16183 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

I hate the Morrigan = Flemeth theories. That would be a gotcha from Gaider that he said he didn't like doing.

But that white haired girl seems to be either Morrigan, the OGB, or Flemeth.

[adneate]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I hate the Morrigan = Flemeth theories. That would be a gotcha from Gaider that he said he didn't like doing.
But that white haired girl seems to be either Morrigan, the OGB, or Flemeth.

Or all of them.

[Sidney]

Master Shiori wrote...


Now, I know David would love nothing more then for us to accept Hawke as our own, much as we did the Warden.
However, as Adeante nicely pointed out several times, this simply won't be possible. Hawke may turn out to be an excellent character in his own right, but he's never going to be completely "ours". Much like Commander Shepard, he is already defined in many ways and as such is Bioware's creation that we just happen to borrow for 1 game. Warden, on the other hand, was completely defined by us, the players. You could create a dozen Couslands or Amell's and each of them would be unique.

Your Warden was already "defined" in many ways - that is what the origins stories did and the whole "you are now a Warden" bit. Really, Shep has an "origins" story and the effects of that play out during the game rather than at the start, you "join" an elite fighting group (Warden's vs Spectre). Blammo, heck they're the same guys. You create a class and pick skills for Shep. Bam. You make moral choices and pick dialog and have friends and love interests and well yeah that works. You know what, you can't even pick your Warden's last name so the Hawk thing isn't bad and the only limiter is that instead of picking from the "Wise, cocky, Experienced" options (and BTW can anyone tell those apart?) voices you get a voice. I know that throws people off their game to massive extent except well, your character has a voice in DAO and BG as well it is now a matter of the degree of voice that bothers you.

[Master Shiori]

Brockololly wrote...

MKDAWUSS wrote..

I've owned several games that were 4 discs... Besides, all the cool kids buy and download 'em online anyway

Maybe they're just going retro like  how BG2 was on a boatload of discs?


Found these on the DA2 forum where people are speculating Morrigan is Flemeth, since Flemeth is actually just a title of sorts thats passed down- idea being the Flemeth tells us names are just pretty things... (here is the thread ). Kind of funny pictures...

I like how people jump onto the "It's Flemeth possessing Morrigan's body" yet forget one important thing: Flemeth needs a body that's younger than her own.

If she possessed Morrigan she would have black hair and Morrigan's face.

If that white haired woman truly is Flemeth then the body is certainly not Morrigan's. Though it does make one wonder why she'd opt to look like an old crone again, unless she had to grab the first thing that was on hand.

[soignee]

This makes me sad if it is Flemeth. :-/ poor Morri.

[MoSa09]

This is funny, i am confident given some time, you could also let Leliana's or Wynne face appear in the artwork, and i would look just as fitting as this one. Or even Alistairs face for all it matters.

[adneate]

Sidney wrote...

Your Warden was already "defined" in many ways - that is what the origins stories did and the whole "you are now a Warden" bit. Really, Shep has an "origins" story and the effects of that play out during the game rather than at the start, you "join" an elite fighting group (Warden's vs Spectre). Blammo, heck they're the same guys. You create a class and pick skills for Shep. Bam. You make moral choices and pick dialog and have friends and love interests and well yeah that works. You know what, you can't even pick your Warden's last name so the Hawk thing isn't bad and the only limiter is that instead of picking from the "Wise, cocky, Experienced" options (and BTW can anyone tell those apart?) voices you get a voice. I know that throws people off their game to massive extent except well, your character has a voice in DAO and BG as well it is now a matter of the degree of voice that bothers you.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Shepard is way more predefined than The Warden, Shepard often says things that I had absolutely no intention of ever saying. The Warden never makes such gaffs. I can make my Warden rude to elves because he doesn't like them but polite to everyone else, no where can I make Shepard show a marked dislike for Turians. The rest of your point makes even less sense, since by your analogy every RPG player character is the same because they make moral choices and build relationships so Cloud=Shepard. Also the "Voice" of The Warden can easily be turned off with no side effect to the character and the gameplay, can the same be said of Hawke?

[Brockololly]

Master Shiori wrote...

I like how people jump onto the "It's Flemeth possessing Morrigan's body" yet forget one important thing: Flemeth needs a body that's younger than her own.

