inherit
1020
0
Nov 26, 2017 12:37:49 GMT
21,685
fylimar
5,415
Aug 16, 2016 18:31:34 GMT
August 2016
fylimar
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by fylimar on Oct 9, 2018 18:28:33 GMT
I could be wrong though, I normally don't play evil characters, selfish sometimes, but not downright evil ones. Neither do I and it seems to me from what I have seen on You Tube that it was more a case of Inquisitors who did things that certain people objected to strongly but were not necessarily immoral. To take a case in point is what you do in the Temple of Mythal. Now clearly if you are playing safe, you are going to waste time dancing around on the pretty tiles rather than go straight after Cory's lieutenant, particularly if you are a Dalish Inquisitor, but the fact is that while you are doing this Cory's squad could be getting to what they seek before you and outside your troops are still dying fighting not only Venatori and Red Templars but the Sentinels as well. So instead of dancing on the tiles, many choose to jump down into the basement after the lieutenant. This means it is impossible to come to terms with Abelas. Even if you do dance on the pretty tiles you can still turn down Abelas' offer, fight the sentinels and kill him. Two people who seem to strongly object to this are Solas (unsurprisingly) and Dorian. If your previous actions have resulted in negative approval by these two, then it is possible to punch them for what they say to the Inquisitor at this point. Yet none of those previous actions could downright be described as evil, more ruthless but is that sufficient reason to abandon the fight against Corypheus? Mind you, is punching someone really justified simply because they speak their mind? Of course, despite being punched, Solas doesn't because he is working to his own agenda but Dorian does. I don't think there was anything the Inquisitor could do as evil as the Warden trading the soul of a young boy for the knowledge of blood magic, or letting a slaver walk away with his elven captives for similar power. This to me was far worse than corrupting the ashes, yet whilst you get disapproval from characters I don't believe anyone actually leaves you for it (although of course they wouldn't know about the deal with the demon since it takes place in the Fade but they do see you using blood magic). However, presumably the majority of the time they did seem to feel that working with the "Hitler" Warden was necessary to save the world. Hawkes companions though had no such excuse. I still feel that certain characters, in particular Sebastian, should have walked away if Hawke gives Fenris back to his master or becomes a blood mage. Saving Kirkwall from the Qunari does not seem sufficient justification for doing these things in the eyes of a Chantry faithful person. Thanks for clearing that up. I always thought too, that the inqui was not as much able to do evil deeds as The Warden or Hawke. And I agree, that companions should have left when Hawke gabe Fenris to Danarius - especially Aveline and Varrc, who are both good. Probably Sebastian too.
|
|
inherit
I refuse to believe that the cake is a lie
10461
0
Apr 29, 2024 14:01:18 GMT
10,995
ArcadiaGrey
4,894
September 2018
arcadiagrey
ArcadiaGrey
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by ArcadiaGrey on Oct 9, 2018 21:19:27 GMT
|
|
inherit
1587
0
May 14, 2024 21:30:37 GMT
1,674
Walter Black
1,257
Sept 15, 2016 15:02:16 GMT
September 2016
walterblack
|
Post by Walter Black on Oct 9, 2018 21:25:58 GMT
Oh really? What if the "mandatory and protected" Gay Knight in Shining Armor opposes your decisions ? Or are your PCs automatically perfect, so anyone who disagrees with them are evil by default ? That's rather presumptuous of you. You took a remark about templars and turned it around to romance when (1) you have no idea of Panda's preferences for romance, and (2) the discussion had nothing whatsoever to do with romance, sexuality, tropes, or the gay KISA (that some gay players want). I admitted I was wrong about Panda's preferences, but I wasn't referring to romance in this case specifically. Pessimistpanda has gone on record demanding gay characters be made mandatory, plot critical and protected; i.e., cannot be ignored, kicked out or killed for any reason, to make up for previous straight characters who were forced on players. Didn't you talk about how in your most recent Origins run that you did not care for Alistair? Wouldn't you have liked the option to kick him early, despite the game insisting how important he is? I was merely curious what he would do if Bioware did introduce mandatory gay characters who could not be avoided, and said character(s) hated and opposed his actions.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Oct 9, 2018 22:17:45 GMT
That's rather presumptuous of you. You took a remark about templars and turned it around to romance when (1) you have no idea of Panda's preferences for romance, and (2) the discussion had nothing whatsoever to do with romance, sexuality, tropes, or the gay KISA (that some gay players want). I admitted I was wrong about Panda's preferences, but I wasn't referring to romance in this case specifically. Pessimistpanda has gone on record demanding gay characters be made mandatory, plot critical and protected; i.e., cannot be ignored, kicked out or killed for any reason, to make up for previous straight characters who were forced on players. Didn't you talk about how in your most recent Origins run that you did not care for Alistair? Wouldn't you have liked the option to kick him early, despite the game insisting how important he is? I was merely curious what he would do if Bioware did introduce mandatory gay characters who could not be avoided, and said character(s) hated and opposed his actions.
