1118 réponses à ce sujet

[Feraele]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Feraele wrote...

I believe it was also mentioned "somewhere" about this being a trilogy.

BioWare has never called this a trilogy. Not once. They've called it a franchise.

Thought I saw Ray Musyka state something about it in an interview?   Unless he was talking about ME or something..its possible I got my wires crossed.

[Feraele]

Definition from Wikipedia:



A media franchise is an intellectual property involving the characters, setting and trademarks of an original work of media (usually a work of fiction), such as a film, a work of literature, a television program or a video game. Generally, a whole series is made in a particular medium, along with merchandising and endorsements. Multiple sequels are often planned well in advance, and (in the case of motion pictures) actors and directors often sign multi-film deals to ensure their participation.





They also state lower down on that page that a trilogy can also be part of that.

[Maria Caliban]

A trilogy can be part of a franchise, but they've never called Dragon Age a trilogy. Could there be a Dragon Age 3? Sure. As long as DA 2 sells well, that’s probably exactly what will happen.

But it wasn’t conceived as a trilogy.

[Fraevar]

Maria Caliban wrote...

A trilogy can be part of a franchise, but they've never called Dragon Age a trilogy. Could there be a Dragon Age 3? Sure. As long as DA 2 sells well, that’s probably exactly what will happen.

But it wasn’t conceived as a trilogy.

Well given how ME2 opens with a big fat RESET BUTTON, we should be thankful we won't see that in Awake...oh wait, that's exactly what happens if you don't import a character that's alive...

[MaxQuartiroli]

Delerius_Jedi wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

A trilogy can be part of a franchise, but they've never called Dragon Age a trilogy. Could there be a Dragon Age 3? Sure. As long as DA 2 sells well, that’s probably exactly what will happen.

But it wasn’t conceived as a trilogy.

Well given how ME2 opens with a big fat RESET BUTTON, we should be thankful we won't see that in Awake...oh wait, that's exactly what happens if you don't import a character that's alive...

I may hardly accept it in Awakening because it's an "expansion pack" (optional? maybe...)
I won't accept it into a sequel... Hope for a whole new story at that point...

[wwwwowwww]

Let me give you a budget for 3 people to eat burgers and fries, and see you stretch it to feed 100 people Filet Minion and the side of their choice and don't forget the truffles

[OldMan91]

No -- I am just making an educated guess. We know it wasn't a design decision because (1) David Gaider was initially unaware of it and (2) Nobody would ever make such a stupid design decision.

Until a few months ago, Gaider fondly believed that all player decisions were going to be importable. Then, all of a sudden -- oops, it's impossible to have the worldstate reflect anything other than what's in your main character's files, and the Orlesian warden has separate character files from your Origins character.

If what you say is true (and I don't doubt it is), then it does explain quite a bit and confirms what i've said. The big surprise to me is the poor internal communication that Bioware has apparently demonstrated.

The solution is obvious as soon as you realize the problem exists -- use an imported Origins character (or, in the absence of any import, a default version) and build the Orlesian's files on top of that. Not hard if you set it up that way from the start, but maybe very hard to go back and change once the game is pretty much finished.

So it seems plain to me that the problem arose from not enough clear thinking early on about how the design was to be implemented.

I believe you're right. I suppose, as it is now, having a default Orlesian Warden or an imported one is the only solution. It still bugs me though.

Let me give you a budget for 3 people to eat burgers and fries, and see
you stretch it to feed 100 people Filet Minion and the side of their
choice and don't forget the truffles

Except that the budget was prepared months prior to eating the burgers and fries. If you know that your budget will be far more limited, then you have to prepare to change certain things. Perhaps you could forget about feeding 100 people. Why not do something else instead? That's what I suggested. Instead of an expansion, start developing the sequel or you can also develop the expansion in the form of monthly DLC.

Modifié par OldMan91, 24 février 2010 - 12:26 .

[Jezcentral]

I must admit, I don't want monthly DLC. I want a huge game where choices can have far-reaching effects, and you can forge deep relationships. DLC just seems to be a hack'n'slach where you spend some time on combat, for the reward of a staff or sword. (I know it's not quite that bad, but I just don't thnk the best part of the game lends itself to bit-size chunks, which would constrain the narrative).

I am buying the DLC though.

Modifié par Jezcentral, 25 février 2010 - 04:04 .

[Ubertax]

Oops didn't mean to post sorry...

Modifié par Ubertax, 25 février 2010 - 04:09 .

