Dragon Age: Inquisition Pre-Release Thread

[DalekFlay]

When you say that you 'don't care' and 'whatever makes for a better story is fine by me', you're being contradictory. If you don't care about retcons, it means you don't care about what was good so far. Indeed, when things are like this, nothing stops someone at the staff room from just having this great idea about how Anders and Morrigan, apostates extraordinaire, should join in the apocalypse and even become a couple. Boom, players can keep their silly headcanon and we move on with our lives.

In fact, you sound like a particularly bullshity biodrone from the BSN, who would keep repeating 'I don't know what you're talking about, BioWare's doing a great job to me because, so far, I made the right choices'.

Not sure how I am sounding like a Biodrone while talking at length about how I dislike what they're doing and fucking up, using the Witcher 2 as an example of doing it right, but... uh... okay.

As for your main point, I think the story should be best for the game it's actually in. I take games much more as single entities than a lot of people here I have noticed. I want X game to have a great story with a lot of choices, but I also want Y game to do that same for whatever possibly different reasons and narrative is necessary.

In other words if X game is enhanced by letting you wipe out Bob's Faction, that's great. And if Y game is enhanced by assuming Bob's Faction still exists, that's fine. Do what works best. If it's a planned out from the start series about the same character, like Mass Effect, then that changes things somewhat and you can probably carry stuff over. Dragon Age though? Do whatever makes Inquisition a better game, I care fuck all for whether I actually did the Morrigan ending or not if assuming it happened makes for a better game.

TL;DR As someone else hinted at it seems like Bioware are forcing the choices carrying over in the Dragon Age series because doing it in Mass Effect, which makes ten times more sense, has made it "their thing." I think that's dumb.

 

[Delterius]

And I am sure Elder Scrolls benefited a lot from the changes of its canon, after all they were inevitable and no interesting story could possibly come from whatever crazy place Cyrodil was before Oblivion. The sales, naturally, confirm this. And I sincerely doubt there was ever any following of Morrowind's lore, since, also naturally, it only mattered to Morrowind and nothing else that came after or before it.

 

[Valestein]

"Planned" and "Mass Effect" don't go in the same sentence.

 

[Roguey]

Not sure how I am sounding like a Biodrone while talking at length about how I dislike what they're doing and fucking up, using the Witcher 2 as an example of doing it right, but... uh... okay.

Um what

Witcher 2 negated a few choices. too. Like tell Triss to fuck off and get with Shani? Too bad.

 

[Infinitron]

I always thought CD Projekt decided to enable save importing because they saw Bioware were doing it. I certainly had no idea about it when I first played through the first game, and in fact I had to replay it before TW2 to get a new save.

 

[DalekFlay]

Witcher 2 negated a few choices. too. Like tell Triss to fuck off and get with Shani? Too bad.

Yes, I know. I am using Witcher 2 as an example of doing it right because I am saying fuck the previous game's decisions. Keep up, dammit.

 

[DalekFlay]

I always thought CD Projekt decided to enable save importing because they saw Bioware were doing it. I certainly had no idea about it when I first played through the first game, and in fact I had to replay it before TW2 to get a new save.

I used an old save and all it did was give me a cheat weapon and have that Sigfried dude show up for two minutes at the end. I don't think it was really a big deal.

 

[Roguey]

Witcher 2 negated a few choices. too. Like tell Triss to fuck off and get with Shani? Too bad.

Yes, I know. I am using Witcher 2 as an example of doing it right because I am saying fuck the previous game's decisions. Keep up, dammit.

But the way CDP handled it is pretty much the same as ME/DA.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

It's worse because Mass Effect and Desu Age don't negate your waifu choices from the previous games.

 

[Dreaad]

^ I know you are trolling, but it literately is worse. CDP just basically went "OMFG look at how that shit was successful in Mass Effect 2, we gotta do that too man!!" Then they proceeded to advertise a feature which was so utterly pathetic, the game would have been better without it.

 

[DalekFlay]

^ I know you are trolling, but it literately is worse. CDP just basically went "OMFG look at how that shit was successful in Mass Effect 2, we gotta do that too man!!" Then they proceeded to advertise a feature which was so utterly pathetic, the game would have been better without it.

It was irrelevant really, which is the point. The core story was designed around their creative intentions, even if you screwed Shani you were with Triss in TW2, etc.

Bioware are slaves to this stupid shit now, which is the point. I hope DA3 breaks them of it.

 

[Dreaad]

^ I know you are trolling, but it literately is worse. CDP just basically went "OMFG look at how that shit was successful in Mass Effect 2, we gotta do that too man!!" Then they proceeded to advertise a feature which was so utterly pathetic, the game would have been better without it.

It was irrelevant really, which is the point. The core story was designed around their creative intentions, even if you screwed Shani you were with Triss in TW2, etc.

Bioware are slaves to this stupid shit now, which is the point. I hope DA3 breaks them of it.

Oh yeah I totaly agree with you on all of that. I just hate CDP because they attempted to sell the same idea to people, except what they had was a joke. It was more or less false advertising on their part.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

I was half-serious. It is worse but I never thought it was intended to be a significant feature.

^ I know you are trolling, but it literately is worse. CDP just basically went "OMFG look at how that shit was successful in Mass Effect 2, we gotta do that too man!!" Then they proceeded to advertise a feature which was so utterly pathetic, the game would have been better without it.