I don't recall ever making any such "demands", and I don't think I ever implied that fulfilling those demands would "make up" for anything (it wouldn't). But I'm going to take it for granted that you keep meticulous notes on the things I do and say. I'm not actually that invested in having the ability to eject/kill every single companion. Player freedom and narrative cohesion are inherently opposing forces, and there will always be limitations placed on what I can and cannot do, in order for the story to make sense. I understand and accept that, and I always have, ever since I first picked up a video game. The fact that BioWare's "creative decisions" about who Who I Must Keep vs Who I Can Dispose Of are incredibly biased and homophobic, is really a separate issue.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 9, 2018 23:52:23 GMT
The fact that BioWare's "creative decisions" about who Who I Must Keep vs Who I Can Dispose Of are incredibly biased and homophobic, is really a separate issue. Since you brought it up... Are you suggesting that the fact that you can "dispose of" Zevran, Leliana (let's not forget that she lives regardless), Bull, and have the ability to kick out Sera is homophobic because those characters happen to have that sexuality? That's close to getting in the "sexuality-based plot armor" category. You can also leave Sten in his cage to rot, kill Wynne, kill Shale, have the option to stab Morrigan, and can dispose of Blackwall as well. I'm not sure how to count DA2 because of all the bi followers (and the stated reasons for making them bi), but you have the option of disposing of your sibling as well as Avaline (if conditions are met). The argument is only valid if these characters are disproportionally mistreated compared to the straight characters. I don't think they are. Do there need to be more plot relevant LGBT characters? Yes. But that's not what you said. I'll also venture to say that you are impugning the motives of anyone who takes those options with those characters and accusing them of homophobia as well.
(And if this has anything to do with Mass Effect, I'm not interested. They are separate teams, with separate leadership and values, and have demonstrated that from the very beginning of each franchise.)
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Oct 10, 2018 0:01:52 GMT
The fact that BioWare's "creative decisions" about who Who I Must Keep vs Who I Can Dispose Of are incredibly biased and homophobic, is really a separate issue. Since you brought it up... Are you suggesting that the fact that you can "dispose of" Zevran, Leliana, Bull, and have the ability to kick out Sera is homophobic because those characters happen to have that sexuality? That's close to getting in the "sexuality-based plot armor" category. You can also leave Sten in his cage to rot, kill Wynne, kill Shale, have the option to stab Morrigan, and can dispose of Blackwall as well. I'm not sure how to count DA2 because of all the bi followers (and the stated reasons for making them bi), but you have the option of disposing of your your sibling as well as Avaline (if conditions are met). The argument is only valid if these characters are disproportionally mistreated compared to the straight characters. I don't think they are. Do there need to be more plot relevant LGBT characters? Yes. But that's not what you said. I think those characters are disproportionately mistreated compared to the straight characters, in a meta-narrative sense, by the writers. Yes, I can dispose of some straight characters in DA:O and DA:I (by dispose of, I mean remove from the story, by whatever means, not necessarily violence), but in both games there is also a bare minimum of straight characters that I must keep, and the same does not apply to LGBT characters, despite the number of straight (or at best, undisclosed) characters already hugely outnumbering the openly LGBT population of the games. And yes, I do think that's homophobic. Not intentionally so, perhaps, but intention isn't actually relevant.