If she possessed Morrigan she would have black hair and Morrigan's face.

If that white haired woman truly is Flemeth then the body is certainly not Morrigan's. Though it does make one wonder why she'd opt to look like an old crone again, unless she had to grab the first thing that was on hand.

The interesting thing to wonder is that Morrigan does mention that perhaps Flemeth can change her human form to look more attractive. Morrigan mentions how she does remeember Flemeth looking beautiful with dark hair at one point when she was younger. What that may mean, I don't know. Just a point to ponder I suppose. We're dealing with magic when we talk about Flemeth and we don't really know what the rules are with Flemeth or Morrigan's magic...who knows what the DR might actually lead to?

[MKDAWUSS]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I hate the Morrigan = Flemeth theories. That would be a gotcha from Gaider that he said he didn't like doing.
But that white haired girl seems to be either Morrigan, the OGB, or Flemeth.

How much time would have to have passed for it to be the OGB? That individual isn't exactly a spring chicken. Also, I'd be curious to know how Urthemiel is to be referred, considering Urthemiel (FWIK) has been labeled as a "he." Or has Urthemiel then become the "Old Goddess of Beauty?"

[Master Shiori]

Sidney wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...


Now, I know David would love nothing more then for us to accept Hawke as our own, much as we did the Warden.
However, as Adeante nicely pointed out several times, this simply won't be possible. Hawke may turn out to be an excellent character in his own right, but he's never going to be completely "ours". Much like Commander Shepard, he is already defined in many ways and as such is Bioware's creation that we just happen to borrow for 1 game. Warden, on the other hand, was completely defined by us, the players. You could create a dozen Couslands or Amell's and each of them would be unique.

Your Warden was already "defined" in many ways - that is what the origins stories did and the whole "you are now a Warden" bit. Really, Shep has an "origins" story and the effects of that play out during the game rather than at the start, you "join" an elite fighting group (Warden's vs Spectre). Blammo, heck they're the same guys. You create a class and pick skills for Shep. Bam. You make moral choices and pick dialog and have friends and love interests and well yeah that works. You know what, you can't even pick your Warden's last name so the Hawk thing isn't bad and the only limiter is that instead of picking from the "Wise, cocky, Experienced" options (and BTW can anyone tell those apart?) voices you get a voice. I know that throws people off their game to massive extent except well, your character has a voice in DAO and BG as well it is now a matter of the degree of voice that bothers you.

Shepard's background was acknowledged but didn't really define the character. In DA:O your background affects how you see the world and how the world reacts to you in turn. There's a big difference between doing Nature of the Beast as a Dalish Elf or a Human Noble. People react differently to you. Your role in the world is different. As a human noble you can potentialy become the ruler of your country, as a dwarf noble you can inherit the throne or start your own house.
Hawke by comparison is a refugee from Lothering who becomes a hero of Kirkwall. I can give him any personality I want or make him any class I want, but like Shepard he's background and the way the world will treat him are already set.

The voice is't a problem, since I hardly pay attention to when my Warden is making a comment anyway. The only difference is that instead of reading a line of text I'll actually hear my character say it.

[bl00dsh0t]

Well the OGB is very very unlikely to be featured in the game as an old hag. It has been confirmed that the game starts during origins and spans 10 years so at best the OGB would be 7-9 years old at the end of DA2. Sorta rules it out unless it is aged by magic or some other cop out story move

[Master Shiori]

Brockololly wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...

I like how people jump onto the "It's Flemeth possessing Morrigan's body" yet forget one important thing: Flemeth needs a body that's younger than her own.

If she possessed Morrigan she would have black hair and Morrigan's face.

If that white haired woman truly is Flemeth then the body is certainly not Morrigan's. Though it does make one wonder why she'd opt to look like an old crone again, unless she had to grab the first thing that was on hand.

The interesting thing to wonder is that Morrigan does mention that perhaps Flemeth can change her human form to look more attractive. Morrigan mentions how she does remeember Flemeth looking beautiful with dark hair at one point when she was younger. What that may mean, I don't know. Just a point to ponder I suppose. We're dealing with magic when we talk about Flemeth and we don't really know what the rules are with Flemeth or Morrigan's magic...who knows what the DR might actually lead to?

