David Gaider says Bioware decides what 'dead' means in Dragon Age 2

[Raregolddragon]

Well Shepperd did die at the start of Mass Effect 2 but he got better.

 

[secretsantaone]

This seems a bit contradictary, especially considering Bioware had been playing up the 'big choices that matter' in regards to their games and especially especially in how they didn't pull this in Mass Effect 2. Wrex STAYED dead.

Why is there a sudden expectation that my actions in one game ought to be directly related in the second. Consider Baldur's Gate, another beloved Bioware title. According to Baldur's Gate 2, I underwent the final phase of the first game with a certain party when, in reality, I only kept one of those people around (Minsc if you care). Yet in the opening act of the sequel, I find that I brought a different party and resulting in the capture of one (Imoen) and the death of another (whatever Jaheria's husband's name was).

Given the complexity inherent in carrying the various decisions forward, I think it strange to see even a subtle nod to things I did in a past game. In this very specific case however it would seem the solution is as simple as "don't have Leliana make a cameo" given that she is one of the few party members that could have been killed during the course of the game (if I'm not mistaken the list is Leliana, Wynn and Zeverhn).

Maybe because they have a save feature designed to do just that?

 

[Canadish]

Don't worry folks.
I got in touch with Bioware head staff, and held an extensive interview.
They answered all my questions, and proved that Dragon Age 2 was NOT a buggy, half finished, money grab of a game, filled with pathetic retcons! REALLY!

Answer to all your questions:

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Maybe because they have a save feature designed to do just that?

Just because one has the data that would be necessary to institute such a continuity does not mean the creation of all the required content for the various different possibilities is trivial.

 

[CoL0sS]

While I didn't expect them to admit they did something wrong, this guy left a really poor impression. He didn't offer any explanation for that (pretty big) plot hole, except "she's alive,we're the writers, deal with it bro". I mean most of the characters from DA II were not particularly memorable, and returning characters had such small and insignificant roles that it could be considered a gimmick, so I don't see how replacing "dead" Leliana with another NPC could make any difference to the story (except giving them less material for future DLCs). They just missed it.

Also, somebody should point out that being the lead writer on Dragon Age games isn't something to be proud of (with capital letters in your sig). While lore behind the game was detailed and interesting, story in Origins was pretty unoriginal, but still better than one in DA II which was nonexistent. He'd probably do a better job if he got his head out of his ass....

 

[Canadish]

Maybe because they have a save feature designed to do just that?

Just because one has the data that would be necessary to institute such a continuity does not mean the creation of all the required content for the various different possibilities is trivial.

Bioware doesn't NEED to do anything. They could release Dragon Age 3 with nothing but Mike Laidlaw shaking his tushie at the screen for 3 hours.
I mean, it is their IP after all, right?

No, fact is, the inclusion of a save import feature suggests that our choices matter. That is what they told us. And now, as it happens, they lied. And now they're just telling us to get over it.
That is just bad business practice, and honestly, its not nice in my opinion.
I don't want to give liars my money.
Never mind the fact Dragon Age 2 was an AWFUL game. Surrounded by suspect official reviews, fake "user" reviews, hidden DRM and EA banning real users from the game entirely.

Bioware showed their true colors. It does not seem to be the company it used to be.
And it's sad that the gaming community lost that.

But hey. I guess idiots like this are happy eh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd_SYvSUbno

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

(if I'm not mistaken the list is Leliana, Wynn and Zeverhn).

No, everyone can be killed except Morrigan and Dog. Thinking about a playthrough where I kill as many of them as possible.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Wrong.

What you did to Dr. Heart and throughout the mission itself with him, will teach him alot. I will explain how.

Garrus is indeed between two ends of the extreme spectrum, if you show him Mercy exists, he will act accordingly in his ME2 personal mission. If not, he will question you.

SPOILER ALERT!

If you decide to show mercy to Dr. Heart, he will be more accepting if you want him to show Mercy towards Sidonis in ME2. Why you ask? Because you taught him that with your own words/actions.

