Dragon age 3 you will once again be playing as a human

[disgruntledgamer]

This is welcome news.

Fantasy authors have spent over a decade crawling out from under Tolkien's shadow. Now the only epic fantasy stories written today that still have elves and dwarves are i) Dungeons & Dragons/Pathfinder-related, and ii) video game RPGs. And in those media, the differences boil down to cosmetic, and maybe a few gameplay mechanics. You rarely get any opportunity to actually explore what it means to live for hundreds of years or under an intractable, ossifying caste system because you're too busy raiding tombs and killing orcs.

???? It's not crawling out from under Tolkien's shadow there's still elves and dwarves, the only difference is that it's a set path and restrictions that are under Tolkien's shadow. It's the same settings and you'll still be busy raiding tombs and killing orcs (dark spawn). Except instead of having a choice of being Legolas, Gimli or Aragorn you'll now be restricted to just being Aragorn. Explain how that's crawling out from under Tolkien's shadow?

 

[WFox]

[

The reason Bioware is doing this stupid "cinematic" dialogue system is to appeal to someone like you, a Mass Effect fan. Well I have news for everyone, DRAGON AGE ISN'T MASS EFFECT!

I agree with your point whole heartedly, however I think it's more accurate to say that Dragon Age WASN'T Mass Effect. Dragon Age 2 got rid of Origins, and companion customization, and added the Dialog wheel and a defined/voiced character. It was basically the bastard child of DA:O and ME2.


On Topic: I'm cautiously optimistic (I've been trying to be more positive about things in general). It's hard for me to get riled up about being forced to play human at this point since I already did that when they made the same announcement for DA2. This is a two steps back, one step forward situation- but hey! At least we're getting *some* customization back.

My hope is that at least one of these backgrounds (I refuse to dignify them by calling them Origins) will have the option to have had an elven parent. For anyone who doesn't know, in the Dragon Age world the offspring of elves and humans are always human, there is no such thing as a half-elf. SO having the PC have an elven parent kinda/sorta gets around the whole "human only" thing on both sides and I think has a lot of potential for both the plot as well as role-playing.

Of course this hope hinges on the backgrounds being somewhat more detailed than the dossiers from Mass Effect but, like I said, I'm trying to be positive.

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

I feel like the biggest problem was that conversation wheel.

Basically it stuck Hawke with three different personalities for most of the time. Any deviation in choice made Hawke look like a bipolar asshole. There were only a few instances where there where simply different things to say and that's what Bioware needs to stick with.

 

[llubtoille]

I imagine you'll still be able to get dwarf and elf (etc) party members?
if they want to make the main character a human so they can make the introduction a more focused event, then that sounds fine to me.
It's probably a lot easier on the writing team when they can say with certainty 'the player is human, therefore these people / races react to him/her in this manner'.

And if complaints are purely for the visual effect, within a few weeks of release there'll probably be a - main character elf/dwarf/gnome model replacer - mod thing.

 

[UndeadDollface]

For the OT:

I'm one of the eight people who actually liked DA2 over DAO so this isn't worrying me too much. I'll admit I was hoping for some kind of a generic background(s) (like ME had) with multiple race options (e.g. Neverwinter Nights 2), but I'm okay with just human.

My problem with the multiple origins of DAO is that they ultimately became the only part of the story I could focus on. It's totally awesome to be the pompous daughter of a dwarven king or an outraged elven bride going on a killing spree, but when your character is eventually shepherded into the status of Grey Warden things seem to become distressingly generic. At that point I find myself jumping from character-to-character depending on my location/objective. It's great to be an exiled dwarf in Orzammar, but when I'm in the Dalish camp, or just about anywhere else, my character may as well be human anyway.

 

[Pandabearparade]

I seriously doubt that one level exceeds the entire size of Dragon Age Origins. Bullshit.

I am sorry, but please show me the source you have giving you actual insight to size of the lvls. You dont. You are following a predetermined conclusion.

The doubt comes from the fact that the claim is ridiculous. Dragon Age: Origins was really big. Unless they just artificially scale up the size of the world and make it empty the idea is pretty laughable.

 

[Pandabearparade]

Also, my choices in Dragon Age 2 felt more powerful, I felt like really deciding things, maybe they didn't have actual gameplay impact

Yep. You made "powerful choices" that had no impact on anything. That's Dragon Age 2 in a nutshell.

 

[Pandabearparade]

First of all the interview said Dragon Age 2.

So it did. I was replying to your post replying to his post and hadn't read the actual article. Now I have, and you're right. It's much less ridiculous to claim to be bigger than Dragon Age 2.

Secondly the point wasn't whether or not it was true. The point was he was denying any information that would support the game being good,

Not true. I honestly don't care about dwarves/elves being cut. The article said a lot of things I like. /shrug I won't believe any of it until I play the game (which I'll buy used if at all).

 

[Therumancer]

So you choose to latch onto the one major negative rather than the multiple positives mentioned (two negatives if we count the background being unplayable, but seriously, big deal)? Somebody just wants this game to be bad. I honestly am hoping for the best, though I'll probably wait to see what others say about it.

The thing is that Bioware is facing a lack of faith, harping on the positive points is kind of pointless at this point since the negatives have been dragging down their titles, and even the positive seeming stuff has to be interpeted as it hasn't exactly panned out as they promised.

The way I, and others, see things nowadays is that we already know from "Dragon Age: Origins" that there is no reason why there can't be playable origin stories, and protaganists of more than one race. When Bioware decides not to deliver those things it raises the questions of what else they are skimping on in terms of delivery.