The way I understood Morrigan, she was reffering to the fact that Flemeth might make herself look younger but that wouldn't affect her actual age.

So a young looking Flemeth would still need to switch bodies to avoid dying of old age.

Modifié par Master Shiori, 11 juillet 2010 - 04:42 .

[Sidney]

Master Shiori wrote...

Shepard's background was acknowledged but didn't really define the character. In DA:O your background affects how you see the world and how the world reacts to you in turn. There's a big difference between doing Nature of the Beast as a Dalish Elf or a Human Noble. People react differently to you. Your role in the world is different. As a human noble you can potentialy become the ruler of your country, as a dwarf noble you can inherit the throne or start your own house.
Hawke by comparison is a refugee from Lothering who becomes a hero of Kirkwall. I can give him any personality I want or make him any class I want, but like Shepard he's background and the way the world will treat him are already set.

...but in each case you are arguing that there are more individuals not that each individual is more unique. Your Dalish background means you get a Dalish experience or your Cousland background means you get the Cousland just like at various points Shep gets a sole Survor reaction or a War Hero reaction.

There's nothing less "you" about any single character and while DAO allows you to have  2 backgrounds per race ME allows 3 per race - granted only one race but again per character the unqiueness is better. Hawk might be a "refugee from Lothering" but at this point you don't know what sort of refugee he is so you could still create a different origins story.

[Sidney]

Master Shiori wrote...
The way I understood Morrigan, she was reffering to the fact that Flemeth might make herself look younger but that wouldn't affect her actual age.

So a young looking Flemeth would still need to switch bodies to avoid dying of old age.

The basic gist I got is that: Flemteth can possess a body but that body is just a biologcal vessel so it does all the things a normal body does like age and die.

She has to get a new vessel and per Morrigan's comments she can likely pick ANY body she wants but it is easier to make the jump and "better" for the possesor if the body fits the parameters that Flemeth wants as a mage. Now that assumed Morri isn't lying to you but I trust her.

[adneate]

Sidney wrote...

...but in each case you are arguing that there are more individuals not that each individual is more unique. Your Dalish background means you get a Dalish experience or your Cousland background means you get the Cousland just like at various points Shep gets a sole Survor reaction or a War Hero reaction.

There's nothing less "you" about any single character and while DAO allows you to have  2 backgrounds per race ME allows 3 per race - granted only one race but again per character the unqiueness is better. Hawk might be a "refugee from Lothering" but at this point you don't know what sort of refugee he is so you could still create a different origins story.

You didn't refute my point but I'll refute yours once again. Hawke is less mine in about every single way, since he/she has a predefined voice they are always going to sound and inflect on things exactly the same. Additionally you arguing that Shepard's backgrounds are better than Dragon Age's Origins is beyond me it makes no sense at all. Shepard's background largely has nothing to do with the main quest, it triggers a few sidequests and a couple extra pieces of dialogue. Compare that to taking the Mage Origin, the entire world changes it's opinion of you all your intimidation dialogue is different the majority of your interaction with companions is different and what you can do is limited by the fact that you are a Mage. In ME2 a sole survior Shepard can't even bring up Akuze to The Illusive Man, the backgrounds which meant little before mean nothing in the sequel. So compared to a character with only the most basics defined by the developer to a character with nearly everything predefined I would say the in fact yes there is a lot less me in a fully voiced character.

[Master Shiori]

Sidney wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...

Shepard's background was acknowledged but didn't really define the character. In DA:O your background affects how you see the world and how the world reacts to you in turn. There's a big difference between doing Nature of the Beast as a Dalish Elf or a Human Noble. People react differently to you. Your role in the world is different. As a human noble you can potentialy become the ruler of your country, as a dwarf noble you can inherit the throne or start your own house.
Hawke by comparison is a refugee from Lothering who becomes a hero of Kirkwall. I can give him any personality I want or make him any class I want, but like Shepard he's background and the way the world will treat him are already set.

...but in each case you are arguing that there are more individuals not that each individual is more unique. Your Dalish background means you get a Dalish experience or your Cousland background means you get the Cousland just like at various points Shep gets a sole Survor reaction or a War Hero reaction.