If you allow Garrus to kill Dr. Heart and want to show mercy to Sidonis, Garrus will actually question you through that entire intense sequence. More dialogue is given "Why Shepard, you showed me I should kill anyone who done me wrong and my squad." or something like that.

I dare you to replay ME1 by killing off Dr. Heart and save Sidonis, it makes for a different sequence.

At any rate, have fun with ME3!

I have played through Mass Effect 2 with both a renegade and paragon character imported from Mass Effect, both having dealt with Sidonis in different ways. I can attest that there is almost no difference in the missions regardless of what you did in the first game. If there are, they are so minor they don't count.

Thing is, your choice still feels like it has no impact. You know why? Garrus shouldn't even be in Omega in the first place if your choice did matter. If you go full paragon in Mass Effect Garrus completley changes. He says he is going to apply for Specter training and use lawful methods. He does the exact opposite of this. Instead you find him gunning down mercenaries on Omega because he felt like being a dumb vigiliante again. The fact that he does this regardless of waht you say to him in Mass Effect proves how little of an impact your choice has.

Honestly though one of the most irritating things about this is how Shepard, regardless of your morality, acts like there's nothing wrong with Garrus being on Omega.

 

[secretsantaone]

I didn't feel obliged to read your post because you tried to argue that in order to criticise writing we must somehow have authored a piece of our own - absurdity to the highest degree.

No, I can happily point out a score of published authors who are shite, in comparison to Gaider, at least. I made no argument that you need to be able to write your own book to judge someones work. What this interjection was all about was you showing little to no appreciation whatsoever, and this sort of blatant dismissal is rarely seen by anyone who knows how much work has to flow into writing a comprehensive piece of fiction.

When the lead writer decides it's okay to have an optional companion who can be killed or completely ignored by the player return from the dead to serve as a plot device, you have problems. There is no consistency.
The writing is shit because it's dismissive. It tells the player that really their role in the narrative doesn't matter because Bioware will pull all sorts of magic out of its arse anyway.

Gaider was the lead in Origins, so how he fucked up so badly I don't know.

... and this is where you ignored my post. Writers have been resurrecting their favourite characters for one reason or the other throughout the course of fiction. Some with coherent reasons (Gandalf -- he never did die, Buffy -- we saw the ritual), some with less (Leliana, Ellen Ripley -- she should have never died to begin with *hiss*), some with such ridiculous fervour that it makes me want to bash my head against a wall (Supernatural).

So. Again I will point out that I do not think Dragon Age 2 is perfect. The plot holes I would list are probably not the ones that most folks rage about, however, and this is not part of the discussion.

What I have been trying to say is that, without being involved in the creation of the Dragon Age setting, players may have the "right" to complain about a decision, but they do not have the right to dismiss the choice from being a valid one for the people who wrote it, because face it: While man does not have the means to return someone from the dead, for all we know it was not man who brought her back.

I can come up with a multitude of possibilities on how Leliana survived and my imagination doesn't have to stretch very far to come up with a score more for how she might have returned had she really died. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it is not perfectly valid in context of the Dragon Age setting.

For crying out loud, Anders had a fucking sword driven through him and didn't as much as flinch before he ripped the people responsible apart. "Unique circumstances" back and forth, whoever knows Leliana doesn't have some as well?

And that is just taking into account that people make the argument of having cut off Lelianas pretty red head. A weak argument at best. The times my characters in DA:O cut someones head off and then talked to them in a cutscene can barely fit on the fingers of one hand. Game mechanics. Blerk.

All well and good.

IF we had some reason to believe Leliana could have reasonably survived, some sort of hint or foreshadowing, hell it wouldn't be that hard to add one line of dialogue refering to the event. For all intents and purposes it just looks like they dismissed the choice altogether.

 

[Ridgemo]

I didn't feel obliged to read your post because you tried to argue that in order to criticise writing we must somehow have authored a piece of our own - absurdity to the highest degree.