[Ubertax]

grrr.. I apologize... again..

Modifié par Ubertax, 25 février 2010 - 04:12 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Any word yet on what the "default" version will be?

[Gabey5]

its an expansion what do you expect.. even if they did mention your dead wardens sacrifice did you expect more than one or two sentences? Alot wont be mentioned because of all the possible outcomes

[Shirle Illios]

Gabey5 wrote...

its an expansion what do you expect.. even if they did mention your dead wardens sacrifice did you expect more than one or two sentences? Alot wont be mentioned because of all the possible outcomes

It's not about what won't be mentioned, it's about what will be mentioned that conflicts with the decisions your dead Warden made.

If Alistair appears as King (i.e. it mentions the choice you made regarding who became ruler of Ferelden) then what if your dead Warden made the choice that led to Alistair running off to sulk in a tavern somewhere?

In fact, I'd prefer that not any of the choices you made comes up over that it does, but conflicts with the actual choice you made. If the expansion doesn't make mention of who became ruler of Ferelden then it can't conflict with the choice my Warden made on the matter either.

It's fine if BioWare implements reactivity to the choices you made, but then they should do so all the way because only doing it partly is worse than not doing it at all.


Love -x-x-x-

Shir'le

[Feraele]

I have a new question in my head now...being that this is a franchise and.....



Definition from Wikipedia:







A media franchise is an intellectual property involving the characters, setting and trademarks of an original work of media (usually a work of fiction), such as a film, a work of literature, a television program or a video game. Generally, a whole series is made in a particular medium, along with merchandising and endorsements. Multiple sequels are often planned well in advance, and (in the case of motion pictures) actors and directors often sign multi-film deals to ensure their participation.



Will the connotation "canon" ever come into play here? Guess I don't understand how that would work. It seems if it is a franchise ie: Lord of the Rings...it will just keep going, with differing stories attached or tagged on as time rolls by.



So where will "canon" fit in there?

[Feraele]

Gabey5 wrote...

its an expansion what do you expect.. even if they did mention your dead wardens sacrifice did you expect more than one or two sentences? Alot wont be mentioned because of all the possible outcomes

At least one or two sentences acknowledging the dead warden's (hero) sacrifice would make me quite happy I think...although most that are requesting this same acknowledgement ..would want the world state imported too...as some decisions like who is monarch, who is ruling with him/her, matter to their particular storylines.

If that doesn't happen ..that means the dead warden..is dead and forgotten, no reason to ever play that way again..ever.  

Even though...that kind of ending conflicts with what we are told about our duty as a Grey Warden, and that is to bring down the Archdemon and destroy its soul..forever.

[Noilly Prat]

I haven't followed this discussion from the beginning, and I'm wondering about one thing right now: have we ever figured out whether part of the stock story for the Orlesian Warden involves the sacrifice of the Warden from the first game?



I have no idea whether this is the case or not, but it does seem it would at least go some distance toward appeasing the US people if playing with the new Warden assumed the previous one died. Seems like a kind of obvious choice to me actually.



I realize there are other choices made in DA:O that people are concerned about as well, but it also seems to me that it may be entirely possible that the circumstances and plot of Awakening will be such that a lot of those choices won't matter all that much regardless. Mass Effect 2 kind of did that in some respects, KOTOR 2 kind of did it, and call it cheap if you like, but at least it doesn't lead to direct internal contradictions in the story.

[Feraele]

Noilly Prat wrote...

I haven't followed this discussion from the beginning, and I'm wondering about one thing right now: have we ever figured out whether part of the stock story for the Orlesian Warden involves the sacrifice of the Warden from the first game?

I have no idea whether this is the case or not, but it does seem it would at least go some distance toward appeasing the US people if playing with the new Warden assumed the previous one died. Seems like a kind of obvious choice to me actually.

I realize there are other choices made in DA:O that people are concerned about as well, but it also seems to me that it may be entirely possible that the circumstances and plot of Awakening will be such that a lot of those choices won't matter all that much regardless. Mass Effect 2 kind of did that in some respects, KOTOR 2 kind of did it, and call it cheap if you like, but at least it doesn't lead to direct internal contradictions in the story.

This was the only answer given, and I believe it wasn't given to us directly but to some interviewer..might have been IGN:

Fernando Melo wrote...

Can you import the world 'state', but start new in Awakening as the Orlesian Cmdr?  No.  The world 'state' only exists and lives on as part of your character's choices - most of the reactivity to events and choices in Origins would simply not make sense if it wasn't 'you' that did it.