There's nothing less "you" about any single character and while DAO allows you to have  2 backgrounds per race ME allows 3 per race - granted only one race but again per character the unqiueness is better. Hawk might be a "refugee from Lothering" but at this point you don't know what sort of refugee he is so you could still create a different origins story.

ME backgrounds are something you can practicaly pick and dismiss afterwards. The most you get out of them is one specific mission per background in ME1 and a few lines of dialogue with Jacob and Miranda in ME2.
Everyone you meet will see you as Commander Shepard, first human Spectre or Hero of the Citadel. Nobody will bother commenting on your background.

In DA:O people will often see you as a city elf, dwarf commoner or mage first and respond apropriately. You are a Warden but at times it's less important than where you're from.

I can make Hawke "mine" to an extent, but I  will not be able to define him as much  as I could my DA:O Warden.
Is this a bad thing? Not really. Sometimes it's better for the story to have a more strongly defined character. That doesn't mean it won't impact your choice and thus you won't be able to indentify with him as strongly as you could with someone you create from scratch.

There is no right or wrong in this. It's all a matter of what you, as a player, preffer.

EDIT:

Adeante bet me to it.

He/she really makes this point come better then I can.

Modifié par Master Shiori, 11 juillet 2010 - 05:14 .

[Master Shiori]

Sidney wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...
The way I understood Morrigan, she was reffering to the fact that Flemeth might make herself look younger but that wouldn't affect her actual age.

So a young looking Flemeth would still need to switch bodies to avoid dying of old age.

The basic gist I got is that: Flemteth can possess a body but that body is just a biologcal vessel so it does all the things a normal body does like age and die.

She has to get a new vessel and per Morrigan's comments she can likely pick ANY body she wants but it is easier to make the jump and "better" for the possesor if the body fits the parameters that Flemeth wants as a mage. Now that assumed Morri isn't lying to you but I trust her.

That's what I meant, but you said it better.

[Barbarossa2010]

adneate wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Your Warden was already "defined" in many ways - that is what the origins stories did and the whole "you are now a Warden" bit. Really, Shep has an "origins" story and the effects of that play out during the game rather than at the start, you "join" an elite fighting group (Warden's vs Spectre). Blammo, heck they're the same guys. You create a class and pick skills for Shep. Bam. You make moral choices and pick dialog and have friends and love interests and well yeah that works. You know what, you can't even pick your Warden's last name so the Hawk thing isn't bad and the only limiter is that instead of picking from the "Wise, cocky, Experienced" options (and BTW can anyone tell those apart?) voices you get a voice. I know that throws people off their game to massive extent except well, your character has a voice in DAO and BG as well it is now a matter of the degree of voice that bothers you.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Shepard is way more predefined than The Warden, Shepard often says things that I had absolutely no intention of ever saying. The Warden never makes such gaffs. I can make my Warden rude to elves because he doesn't like them but polite to everyone else, no where can I make Shepard show a marked dislike for Turians. The rest of your point makes even less sense, since by your analogy every RPG player character is the same because they make moral choices and build relationships so Cloud=Shepard. Also the "Voice" of The Warden can easily be turned off with no side effect to the character and the gameplay, can the same be said of Hawke?

Agreed. My disappointment with DA2 stems from the fact that what made it a great and noteworthy gaming experience was that it was truly unique and in no need of any substantial improvement, and certainly no fixing, regarding the player's interface with the story.  We determned what race, gender, physical structure, attributes and personality he/she would have.  We determined the dialogue options and breathed life into a character of (virtually) our own making.  We WERE the central character of the story.  You literally BECAME the central protagonist of a great and epic story (for the most part).  That they are now jettisoning that for a lesser idea is unacceptable to me.  Bioware is trading in excellence for mediocrity. 

Gaider and company want to pretend that this is not the case, and that it is Thedas and the DA universe that matters most.  Nope, sorry.  I really wouldn't want to have to defend this new course if I were Gaider.  I personally don't think this is the way he would personally go, but unfortunately a Board of corporate boobs and bean counters has taken over and he does need to stay employed, so he is making the best of a bad situation.  Truly, only the most gushing and sycophantic of fans (or those fair weather fans who really only want "totally awesome action, duuuude") would defend this move. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Bioware devs said ME is a third person narative, while DA is a first person one. On that basis alone, it shows that we have more control over the character in DA, then we do Shepard. There is really no need to discuss it.