No, I can happily point out a score of published authors who are shite, in comparison to Gaider, at least. I made no argument that you need to be able to write your own book to judge someones work. What this interjection was all about was you showing little to no appreciation whatsoever, and this sort of blatant dismissal is rarely seen by anyone who knows how much work has to flow into writing a comprehensive piece of fiction.

When the lead writer decides it's okay to have an optional companion who can be killed or completely ignored by the player return from the dead to serve as a plot device, you have problems. There is no consistency.
The writing is shit because it's dismissive. It tells the player that really their role in the narrative doesn't matter because Bioware will pull all sorts of magic out of its arse anyway.

Gaider was the lead in Origins, so how he fucked up so badly I don't know.

... and this is where you ignored my post. Writers have been resurrecting their favourite characters for one reason or the other throughout the course of fiction. Some with coherent reasons (Gandalf -- he never did die, Buffy -- we saw the ritual), some with less (Leliana, Ellen Ripley -- she should have never died to begin with *hiss*), some with such ridiculous fervour that it makes me want to bash my head against a wall (Supernatural).

So. Again I will point out that I do not think Dragon Age 2 is perfect. The plot holes I would list are probably not the ones that most folks rage about, however, and this is not part of the discussion.

What I have been trying to say is that, without being involved in the creation of the Dragon Age setting, players may have the "right" to complain about a decision, but they do not have the right to dismiss the choice from being a valid one for the people who wrote it, because face it: While man does not have the means to return someone from the dead, for all we know it was not man who brought her back.

I can come up with a multitude of possibilities on how Leliana survived and my imagination doesn't have to stretch very far to come up with a score more for how she might have returned had she really died. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it is not perfectly valid in context of the Dragon Age setting.

For crying out loud, Anders had a fucking sword driven through him and didn't as much as flinch before he ripped the people responsible apart. "Unique circumstances" back and forth, whoever knows Leliana doesn't have some as well?

And that is just taking into account that people make the argument of having cut off Lelianas pretty red head. A weak argument at best. The times my characters in DA:O cut someones head off and then talked to them in a cutscene can barely fit on the fingers of one hand. Game mechanics. Blerk.

Sorry for the amount of times you've been qouted, but just a couple things i think.

You bring up Gandalf and Buffy as two examples of writers bringing characters back. But those 2 were in fiction where you had no choice. So while you may get suitably annoyed that they are back due to them being dead, it's not like you made the choice to kill them. You just reaad/watched that it happened. I think people in Liliana's case are saying "I killed her, it was a personal thing for me".

As for the whole choice/linear debate. I get what your saying, that the writers have to make some decisions to make the universe work. But to say that the best way of getting rid of linearity by making the story more linear, seems odd. Playing a linear story isn't always bad, and in this case may improve it.

I'm in agreeance that choice is only good when it makes a difference. Otherwise theres no need to do it. If Liliana did truly die, and that had consequences you felt in the next game, that would have been good, because you'd be dealing with what you did from the first. As it is, they may as well never had that part in the game.

I'm merely playing devil's advocate here. I havn't played this game, so i can not comment on it's quality. Just putting my 2 pence in on the above.

 

[iPanda]

I love Gaider and his team for the simple reason that they created such depth. They made a world full of numberous mythologies, races, systems, cultures and differences that you could squeeze out a series of novels as monsterous as Wheel of Time from it's bowels.

However... As an author, who loves fantasy, if I ever wrote a piece where something that is so painfully an oversight occured and then reviewers pointed it out to me and I replied with 'You don't understand, only I know what's going on and I'm not telling you,' or simmilliar... I think I'd lose any credibility, any future deals, a lot of fans support and interest... etc. It's just bad taste, simple as.

To all those people who think that a game offering you choice should be allowed mistakes:
Fine. I mean, not that in Mass Effect 2 I was getting messages from the most pointless side quest characters to offer me thanks or swear vengeance down upon my name... Whatever. No, I genuinely believe this is acceptable. It must be hard, meeting demand, making it open, etc.
However, the death of a character? A main character? No. Too big, too stupid.