From my perspective it's a matter of Bioware earning back the trust of it's fans like me, who contributed to their "record sales" of those previous titles but were disappointed (you really can't tell much about a game until you've paid for it, and getting games upon initial release has burned many of us here). I do not think Bioware deserves "benefit of the doubt" in any way shape or form, and any claim they make that is positive needs to be taken with healthy skepticism after the promises made about the ME3 ending and what they delivered (with evidence via their own interviews that they had no intention of delivering what they were promising).

I understand if you disagree, but as the OP seems to show, I'm not the only one taking this attitude at the moment.

 

[sapphireofthesea]

Not liking the Castle thing. It sounds good but Neverwinter Nights 2 did it and it was at the start of managing it that I stopped on both play throughs. It just interrupts the story and makes for a massive shift in the pace and style if you really want to make it useful. If it just brings in money, then you need something worth buying and seriously, is it really necessary to micro manage for the sake of a high teir of items.
Personally this one is not sounding very good to me yet. I liked the diversity of the first, sticking us with only a human in a diverse world feels like a step back, will have to see what they do about getting us out in the world again before I make a final judgment.

 

[Something Amyss]

I am sorry, but please show me the source you have giving you actual insight to size of the lvls. You dont. You are following a predetermined conclusion.

To be fair, their only support for the claim is "trust us."

 

[alphamalet]

I am sorry, but please show me the source you have giving you actual insight to size of the lvls. You dont. You are following a predetermined conclusion.

To be fair, their only support for the claim is "trust us."

While that is true, they still have more information on the subject than he does. He is claiming certainty. I require his source for certainty.

I dont take the information at face value. I know they are interested relaying information as favorably as possible. However that doesn't make non-information in fact. You cant just go "True" or "False" without any back up. He does.

However that isn't the main point. He will gladly accept information from the devs as a source as long as it fits his predetermined conclusion of the game being bad, but as soon as he is presented with information that he cant make negative it is deamed as false. If he is pick and choosing he might as well ignore the source all together and just go with what he has already decided.

We will see who is right when the game comes out. Like Zachary said, their only support is, "Trust us." After Dragon Age II and Mass Effect 3, that sort of "Trust us" statement from Bioware seems hollow to me. If that makes me jaded then so be it, but like I said earlier, this more of hyping the game as opposed to "information". When I see gameplay footage, then I will make my conclusion. As it stands now, Bioware wants me to make my conclusion based off of their name alone. After the utter disappointments they have crapped out recently, I refuse to do that or take their word on any of this. There was a lot of positive "information" before Dragon Age II came out.

 

[Soulrender95]

You know I really don't mind playing the human, there is some disappointment in not having a choice in race but at least there is some option in backstory which I'm hoping will at least allow a small variation in starting stats and skills, and preferably one offbeat/comedic backstory for a wacky deadpan snarker,

" at some point in your childhood Flemeth kicked you in the shin, ever since that day you've annoyed everyone with your shin scar in the shape of a dragon, you just have to show it to everybody you meet, no matter how serious the situation is.. for some reason you find it hard to make friends."

but more importantly, I now feel the need to replay Dragon age 2 can't say I felt the need before I didn't hate it, aside from one character based retcon, but it left less of an impression on me that the first game did and I feel enough time has passed now to see if it was a fair assessment or just me being an ass because it wasn't what I wanted from Dragon age 2.

 

[Tomeran]

*digs through all the mindless EA/Bioware-hate*

Looks good, I suppose? My problem with the DA franchise is that the titles feel so...disconnected from one another. We're gonna play a new protagonist in DA3? Why? We already have the warden and/or Hawke. Creating three protagonists does not create the same level of attachment and personal feeling that could be felt in the mass effect series. So im not so sure im positive about all that.

Couldnt really care less about the "human only" option, I'd rather they focus content on fewer customization options and make it good then spread it out thinly and make it less quality.
Lack of protagonist voice-acting in DA1 acting as a strong example of that.

Most other things look good enough, happy to see the game and its scenery will have a bit bigger scope. A needed change from DA2.

All in all, I'll definetly try the title, but I wish I could've been more excited. Perhaps I'll be positivly surprised. One can hope.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Say what you like about the alternate origins in DA:O, but it won't change the fact that I think my favourite part of the game was when I ran into Gorim in Denerim on my first playthrough, which was as a Dwarven Noble. I just imagined my PC doing the whole boisterous Dwarf thing of crying out "Brother!" from across the market square before embracing him in a totally manly hug with three (no more, no less) pats on the back. Swapping stories about what happend since Orzammar, and so on.

Okay, okay, so I'm probably the only one who really liked that bit that much. But to get to my actual point, I realise I'm in the minority but I don't think it's healthy to start chipping away features of your game just because only the minority enjoyed them. I expect that everyone who's a fan of big RPGs has some minor feature that they love despite being in the minority about it. I just think that cutting minor features in order to contribute the time and energy towards the nebulous concept of making the game better will lead to you losing fans who enjoyed those features without gaining any through the minor, hard to detect improvements you might make here and there.

Anyway, that's my opinion on why it's a bad idea to ignore a minority just because they're minority.


Now onto the silly stuff.

1: Let's make both sides happy. People who preferred the Mass Effect or DA2 style of PC can have a human with voiced dialogue and more realistic mannerisms. Fans of the DA:O style get a Qunari. He/she stands bolt upright in conversations, glaring intently at the person they're talking to. They only talk like a character who's ticking things off on a list of "Stuff I need to know about this quest". Their lines are unvoiced to avoid betraying any emotion other than that imagined by the player. Basically they're an old-school RPG protagonist who's still acting in character.

2: I will probably not buy DA3. That's the long and short of it. However! I will buy it if it's possible for the PC to have a threesome with Isabela and Zevran again, thus creating a running joke where those two hunt down the most important people in Thedas and sleep with them all together.

That is all.