At this point I suppose our concerns will not be addressed.  It doesn't seem to be important to Bioware.

[Noilly Prat]

Feraele wrote...


This was the only answer given, and I believe it wasn't given to us directly but to some interviewer..might have been IGN:

Fernando Melo wrote...

Can you import the world 'state', but start new in Awakening as the Orlesian Cmdr?  No.  The world 'state' only exists and lives on as part of your character's choices - most of the reactivity to events and choices in Origins would simply not make sense if it wasn't 'you' that did it.

At this point I suppose our concerns will not be addressed.  It doesn't seem to be important to Bioware.

Right, I've seen that quote.  Since it seems that it will not be possible to play the Orlesian Warden with a particular set of choices imported from DA:O, I'm guessing the Orlesian background comes with its own set of assumptions about what happened in the first game.  And I'm wondering if anybody knows any details about those assumptions yet.  I'm guessing probably not, but hopefully we'll hear something soon.

My thoughts are just that, if the first game's Warden's ultimate sacrifice were a set part of the story for the Orlesian Warden, that would at least partly address the complaints.  Not all of them, obviously, but at least people who chose that option wouldn't have to worry about Awakening completely ignoring their sacrifice, as some people seem to be assuming is the case.

[Reaverwind]

Noilly Prat wrote...

Feraele wrote...


This was the only answer given, and I believe it wasn't given to us directly but to some interviewer..might have been IGN:

Fernando Melo wrote...

Can you import the world 'state', but start new in Awakening as the Orlesian Cmdr?  No.  The world 'state' only exists and lives on as part of your character's choices - most of the reactivity to events and choices in Origins would simply not make sense if it wasn't 'you' that did it.

At this point I suppose our concerns will not be addressed.  It doesn't seem to be important to Bioware.

Right, I've seen that quote.  Since it seems that it will not be possible to play the Orlesian Warden with a particular set of choices imported from DA:O, I'm guessing the Orlesian background comes with its own set of assumptions about what happened in the first game.  And I'm wondering if anybody knows any details about those assumptions yet.  I'm guessing probably not, but hopefully we'll hear something soon.

My thoughts are just that, if the first game's Warden's ultimate sacrifice were a set part of the story for the Orlesian Warden, that would at least partly address the complaints.  Not all of them, obviously, but at least people who chose that option wouldn't have to worry about Awakening completely ignoring their sacrifice, as some people seem to be assuming is the case.

That isn't the problem. The problem is Awakenings is reported to reference decisions the Warden allegedly makes in Origins - and given what's being done with the US warden, that most likely means the Orlesian Warden will be generated with a default background, completely ignoring who the US warden put on the throne and so on, and worse, ignoring who the US warden actually was.

Edit: I've played an expansion for another game which also made references to what the hero of the original game did (also with a default background). Suffice to say, it was completely unsatisfactory. Bioware will have to do one helluva of a job to convince me open my wallet on this one.

Modifié par Reaverwind, 25 février 2010 - 08:18 .

[Rama_88]

"The problem is Awakenings is reported to reference decisions the Warden allegedly makes in Origins - and given what's being done with the US warden, that most likely means the Orlesian Warden will be generated with a default background, completely ignoring who the US warden put on the throne and so on, and worse, ignoring who the US warden actually was."



Exactly, and that would completly ruin the US ending wich is amazingly stupid, if thats how Awakening is going to be Bioware screwed big time, wasting IMO the best ending in the game. A very stupid move indeed.

[Noilly Prat]

Reaverwind wrote...


That isn't the problem. The problem is Awakenings is reported to reference decisions the Warden allegedly makes in Origins - and given what's being done with the US warden, that most likely means the Orlesian Warden will be generated with a default background, completely ignoring who the US warden put on the throne and so on, and worse, ignoring who the US warden actually was.

Yeah, as I said it would only partly address the problem-- and for the expansion to completely ignore the sacrifice altogether would certainly be a problem.

My point is just this: we do know that story choices will be reflected in Awakening, but not exactly how they will be reflected or to what extent (as far as I know, anyway).  Some previous games-- Mass Effect 2, to give a recent example-- have handled this problem by sort of whitewashing certain things, which greatly annoys some, but I tend to view it as a necessary evil in this type of game.  Of course continuity and self-consistency matter, and of course I would always like to see more, bigger, and better developed consequences in a sequel (or sequel-like expansion), but to the extent that this is not possible, I think that whitewashing certain details is probably the best solution.