[Brockololly]

Barbarossa2010 wrote...
Truly, only the most gushing and sycophantic of fans (or those fair weather fans who really only want "totally awesome action, duuuude") would defend this move. 

The DA2 forum is rather disgusting now IMO- I'll admit to trying to track the devs in the threads they post in to elicit a response if I've got a question, but there are a healthy number of people over there that just completely brown nose every single developer post. EVERY single one, its creepy, really. And then you've got the people claiming anyone who is complaining is a moron "because you;re just fearing change! Change is good!" Maybe, but its absolutely myopic and flat out stupid to be ardently defending changes to a game you haven't even played yet. As a consumer you should be skeptical- if I enjoyed Origin just fine and then BioWare says we're changing up aspects that I really enjoyed, its BioWare's onus to make me want to buy the game and prove to me that the changes they made are for the better.

Changes have definitely been made, I 'm just curious now how much has actually changed at its core and how much is just marketing bluster.

Modifié par Brockololly, 11 juillet 2010 - 05:46 .

[Ash Wind]

Brockololly wrote...

Barbarossa2010 wrote...
Truly, only the most gushing and sycophantic of fans (or those fair weather fans who really only want "totally awesome action, duuuude") would defend this move. 

The DA2 forum is rather disgusting now IMO- I'll admit to trying to track the devs in the threads they post in to elicit a response if I've got a question, but there are a healthy number of people over there that just completely brown nose every single developer post. EVERY single one, its creepy, really. And then you've got the people claiming anyone who is complaining is a moron "because you;re just fearing change! Change is good!" Maybe, but its absolutely myopic and flat out stupid to be ardently defending changes to a game you haven't even played yet. As a consumer you should be skeptical- if I enjoyed Origin just fine and then BioWare says we're changing up aspects that I really enjoyed, its BioWare's onus to make me want to buy the game and prove to me that the changes they made are for the better.

Changes have definitely been made, I 'm just curious now how much has actually changed at its core and how much is just marketing bluster.

Too many of the Threads in the DA:2 forum are unreadable right now, for just that reason.
 
And I love the apparent mindset that you Cannot Fairly be Disapointed by this game, because you know so little about it... yet hypocritically, its okay to bust out the phony acclaim that its awesome based on that same limited information

[adneate]

Brockololly wrote...

The DA2 forum is rather disgusting now IMO- I'll admit to trying to track the devs in the threads they post in to elicit a response if I've got a question, but there are a healthy number of people over there that just completely brown nose every single developer post. EVERY single one, its creepy, really. And then you've got the people claiming anyone who is complaining is a moron "because you;re just fearing change! Change is good!" Maybe, but its absolutely myopic and flat out stupid to be ardently defending changes to a game you haven't even played yet.

Changes have definitely been made, I 'm just curious now how much has actually changed at its core and how much is just marketing bluster.

I never understood the loyalty so many people give to companies who's only real concern is getting your money, I don't understand why people don't think the burden in on BioWare and EA to sell me this game. Maybe it comes from being a PC gamer since I was a little kid on a 486 playing DOS games, I just don't get the "console war" It all seems so stupid. So many of these kids swear loyalty to faceless corporations for no good reason they think part of being a fan of something is being an ideological police force utterly devoted beyond all question. I don't owe a bunch of people I don't know the benefit of the doubt, I can form an opinion on what I've seen so far and that opinion is that I'm not impressed with this game.

[Herr Uhl]

I find both to be annoying. The ones that say that it WILL be crap and that the entire series is ruined.



And then the ones that say that it absolutely WILL be awesome. They give me a stalker vibe.



Though I think much is marketing. *remembers the Violence trailer for Origins*

[Brockololly]

On the subject of a Silent PC like Origins versus a ME style third person narrative this article is ab-so-freaking-lutely AMAZING. It gets to the core of everyone's complaints. I remember reading it a while back, its written by an audio designer at Media Molecule, the devs that work on Little Big Planet. Its a must read.