|
|
inherit
1439
0
May 14, 2024 21:42:51 GMT
12,457
witchcocktor
4,036
Sept 6, 2016 10:00:37 GMT
September 2016
witchcocktor
Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by witchcocktor on Oct 10, 2018 21:17:55 GMT
The fact that BioWare's "creative decisions" about who Who I Must Keep vs Who I Can Dispose Of are incredibly biased and homophobic, is really a separate issue. Since you brought it up... Are you suggesting that the fact that you can "dispose of" Zevran, Leliana (let's not forget that she lives regardless), Bull, and have the ability to kick out Sera is homophobic because those characters happen to have that sexuality? That's close to getting in the "sexuality-based plot armor" category. You can also leave Sten in his cage to rot, kill Wynne, kill Shale, have the option to stab Morrigan, and can dispose of Blackwall as well. I'm not sure how to count DA2 because of all the bi followers (and the stated reasons for making them bi), but you have the option of disposing of your sibling as well as Avaline (if conditions are met). The argument is only valid if these characters are disproportionally mistreated compared to the straight characters. I don't think they are. Do there need to be more plot relevant LGBT characters? Yes. But that's not what you said. I'll also venture to say that you are impugning the motives of anyone who takes those options with those characters and accusing them of homophobia as well.
(And if this has anything to do with Mass Effect, I'm not interested. They are separate teams, with separate leadership and values, and have demonstrated that from the very beginning of each franchise.)
It would be nice if LGBT characters were part of the main crew that you can't get rid of no matter what. Not that I want Bioware to purposefully piss off homophobes and people who get '' triggered '' over LGBT representation, but it does feel like Bioware realizes that some people might not want LGBT characters anywhere near them and make said characters optional, and available to be kicked out or killed cold turkey. I know, tinfoil hat, but it does seem pretty convenient. I think only Leliana (in DA:I) and Josephine are exempt from this, but that's pretty much it. Sorry for the OT ugh but I wanted to chime in lol.
|
|
inherit
1587
0
May 14, 2024 21:30:37 GMT
1,674
Walter Black
1,257
Sept 15, 2016 15:02:16 GMT
September 2016
walterblack
|
Post by Walter Black on Oct 11, 2018 21:25:34 GMT
Since you brought it up... Are you suggesting that the fact that you can "dispose of" Zevran, Leliana (let's not forget that she lives regardless), Bull, and have the ability to kick out Sera is homophobic because those characters happen to have that sexuality? That's close to getting in the "sexuality-based plot armor" category. You can also leave Sten in his cage to rot, kill Wynne, kill Shale, have the option to stab Morrigan, and can dispose of Blackwall as well. I'm not sure how to count DA2 because of all the bi followers (and the stated reasons for making them bi), but you have the option of disposing of your sibling as well as Avaline (if conditions are met). The argument is only valid if these characters are disproportionally mistreated compared to the straight characters. I don't think they are. Do there need to be more plot relevant LGBT characters? Yes. But that's not what you said. I'll also venture to say that you are impugning the motives of anyone who takes those options with those characters and accusing them of homophobia as well.
(And if this has anything to do with Mass Effect, I'm not interested. They are separate teams, with separate leadership and values, and have demonstrated that from the very beginning of each franchise.)
It would be nice if LGBT characters were part of the main crew that you can't get rid of no matter what. Not that I want Bioware to purposefully piss off homophobes and people who get '' triggered '' over LGBT representation, but it does feel like Bioware realizes that some people might not want LGBT characters anywhere near them and make said characters optional, and available to be kicked out or killed cold turkey. I know, tinfoil hat, but it does seem pretty convenient. I think only Leliana (in DA:I) and Josephine are exempt from this, but that's pretty much it. Sorry for the OT ugh but I wanted to chime in lol. A few problems with this, starting with the unfair assumption that the main reason that most players who don't recruit/fire/kill LGBT Companions is bigotry. It couldn't possibly be that they think Leliana is a creepy religious nut, that Zevran is untrustworthy and simply biding his time, that Isabella is a borderline sociopath, that Merrill is too childish and deals with blood magic and demons, that Fenris whines too much and is a potential danger to Bethany or Mage Hawke, that Anders is an unstable fanatic and Abomination, that Dorian is an arrogant slavery apologist and possible Venatori sleeper, that Sera is a crude bigot and anarchist criminal, that for all his honesty Iron Bull is still a Qunari spy, or that Josephine's deluded naivety makes her a liability when the Inquisition might have no choice but to get it's hands dirty. No, only bigotry .
It also works in potential future Companions, as part of me hopes Maevaris Tilani might be a Companion. However, off the top of my head I can think several reasons to not recruit/fire/kill her that have nothing to do with gender or sexuality:
-The player is role playing a ruthlessly ambitious PC who sees no reasons for Tevinter to reform, and views the Lucerni as a threat to their power.