To all those people who think it doesn't matter:
Each to their own. However, I think it needn't have mattered because;
1] Leliana played such a small role in 2, it could have been anyone, as mentioned before and
2] Wynne could be killed at the Urn. Why not leave it at that if you had plans for Leliana? and
3] Writing is an art. If you have plans you make them known thorugh hints, easter eggs, metaphores, hugely detailed and backtracking story arcs, etc. Not just 'pop'.

Also, what happens if Leliana kills herself in the epilogue? The same, I guess?

I noticed a lot of odd things in 2. Especailly when it came to Cassandra. That woman didn't seem to know what the hell she wanted or needed to know, or what was going on. One minute she knew about a Deep Evil, the next she was utterly shocked. But I don't really mind about that. xD DA2 was fun, just... Just fun.

 

[Monsterfurby]

Bioware haven't really been too friendly when it comes to Dragon Age.
Now, the other communities they handle well, but for some reason, they only seem to deal with the DA community when they have a particularly bad day. This is the around fifth or so post by them that was... not too well received.

 

[Meggiepants]

Late to this thread party, but what the hell.

Dragon Age and ME can't really be compared in this respect. There are only two times in ME where someone can die from what you decide to do.

In DA, I can really only think of one character who can't die from what you decide to do. If they want to bring any of the characters forward at all, for any reason, they have really written themselves into a corner. I don't honestly think that Bioware knew they would make a sequel to Dragon Age. Aside from the Morrigan issue, the game has a real finality to it. Based on their own lore, which of course they conveniently changed to make expansions and the like, another Blight wouldn't happen for hundreds of years, so all the characters in DA:O would presumably be dead by the time the next big threat that required the use of Grey Wardens came to Thedas.

ME had a planned story arc. When ME came out, it was stated that it was the first in a planned trilogy. I never heard that stuff about DA:O, and in fact, didn't know that it was going to be a trilogy until DA2 came out. I think what you are seeing here is an after the fact "Let's make this a trilogy" thing. I just don't know that EA was ready to green light a second game in the DA series because the first one took 5 years to make. It was a gamble that happened to pay off.

It's like when writers think a T.V. series might be cancelled. They try to tie up the storyline as best they can for the fans, but they leave a few new things unresolved, just in case.

Morrigan was Bioware's just in case scenario. Then DA:O became a smash hit. Now you have the writers backtracking trying to please fans and find a way to tie these various stories together. Yes, it makes for problems with continuity, but I cut them some slack here because I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say if they knew they would get sequels greenlit, they would have approached this differently.

Also, as to how Leliana can survive after you cut her head off... hellooo, wizards. Perhaps... a wizard did it.

 

[AlternatePFG]

(if I'm not mistaken the list is Leliana, Wynn and Zeverhn).

No, everyone can be killed except Morrigan and Dog. Thinking about a playthrough where I kill as many of them as possible.

Dog can be completely ignored, I think you can kill him or leave him when he runs up to you after Ostagar if you did his quest.

 

[Scorekeeper]

The Maker did it.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

(if I'm not mistaken the list is Leliana, Wynn and Zeverhn).

No, everyone can be killed except Morrigan and Dog. Thinking about a playthrough where I kill as many of them as possible.

Dog can be completely ignored, I think you can kill him or leave him when he runs up to you after Ostagar if you did his quest.

I was talking about after they had joined. We go that route and Morrigan is the only one.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

So it's like a minor set back to being alive? Well nice one guys, thanks for making that choise easier ¬_¬

 

[TheBelgianGuy]

snip

OP lost a discussion on the bioware forums, and now he has to come and cry on the escapists about it.
Troll.

 

[Dogstile]

Hey, guys, didn't origins come out summer last year?

Doesn't that mean you should still be spoilering it?