would be to say, "The writers could have used the taint as an escamotage to show the player the activities of the enemy."

 

I don't buy it, though. The Archdemon I can accept because every tainted creature hears its call. The darkspawn in particular are mostly mindless, but that does not apply to people who become tainted, like the Grey Wardens.

[vbibbi]

It's apparently "ploy" in Italian.

An example from Wikipedia:

The taint by itself isn't a ploy or scheme though; that would depend on how it's used in the narrative by the writer. Perhaps a more accurate phrasing would be to say, "The writers could have used the taint as an escamotage to show the player the activities of the enemy."

 

I don't buy it, though. The Archdemon I can accept because every tainted creature hears its call. The darkspawn in particular are mostly mindless, but that does not apply to people who become tainted, like the Grey Wardens.

 

It could have been cool for the Architect to have tapped into the taint enough to learn how to communicate with other tainted individuals. He could send us dreams or visions similar to how the AD comes into our dreams in DAO.

[Gervaise]

I don't like the narrative cut scenes because essentially that makes it a story being told that you are simply part of looking in as a third party but seeing it from a certain character's perspective (your PC).  You are simply watching a film where you are allowed some degree of interaction.    To me role playing means that you become that character and are actually "living" the role, which is why choices are important and can alter how things turn out.   If I am role playing then I only want to know what my character knows.     One of my dislikes of BG2 was the fact that you saw things happening that clearly alerted you to what was going on, yet your character had to act as though they didn't know.    However, in DAO I have to admit there was little in the cut scenes that you didn't ultimately learn from the characters involved, except the one involving Zevran, where the moment you see the woman interacting with him, you know this is a set-up, so no element of surprise, and you know he was working for Loghain, so questioning him about it seems a bit pointless (although at least that means your PC now knows what you already knew).     Someone pointed out in a review of Trespasser that it would have been a lot more interesting a journey of discovery if we didn't already know Solas' identity from the cinematic at the end of the main game.     Really Trespasser was our PC catching up with information we already knew at least so far as revealing who Solas really is.

 

I seem to recall that PW or someone was saying how in the future they plan on having more of these cut scenes telling the story but I do hope not.    It really spoils the immersion in your character.   If my character can't discover more about their antagonist through their own experiences, then I don't want to either.    If they want you to understand your enemy better, or even sympathise with them, then use some device like the seeing crystal or the memory crystals from Corypheus' lair, so your character is party to the information.   Have them talk to someone who knows them, as we do with Anora about Loghain, or Cullen about Samson.

 

That was really one of the main drawbacks of their divergent plotlines in that one route showed you far more about Corypheus than the other did.   An easy way to have remedied that was to have the visit to his lair occurring no matter which path you took.   To be honest I would have rather they had settled on one character being the Vessel (Calpurnia made so much more sense than Samson) and seeing both sides of the story concerning his lieutenants, so the choice between mages or Templars only impacted on which rebel group we recruited to help us and which of their respective recruiters we ended up judging, plus a few war table missions.    The Venatori were still active even if we went with the Hushed Whispers route and the Red Templars were still active if we went with Champions of the Just, so why not involve both the lieutenants in the whole story?

 

Where cinematic cuts scenes advancing the story could be helpful would be if they want to show battle scenes between Tevinter and the Qun in which we are not involved.   As someone suggested above, this could be used as a flashback device when someone is recounting about their experiences to the PC.    Likewise, if the person has actually witnessed some action of Solas or his interaction with a group of people, then the cut scene could be a valid way of showing this instead of them simply recounting it verbally.    An alternative would be the PC interacting with an item or having a dream that allows them to see events that they otherwise couldn't.   The important thing is there is some way to link it back to the PC, so there is a legitimate reason we have seen it in character and this is then taken into account as part of the knowledge on which they base conversations and decisions.        

[nightscrawl]

Someone pointed out in a review of Trespasser that it would have been a lot more interesting a journey of discovery if we didn't already know Solas' identity from the cinematic at the end of the main game.     Really Trespasser was our PC catching up with information we already knew at least so far as revealing who Solas really is.

Oh... you know I completely forgot about the DAI post-credit stinger. You're right, I completely agree.

Let's just take someone like myself whose Inquisitor considered Solas a friend and was surprised when he suddenly disappeared at the end of the game. It's kind of weird, and you wonder about it, perhaps you have concern and think that Solas was more affected by the destruction of the orb than he initially let on. But that's it.

Then you, the player, see the post-credit stinger and go, "OMG! O_O!!" And then the speculation beings: What did he do to Flemeth/Mythal? Was he ever genuine? What are his plans? And on and on.

Then news of the Trespasser DLC comes out and suggestions that we will see Solas again and get questions answered. But these are not the same questions that our Inquisitor has because our Inquisitor did not see that cutscene.

It's all very meta and I don't like it.

Imagine how much of a surprise it would have been to see Solas suddenly there at the end?

My first exposure to this type of device was at the end of the second Matrix movie. I had read online that you needed to hang around until the credits were over, so I did, and it was a fun thing that hyped up excitement for the next film. The same applies to all of those Marvel movies, perhaps even more so because many of those contain cameos of characters from the other films.

But films are passive, and games, especially RPGs, are active. I can see this type of device being used in, say, a Zelda game, because you are playing a fixed character (Link) and you don't make actual choices; you simply use Link as a vehicle for experiencing the story, rather than your own character that drives the story.
 

I seem to recall that PW or someone was saying how in the future they plan on having more of these cut scenes telling the story but I do hope not.    It really spoils the immersion in your character.   If my character can't discover more about their antagonist through their own experiences, then I don't want to either.

This is the main reason why I don't feel that reading The Masked Empire is important for my Inquisitor to make a decision. I know other players feel differently, but I enjoyed the decision as it was.
 

That was really one of the main drawbacks of their divergent plotlines in that one route showed you far more about Corypheus than the other did.   An easy way to have remedied that was to have the visit to his lair occurring no matter which path you took.

Yepper, completely agree.
 

To be honest I would have rather they had settled on one character being the Vessel (Calpurnia made so much more sense than Samson) and seeing both sides of the story concerning his lieutenants, so the choice between mages or Templars only impacted on which rebel group we recruited to help us and which of their respective recruiters we ended up judging, plus a few war table missions.    The Venatori were still active even if we went with the Hushed Whispers route and the Red Templars were still active if we went with Champions of the Just, so why not involve both the lieutenants in the whole story?

I understand why they did it. Too often the writers and devs are criticized for not allowing our choices to be significant, to have a change that we can see and experience. It seems to me that the mage/templar choice was their way of showing us that they can do that for us. It may not be great world-changing difference, but enough to give a different flavor to each playthrough. You can tell how effective it was from the continual threads arguing over which is the best path.
 

Where cinematic cuts scenes advancing the story could be helpful would be if they want to show battle scenes between Tevinter and the Qun in which we are not involved.   As someone suggested above, this could be used as a flashback device when someone is recounting about their experiences to the PC.    Likewise, if the person has actually witnessed some action of Solas or his interaction with a group of people, then the cut scene could be a valid way of showing this instead of them simply recounting it verbally.    An alternative would be the PC interacting with an item or having a dream that allows them to see events that they otherwise couldn't.   The important thing is there is some way to link it back to the PC, so there is a legitimate reason we have seen it in character and this is then taken into account as part of the knowledge on which they base conversations and decisions.

I like all of these! Lol... it's so rare that we agree on everything.