Don't get me wrong.  I haven't made the sacrifice yet, so the issue doesn't really affect me, but I'm completely with the players who are concerned about this.  I just can't help but feel that some may be jumping the gun a bit, and, where we don't know the facts, simply assuming the worst.  When Awakening is out, if it turns out that the US ending has, in fact, been totally ignored, along with all of the story choices that preceded it that are important to the plot of Awakening, I will gladly add my voice to those complaints, even if it doesn't personally affect me.  But, if it turns out to just be another case of overzealous fans shouting "WTF the game barely mentioned who is King in Ferelden, BioWare cheated, I'm never buying another one of their games again!" ... sorry, but I will have to side with BioWare.  (And don't pretend there aren't people like that out there.  We've all seen them.)

In short: I really hope that Awakening doesn't let down the US players by ignoring the consequences of their decisions.  But, contrary to what some seem to be saying, as far as I know we don't know it will be letting down those players, at least not any worse than Mass Effect 2 or DA:O itself.

[Reaverwind]

Noilly Prat wrote...

Reaverwind wrote...


That isn't the problem. The problem is Awakenings is reported to reference decisions the Warden allegedly makes in Origins - and given what's being done with the US warden, that most likely means the Orlesian Warden will be generated with a default background, completely ignoring who the US warden put on the throne and so on, and worse, ignoring who the US warden actually was.

Yeah, as I said it would only partly address the problem-- and for the expansion to completely ignore the sacrifice altogether would certainly be a problem.

My point is just this: we do know that story choices will be reflected in Awakening, but not exactly how they will be reflected or to what extent (as far as I know, anyway).  Some previous games-- Mass Effect 2, to give a recent example-- have handled this problem by sort of whitewashing certain things, which greatly annoys some, but I tend to view it as a necessary evil in this type of game.  Of course continuity and self-consistency matter, and of course I would always like to see more, bigger, and better developed consequences in a sequel (or sequel-like expansion), but to the extent that this is not possible, I think that whitewashing certain details is probably the best solution.

ME2 makes for a poor comparison due to the simple fact it's a stand-alone game. It's not an expansion. One would anticipate that importing choices from the previous game would be exceedingly problematic, and that some sort of canon would have to be established. The better comparison would be what was done with NWN2 and its expansions. MotB mostly dodged the issue by moving into a different part of the world completely. Awakenings looks like it's going to partly pull a SoZ, and that's enough to put me off.

Modifié par Reaverwind, 25 février 2010 - 08:48 .

[Rama_88]

When Awakening was announced with some details and what not i thought it was obvious that they were going to make the US to be a damn cool ending to start Awakening; in my mind it didnt sound so hard to pull this off, but it seems i was terribly wrong, i understimated Biowares stupidity, it really amazes me how much they seem to have failed here.

[Noilly Prat]

Reaverwind wrote...


ME2 makes for a poor comparison due to the simple fact it's a stand-alone game. It's not an expansion. One would anticipate that importing choices from the previous game would be exceedingly problematic, and that some sort of canon would have to be established. The better comparison would be what was done with NWN2 and its expansions. MotB mostly dodged the issue by moving into a different part of the world completely. Awakenings looks like it's going to partly pull a SoZ, and that's enough to put me off.

Considering Awakening is the sort of expansion which functions as a sort of mini-sequel rather than adding new areas and content to the world and story of DA:O, I'm not sure it's such a bad example.  I would tend to think that many of the same technical issues would apply in this case, though I don't claim any sort of expertise on this.

Even still, there are comparable examples in how BioWare handled continuity from Baldur's Gate to its sequel, or Neverwinter Nights to its expansions.  BG2 seemed to assume that players finished the first game with a given party setup, and didn't kill off certain people they may have in fact killed.  Some of Aribeth's dialogue in Hordes of the Underdark seem to make more or less sense depending on how you dealt with her in the OC.  Even DA:O itself, as a single, stand-alone game, glosses over a lot of issues in its main plot related to your choice of origin story.  (Going back to Orzammar as a dwarven noble on a second playthrough really confirms this-- practically nothing changes from the other origin possibilities.)

None of that prevented me from enjoying those games, and, while Awakening could, I suppose, prove to be a spectacular failure, I'm at least hoping that it won't override story continuity any worse than BioWare's previous games and expansions.

Modifié par Noilly Prat, 25 février 2010 - 09:10 .