-The player is role playing a radical revolutionary who wants to burn all Magisters.
-The player is role playing a hero who supports slow, secret reform, and sees the Lucerni as dangerously naive.
- The player is role playing a character who is naive, overwhelmed, and maybe not all that bright, and simply forgot to recruit Mae.
- The player prefers a different character that Mae often clashes with.
-The player's class build makes Mae redundant.
-The player simply doesn't like "sassy" characters.
Hell, there's also players who send characters away for positive reasons:
-The player doesn't want all their best people in the same basket, in case a mission goes bad.
-The player has faith that the Companion can be great hero in their own right, but needs to step outside of their shadow to do it. Likewise, they don'y want their presence potentially overshadowing and/or co-opting whatever causes the Companion fights for.
-The Companion is heavily conflicted about whatever reasons led to them joining the hero, and PC can see that they could be happier and more fulfilled doing something else.
-The player loves the Companion, either as a partner or platonic, surrogate family member, and wants to keep them safe*.
Another thing is, when pointing out how it was bad that the previous mandatory characters were all straight? You're right, and we should have been able to kick THEM out too ! I played several characters where I would have LOVED to tell manbaby Alistair to hit the road, to make Aveline and Varric stop butting into my life, fire Solas' useless hobo ass, or remove Chantry lapdogs Cullen and Cassandra entirely. If this really is MY Hero's Journey, then I should be able determine who and what is important to me. Is it a bad idea to allow players to remove ALL Companions? Well, Bioware could research player created party members, like in Pillars of Eternity or their own older games. Or, I don't know... actually force us to deal with stupid decisions ?
Interestingly enough, Obsidian doesn't seem to have this problem, as their Companions are traditionally purely optional. Hell, most of their games can be completed more or less solo. Food for thought?
*It always nagged me how we couldn't choose to give more nuanced, positive reasons like these when sending away Kaidan/Ash in Mass Effect 3
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Oct 11, 2018 22:12:30 GMT
I don't know how I feel about characters who can leave the party, but as long as they're IN the party I would like the player to have absolute control over them, including having them act as party spokesperson (as we could in BG).
If, at some point, the party's behaviour becomes abhorrent to them, I suppose they could leave, but I think I'd rather leave that decision in the hands of the player, as well.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 11, 2018 22:28:43 GMT
Interestingly enough, Obsidian doesn't seem to have this problem, as their Companions are traditionally purely optional. Hell, most of their games can be completed more or less solo. Food for thought? It's a tradeoff, though. Having a more developed story and characters that you associate with involved with that story (Cassandra forming the Inquisition) likely means that there will always be some mandatory characters. While they could just have those story-relevant characters as non-follower NPCs, that then means they also have to create new characters that are followers. There are only so many resources to go around. Another aspect is the devs providing a way to ensure that we always have at least some followers available should we need them. You may not agree with that design philosophy, but it appears to be one they have.
Or they can just go the easier route and have more LGBT characters/followers be plot-relevant.
|
|
inherit
1439
0
May 14, 2024 21:42:51 GMT
12,457
witchcocktor
4,036
Sept 6, 2016 10:00:37 GMT
September 2016
witchcocktor
Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by witchcocktor on Oct 12, 2018 17:28:40 GMT
It would be nice if LGBT characters were part of the main crew that you can't get rid of no matter what. Not that I want Bioware to purposefully piss off homophobes and people who get '' triggered '' over LGBT representation, but it does feel like Bioware realizes that some people might not want LGBT characters anywhere near them and make said characters optional, and available to be kicked out or killed cold turkey. I know, tinfoil hat, but it does seem pretty convenient. I think only Leliana (in DA:I) and Josephine are exempt from this, but that's pretty much it. Sorry for the OT ugh but I wanted to chime in lol. A few problems with this, starting with the unfair assumption that the main reason that most players who don't recruit/fire/kill LGBT Companions is bigotry. It couldn't possibly be that they think Leliana is a creepy religious nut, that Zevran is untrustworthy and simply biding his time, that Isabella is a borderline sociopath, that Merrill is too childish and deals with blood magic and demons, that Fenris whines too much and is a potential danger to Bethany or Mage Hawke, that Anders is an unstable fanatic and Abomination, that Dorian is an arrogant slavery apologist and possible Venatori sleeper, that Sera is a crude bigot and anarchist criminal, that for all his honesty Iron Bull is still a Qunari spy, or that Josephine's deluded naivety makes her a liability when the Inquisition might have no choice but to get it's hands dirty. No, only