Here is the link: http://soundspam.blo...ge-origins.html

I'll just copy/paste the big bullet points:

I found Mass Effect to be a bit of a chore – all RPGs are intrinsically a bit grindy for sure, but Mass Effect didn’t give me a story or universe I wanted to see more of and the user interface didn't make life any easier during combat. As soon as I started playing Dragon Age another thing became dazzlingly clear – the dialogue tree system in Mass Effect (which they've retained for Mass Effect 2 and SW:ToR) is not to my tastes. The way it works is it presents you with a list of general directions/responses your character can take and, once you have made  your selection, you listen to what your character has to say. I have a  few problems with this:

• Frequently, my character will say something which I categorically had no intention whatsoever for them to say, in a way which just doesn’t suit the character I’m trying to be. I’ve been forced to choose from a small selection of directions which are compromised abstractions, the result being frustration with my character and the game.

• I’ve got to listen to the mouthy bugger, and if I skip this I have no idea what he’s just said because of the limitations of the aforementioned abstractions which are representative only of my character’s initial response and not the entirety of the rambling speech he then goes on to make.

• I am my character (right?), so why do they do things and say things which I have little control over, and know a whole bunch of stuff which I don’t? I mean, I’m meant to be them, but I’m having it rammed down my throat that I’m quite clearly not them. They are themselves more than I am them. If that’s what I was looking for I’d watch a film, a really good film that has a century-long legacy of perfecting this kind of storytelling.

• In summary - why give me a choice, the illusion of control, only to immediately remind me who's really in charge? I don't get this kind of frustration, certainly not to the same degree, playing a game with purely linear cutscenes.

Dragon Age, however, uses a different system whereby you are presented with several verbatim options for what your character could say and, then, as soon as you click on one of these phrases it is as if your character has already said it and you immediately hear and see the other party’s response. This works beautifully for several reasons:

• Having read all the options, considered whether it fits with the character you have established and any potential outcomes, there is no need for you to hear your character speak this information out loud again (a trap fallen in to by earlier games, such as Ion Storm’s Deus Ex) because you’ve already just “heard” it in your head when reading it. And so, the act of clicking replaces the act of speaking.

• To highlight how awesome this is, compare it to what happens when you select an action for your character to perform rather  than a phrase to speak – you generally have to watch your character  perform the action. Why? Because if you didn’t see your character  perform the action and yet you instantly saw the results of said action, this discontinuity would require a mechanism which explains the passage of time. But we know our character has said something aloud when the other characters present respond appropriately to our chosen selection,  so there is therefore no need to hear it – it has clearly already been said. It’s as if the time spent reading your options replaces the time spent talking and communicating your thoughts to the other parties.

• If your character were to speak out loud, ignoring the redundancy of hearing it all again, who’s voice is this we are hearing? It certainly isn’t mine or my character’s – it’s some poor bugger who’s been in a recording studio for weeks, where everyone in the recording session has zoned out because it’s the end of another long day of the  same monotonous pap, and the director has long since given up trying to get every line perfect. There isn’t even the time for that, never mind  the will. And it’s not that the character is mute – this is not the same as Gordon Freeman, the silent protagonist of the Half-Life  series, where the player is never given the option to “speak” – it’s  that this interface paradigm bypasses the need to hear the character  speak. But similar to Gordon Freeman, by not hearing a prescribed character voice which takes them out of the experience the player is empowered to fully inhabit their character.

• The experience becomes less about communicating information via voice, and more about communicating via the written word. This opens the door to a whole new world of immersive experiences that voice  and dialogue can never get even remotely close to. You can certainly get quite close using sound and the moving image, with judicious use of  voice, but you will never have the time or a big enough team to realise this in a game the size and scope of Dragon Age.

• Less time and money needs to be spent on voice records and localisation. And the experience is better! Low hanging fruit or what?

[*]
[*]
So, in playing, or trying to play, Mass Effect and then coming to Dragon Age, the differences in these two systemswas made so abundantly clear that Dragon Age felt like it had invented a brand new, revolutionary interface paradigm. In reality, this is the same old tried and tested dialogue tree system of Neverwinter Nights and Knights of the Old Republic.

This man speaks the truth!

Modifié par Brockololly, 11 juillet 2010 - 06:03 .

[adneate]

Quick send it to everyone on BioWare's staff before it's too late.