It was irrelevant really, which is the point. The core story was designed around their creative intentions, even if you screwed Shani you were with Triss in TW2, etc.

Why would anyone want to have their choices outright invalidated? Canonizing players' choices sucks.

 

[DalekFlay]

Why would anyone want to have their choices outright invalidated? Canonizing players' choices sucks.

It's about choosing a better sequel over honoring the previous game. It's not about wanting them invalidated, Mr. Lawyerspeak, it's about thinking that is less important.

 

[Lancehead]

Why would anyone want to have their choices outright invalidated? Canonizing players' choices sucks.

It's about choosing a better sequel over honoring the previous game. It's not about wanting them invalidated, Mr. Lawyerspeak, it's about thinking that is less important.

In a videogame, player agency is less important than the designer's glorious artistic sensibilities capriciousness? I strongly disagree.

 

[norolim]

Actually, if anyone of you read the Witcher books, you'd know that Geralt doesn't really stick to one woman for a long time, unless it's Yennefer. So him switching Shani for Triss in TW2 is perfectly justifiable.

 

[Lancehead]

I'm not talking about Witcher or any particular game.

But grotsnik and Delterius have already gone into detail on the issue, so I won't bother anymore.

 

[DalekFlay]

In a videogame, player agency is less important than the designer's glorious artistic sensibilities capriciousness? I strongly disagree.

Yeah, because plot and setting never matter.

Step back and think for a second... how is developer bullshit any different when they're pushing stupid decisions into sequels that would be better without them? Player agency is of paramount importance but it exists within games, it doesn't have to cross them. If you design around that like Mass Effect then fine, but Dragon Age obviously wasn't.

Let them have the freedom to make the best game possible.

 

[Dreaad]

It's just a nice way to not leave characters you may like behind, I always found the gothic games had pretty good continuity like that. Granted none of the side cast where "companions" but it was nice to see martin again and to slowly watch his outlook change slightly, after all the shit he went through etc

 

[DalekFlay]

It's just a nice way to not leave characters you may like behind, I always found the gothic games had pretty good continuity like that. Granted none of the side cast where "companions" but it was nice to see martin again and to slowly watch his outlook change slightly, after all the shit he went through etc

I mean maybe the way to make everyone happy is have one ending and leave all the choices in the previous game naturally, rather than force a decision. Like I said before, Witcher 2 does that... they're being invaded either way, but the road to get there felt different. Dragon Age 2 had the mage revolt start either way, but the road to get there was fucking stupid. In the end it's the talent of the writer that decides I guess.

I just hate the idea of a Josh Sawyer or Harvey Smith sitting there saying "this is the best plot idea but we can't do it because X% of players in the last game killed this important part of it." Fuck that noise, make the best game you can.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

Then why not make a different game that doesn't interfere with the previous one's continuity?

 

[Commissar Draco]

Then why not make a different game that doesn't interfere with the previous one's continuity?

Because of added costs of new brand and its advertising. We'll get new Twicher games until some part will tank badly and/or CDR will go bankrupt.

 

[Absalom]

previous one's continuity?

 

[Rake]

Why would anyone want to have their choices outright invalidated? Canonizing players' choices sucks.

It's about choosing a better sequel over honoring the previous game. It's not about wanting them invalidated, Mr. Lawyerspeak, it's about thinking that is less important.

In a videogame, player agency is less important than the designer's glorious artistic sensibilities capriciousness? I strongly disagree.

Think of Fallout. I destroyed Sandy Sands and the game acknowledge it, but the sequel didn't. Should i throw a fit? From all the possible endings, Fallout devs chose one to be canon and built the rest of the series based on that ending. Player agency is good inside a single game, but it should never be resricting about the whole series.
Mind you, i don't defend Bioware here, their decisions are stupid, and themselves desided to market the whole"your choices and previous saves pass from one game to the other", so to contradict that is a fail. But i think it was a flawed idea from the start.
That's what i think. Take it with a grain of salt because my ideal game is PS:T, while you sound like you prefer more nonscripted, sandboxy, "emergent gameplay" type of games.

 

[Infinitron]

Why would anyone want to have their choices outright invalidated? Canonizing players' choices sucks.

It's about choosing a better sequel over honoring the previous game. It's not about wanting them invalidated, Mr. Lawyerspeak, it's about thinking that is less important.

In a videogame, player agency is less important than the designer's glorious artistic sensibilities capriciousness? I strongly disagree.

Think of Fallout. I destroyed Sandy Sands and the game acknowledge it, but the sequel didn't. Should i throw a fit? From all the possible endings, Fallout devs chose one to be canon and built the rest of the series based on that ending. Player agency is good inside a single game, but it should never be resricting about the whole series.
Mind you, i don't defend Bioware here, their decisions are stupid, and themselves desided to market the whole"your choices and previous saves pass from one game to the other", so to contradict that is a fail. But i think it was a flewed idea from the start.
That's what i think. Take it with a grain of salt because my ideal game is PS:T, while you sound like you prefer more nonscripted, sandboxy, "emergent gameplay" type of games.

The difference, I think, is that choices in Dragon Age and similar games are presented to the player as very clear, discrete and equally valid options, while in older games, including Fallout, it's more like "weird shit the player did for the lulz", or things that the player didn't do optimally.