bigotry . Don't put words in my mouth. I never accused of everyone who kills or kicks out LGBT companions doing it because of bigotry. That's absolute nonsense. What I DID say is that the option for kicking out and killing LGBT companions is prevalent, and the main group you can't get rid of seems to consist of nothing but heterosexual companions. That is a fact, and like I said, tinfoil hat and all, there might be a reason for it that's not a pretty picture overall. The chance for rejecting any LGBT themes in your own adventure is available for the players, and that COULD, and let me rephrase, COULD be a completely by the choice of the developers, a choice they made willingly. BUT, THIS IS ME TINFOIL HATTING, and I'm not accusing the devs of deliberately doing this. But the possibility certainly might be there. And does bigotry towards made up characters bother me? Hell to the no. Be a bigot towards fictional homos all you want. But what does bother me is if fictional homos don't get to be central characters that are important to the plot, because of bigotry towards fictional homos. That's the only thing that bothers me. And hey, Dorian is pretty central, and seems to be a pretty important player in DA4, so even if you are able to kick out fictional homos over bigotry, the devs were pretty good on making Dorian, despite the possibility of kicking him out, an important character, despite not being a mandatory companion you can't get rid of.
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Oct 12, 2018 19:39:11 GMT
Interestingly enough, Obsidian doesn't seem to have this problem, as their Companions are traditionally purely optional. Hell, most of their games can be completed more or less solo. Food for thought? It's a tradeoff, though. Having a more developed story and characters that you associate with involved with that story (Cassandra forming the Inquisition) likely means that there will always be some mandatory characters. While they could just have those story-relevant characters as non-follower NPCs, that then means they also have to create new characters that are followers. There are only so many resources to go around. Another aspect is the devs providing a way to ensure that we always have at least some followers available should we need them. You may not agree with that design philosophy, but it appears to be one they have.
Or they can just go the easier route and have more LGBT characters/followers be plot-relevant.
I think the pre-Skyhold portions on DAI work best, because in those the Inquisitor isn't the main character. The Inquisitor is just one member of what is effectively Cassandra's party. I love that design, and I've never seen it before.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 12, 2018 20:50:31 GMT
I think the pre-Skyhold portions on DAI work best, because in those the Inquisitor isn't the main character. The Inquisitor is just one member of what is effectively Cassandra's party. I love that design, and I've never seen it before. I like how you can defer to Cassandra in a couple of scenes. She throws it back to you, of course, but it's the presentation. This logic is one reason I hold off on Iron Bull's recruitment quest until I'm Inquisitor. I feel being Inquisitor gives more authority to accept or reject in that situation. This isn't some random person asking to help, like the various followers, this is a mercenary company that is to be paid in an official capacity. I don't think that decision should be left to the non-Inquisitor.
Related, I find Alistair's deference to the junior warden to be off-putting.
|
|
inherit
1587
0
May 14, 2024 21:30:37 GMT
1,674
Walter Black
1,257
Sept 15, 2016 15:02:16 GMT
September 2016
walterblack
|
Post by Walter Black on Oct 12, 2018 21:25:43 GMT
Interestingly enough, Obsidian doesn't seem to have this problem, as their Companions are traditionally purely optional. Hell, most of their games can be completed more or less solo. Food for thought? It's a tradeoff, though. Having a more developed story and characters that you associate with involved with that story (Cassandra forming the Inquisition) likely means that there will always be some mandatory characters. While they could just have those story-relevant characters as non-follower NPCs, that then means they also have to create new characters that are followers. There are only so many resources to go around. Another aspect is the devs providing a way to ensure that we always have at least some followers available should we need them. You may not agree with that design philosophy, but it appears to be one they have. But that's the thing, in any truly good RPG, the player is the most important person in the story. Who is or is not relevant, and to what degree, should be the result of our choices. If I miss out on an interesting character with fun combat mechanics and major lore insight, all because I didn't talk to them in the tavern, so be it. It often strikes me as if some writers are unwilling to accept that *gasp!* some players would rather skip over their work this time . If forced Companions really is more about party balance (or dev hand holding and railroading, if you prefer), then Companions should me more versatile, instead of pigeonholing them into one of the "holy trinity"; i.e., tank, dps, or support. This misses my point, since I agreed that it was a mistake for the straight characters to be forced on us if we didn't want any of them, and that NO ONE should be mandatory.
Fair enough, my apologies. It's always been a bad habit of mine to try planning ahead and circumvent whatever arguments might happen in any given debate. It's been hard time fixing that, and slowly but surely I'm learning.
Indeed. For all David Gaider's faults, he never abused his position as former Dragon Age head writer to make another of his characters mandatory, especially one of his author avatars.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 12, 2018 21:34:27 GMT
instead of pigeonholing them into one of the "holy trinity"; i.e., tank, dps, or support. To be fair, they haven't been too consistent with this. Aside from rogues, who are always damage, DA2 is the only game where there are hard line restrictions for follower roles. In both DAO and DAI, you can spec followers to suit your needs. There might be some limitations because certain followers won't have access to a spec that doesn't match their iconic build (you can spec Bull as tank, but he remains a reaver). The only true restriction in those games is one imposed by lore of mages and non-mages.
|
|
inherit
1587
0
May 14, 2024 21:30:37 GMT
1,674
Walter Black
1,257
Sept 15, 2016 15:02:16 GMT
September 2016
walterblack
|
Post by Walter Black on Oct 12, 2018 21:42:02 GMT
I think the pre-Skyhold portions on DAI work best, because in those the Inquisitor isn't the main character. The Inquisitor is just one member of what is effectively Cassandra's party. I love that design, and I've never seen it before. I like how you can defer to Cassandra in a couple of scenes. She throws it back to you, of course, but it's the presentation. This logic is one reason I hold off on Iron Bull's recruitment quest until I'm Inquisitor. I feel being Inquisitor gives more authority to accept or reject in that situation. This isn't some random person asking to help, like the various followers, this is a mercenary company that is to be paid in an official capacity. I don't think that decision should be left to the non-Inquisitor.
Related, I find Alistair's deference to the junior warden to be off-putting.
Part of this is Alistair's low self esteem and "boyishness", but most of it strikes me as Bioware's "characters who realistically could lead, but don't because player entitlement" trope. Jaheira, Bastilla and/or Carth, Dawnstar, Alistair, Cassandra, Cora, and whichever accomplished hero gets demoted in DA4. Hell, Kaidan or Ash could have just as easily gotten the Cypher, if Shepard hadn't been Protagonist Genre Savy .
One of the biggest things that strike me as off putting about Bioware's whole player empowerment deal? How in most of the romances we're their boss or commanding officer .
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Oct 12, 2018 22:09:30 GMT
Related, I find Alistair's deference to the junior warden to be off-putting. Alistair's deference to the junior Warden tells us a lot about Alistair. The dude can't lead. Maybe he can learn to, but the Alistair of Lothering has no business being King.
|
|
helios969
N4
Kamisama
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Origin: helios969
Prime Posts: No Clue
Prime Likes: Who Cares
Posts: 1,854 Likes: 2,479
inherit
867
0
2,479
helios969
Kamisama
1,854
August 2016
helios969
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
helios969
No Clue
Who Cares
|
Post by helios969 on Oct 15, 2018 10:30:50 GMT
Save for companions that are there for narrative purposes (Cassandra and Varric), yes they should be able to leave...though you should be provided an opportunity to change their minds if you want. Additionally, we should be able to kick them out for incompetence (Liam and PB) or philosophical differences (Vivienne). It doesn't matter if people are inclined to play the game once or 20 times, people should be able to craft their own RP experience...and will end up enjoying the experience more irrespective of missed content.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 17, 2018 4:24:15 GMT
It doesn't matter if people are inclined to play the game once or 20 times, people should be able to craft their own RP experience...and will end up enjoying the experience more irrespective of missed content. Exactly. What I find lacking in the "but you'll miss content" argument is that it doesn't allow for different play experiences. While yes, I do know that the majority of people only play the game a single time, I don't think that the game has to be designed with them in mind. Just think what a nice surprise it would be, on a second or third play, to make some decision or play a certain way (your character's RP) that gives a different experience, even to which companions stay or go.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Oct 17, 2018 10:51:10 GMT
BioWare has said before that, according to their telemetry, most players don't even finish a standard BioWare game once. If they designed games based purely on how the majority plays, credits would be rolling after the first couple of hours.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 17, 2018 16:48:16 GMT
BioWare has said before that, according to their telemetry, most players don't even finish a standard BioWare game once. If they designed games based purely on how the majority plays, credits would be rolling after the first couple of hours. I'm sure this is true to a certain degree, but there has to be a cutoff at some point for people that are just taking their time with a play for whatever reason. How is the time measured? "Oh, this person hasn't finished their play after starting it two months ago. They never will." I don't think they can ultimately know an accurate reading for that particular statistic.
On my recent new canon runs, it took me 6 months to finish DAO/DAA, 3 months to finish DA2, and I'm at the 1.5 mark in my current DAI play and not likely to finish that anytime soon. At some point, would they have decided I would never finish those plays? Well, they would have been wrong.
Also, with a game like DAO and its non-standard prologue, I'm sure a great many people have played through the origins with no intention whatsoever to play that character to completion, just to experience them. That same player might be one that has other multiple characters outside of those failed runs. Are those original runs counted as incomplete? I'd argue that they shouldn't be because of player intention. But the telemetry doesn't and can't know that.
|
|
inherit
3318
0
3,788
Psychevore
1,575
February 2017
psychevore
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by Psychevore on Oct 17, 2018 20:18:51 GMT
BioWare has said before that, according to their telemetry, most players don't even finish a standard BioWare game once. If they designed games based purely on how the majority plays, credits would be rolling after the first couple of hours. I'm sure this is true to a certain degree, but there has to be a cutoff at some point for people that are just taking their time with a play for whatever reason. How is the time measured? "Oh, this person hasn't finished their play after starting it two months ago. They never will." I don't think they can ultimately know an accurate reading for that particular statistic.
On my recent new canon runs, it took me 6 months to finish DAO/DAA, 3 months to finish DA2, and I'm at the 1.5 mark in my current DAI play and not likely to finish that anytime soon. At some point, would they have decided I would never finish those plays? Well, they would have been wrong.
Also, with a game like DAO and its non-standard prologue, I'm sure a great many people have played through the origins with no intention whatsoever to play that character to completion, just to experience them. That same player might be one that has other multiple characters outside of those failed runs. Are those original runs counted as incomplete? I'd argue that they shouldn't be because of player intention. But the telemetry doesn't and can't know that.
edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/08/17/finishing.videogames.snow/index.htmlBut just go through your Steam/PS4/Xbox achievement list and compare to the global numbers to see for yourself just how little people barely make it halfway through a game, let alone finish it.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Oct 17, 2018 22:50:26 GMT
But just go through your Steam/PS4/Xbox achievement list and compare to the global numbers to see for yourself just how little people barely make it halfway through a game, let alone finish it. Thanks for the link. However, the article doesn't address the crux of my point: how the statistic is measured. I still argue player intent. I bought Dishonored during the Steam summer sale and played a bit. I then finally got into my recent DAI play. I am going to get back to Dishonored, just not anytime soon; I haven't discarded/abandoned the game. As for the rest, I don't usually play in online mode in Steam or Origin, so I can't do that. Or, for example, using a modded save for Skyrim SE disables achievements.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Oct 18, 2018 0:49:13 GMT
Well sure, but statistics can't show intent. They only express quantifiable, measured data.
A survey might be useful to determine player intent, but I'm not sure that's useful information for anyone. I often INTEND to eat healthier and catch up on housework, but rarely follow through.
In any case, BioWare has known for years that the vast majority of people who purchase their games never even experience most of the content on offer, but they still make their games the same way that they always did, so how they choose to interpret the data doesn't matter overmuch. They'll probably continue to make non-linear narrative games for as long as it makes them money. Whether or not they get PLAYED is a secondary concern.
|
|
inherit
1439
0
May 14, 2024 21:42:51 GMT
12,457
witchcocktor
4,036
Sept 6, 2016 10:00:37 GMT
September 2016
witchcocktor
Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by witchcocktor on Oct 18, 2018 5:38:34 GMT
I'm still not really positive about the whole " I don't like you, you poopyhead, even if you are actively trying to save the world, and so am I, I'm not going to be around you cuz you are a poopy!!!!!!! " aspect of this. Nnnoowww, if the next game isn't about saving the world, this isn't that big of an issue buuuuuhuuuuttttt.. It just seems a bit stupid otherwise. Nnoowww, maybe companions in DA4 would try to kill you and take your place as leader if they don't like you, and you'd have to kill them. Now that's a twist. Companions that leave you should actively work against you!
|
|