Confession: The more I think about it, the more disappointed I get with how little The Warden is developed in game. A lot of the character development tends to be in the players head or in fanfiction. It’s kind of sad, because I can see a whole lot of potential.
GEE, it’s like the warden isn’t actually a character and is meant to be an imprintable player avatar! except since it’s a videogame, a visual medium instead of a majority imaginative one, that’s not a very effective design scheme!!
whoda thunk
iiiiidk man i gotta respectfully disagree here
player avatar characters in video games have a long, storied history, especially when it comes to wrpgs which further have their roots in pen-and-paper games which were hugely based on imagination and creativity and arguing that video games are uniquely unsuited to this concept seems…idk a little shortsighted? the issue here isn’t visuals, it’s interactivity, meaning that if any storytelling medium is fit for a player avatar character video games is it.
i mean that doesn’t mean it has to appeal to you but just because it isn’t your cuppa doesn’t mean it’s bad game design? or at least you can’t really call it such without sending p much the entire wrpg genre under the bus with it
that’s coo’
the issue i take with dao in particular is its jarring divide between what it seeks to be: a videogame equivalent of pen-and-paper rpgs where almost anything is possible, and what it actually is: deeply constrained by programming confines and the contrast between a visually rich cast and flat player avatar. that doesn’t necessitate throwing every game predecessor to it under the bus, though
dragon age is a graphically-advanced, visually realistic game. characters have extensive body language and engaging acting, while the warden neither moves nor talks, so watching the cast doesn’t require any kind of imaginative stretching, but the second the camera jumps back to the warden, the player is required to bear the burden of imagining interaction. this wasn’t really an issue ten years ago during the formative crpg era, because games as a whole required a lot more imagination on the part of the player
maybe dao isn’t jarring for a good chunk of players, but there’s a reason bioware’s completely abandoned that model. it’s unsustainable with today’s game technology tbh
Confession: The more I think about it, the more disappointed I get with how little The Warden is developed in game. A lot of the character development tends to be in the players head or in fanfiction. It’s kind of sad, because I can see a whole lot of potential.
GEE, it’s like the warden isn’t actually a character and is meant to be an imprintable player avatar! except since it’s a videogame, a visual medium instead of a majority imaginative one, that’s not a very effective design scheme!!
whoda thunk 
okay maybe i’m a little disappointed…
maybe this is wishful thinking on my part, but right now i’m putting this down to comic art failings
every other single comic we’ve had in dragon age (or mass effect HA HA wait that’s a lie they never focus on women) fandom has reduced the figures of its women down to more traditional comic book proportions. isabela stayed busty, but she lost her thickness and muscle bulk completely in favor of slim tone
hopefully that’s what we’re seeing here, because while the original concept art had a pretty big disparity too, it’s wasn’t nearly as hilarious dcau superman-vs-wonderwoman as this
Genderbent Isabela makes me uncomfortable.
Glad to get that off my chest. And no, this isn’t attacking anyone specifically. I just keep seeing lots of different pictures of Male!Isabela popping up, way more than I see of other genderbent characters. Maybe it’s just the corner…
That’s a fair point, though a lot (albeit not all) of the art I’ve seen is more focused on how sexy a male Isabela would be. Not how ridiculous they’d look (though there are a couple of those going around). There’s a difference though between sexualization and sex positivity.
Isabela’s outfit is certainly sexualized. However, it also emphasizes the fact that she’s a woman. Aveline’s armor, for instance, is pretty much identical to what a man would wear. And that’s great. I like that a lot. But a lot of “strong women” end up being made to look or act more stereotypically masculine.
Isabela embraces being both a woman and bad ass. And that’s rare. And it gets erased when you gender bend her.
quick question
if isabela’s clothing fits who she is and makes sense for her and is intentionally sexy
why would a rule 63’s version of her look ridiculous? why would it not be sexy?
rule 63 doesn’t erase or replace a character; it just offers artists an outlet for creative derivative design
Ask those citizens how they feel after what happened in Act 3.
didn’t we get confirmation that kirkwall basically enters a civil war? i know aveline with a romanced donnic confirms that a good portion of citizens blame meredith just as much or more than anders for the chaos that follows the chantry explosion
which makes sense, considering that in act 3 tensions has escalated so much that people were taking sides in equal measure, even if the pro-mage stuff is partly from an equality perspective and partly from a hey-give-us-back-our-OWN-civil-liberties-you-crazy-bitch place
okay but here’s the thing about critiquing other people’s ships tho
like, as a matter of just ‘your ship is dumb and sucks and you’re dumb for shipping it abloobloo’, like no question, that’s really stupid and you’re kind of shitty for being that way
but if you want to analyze the narrative pacing or thematic merits of a certain relationship within a canon versus another, we shouldn’t necessarily frown on it or dismiss it under a blanket of nah-nah-nah-boo-boo ur ship sux mine is best
there are a lot of popular pairings that from a writing perspective i find superior to other, equally popular pairings. it’s not a matter of me finding the people who enjoy it lesser in any capacity, or even that i’m questioning the validity of the pairing (or subsequent ship) on its face, but rather just a judgment of how i’ve interpreted the story and what best fits inside
probably the best example for my followers is hawke/anders vs hawke/fenris or isabela. da2’s story is a deconstruction: the breakdown in act 3 where the tale would normally end at act 2. as hawke’s life and everything around him deteriorate, i find it more relevant for his lover to fall with him, to be the heaviest weight to drag him down. the romance parallels the narrative, where those two characters’ do not.
uhhhhh mass effect example i guess: a shepard (of either gender, but admittedly portrayed most often in fanworks as male) who hooks up with kaidan in me3 versus me1 follows, imo, a more satisfactory pacing structure. their relationship (regardless of romance) goes through a lot more rises and falls than is typical in a medium by necessity of being in a trilogy, but the bumps are much less noticeable when there is no romance, because it is overshadowed by the rising action that is their unresolved tension.
and all that? is just my own opinion based on my own interpretation. it’s just preferential analysis, and it doesn’t intend to diminish any ships, because ships aren’t pairings, ships are opinions on a pairing.
as long as we respect everyone’s opinions, we shouldn’t shy away from this kind of discussion
hell, it helps us better understand why we love what we love
if i ever hear anyone who enjoys mass effect 1 complain about ‘reused levels’ in dragon age 2 again
i will drive to their house and shit in their mouths
wow idk who my special question anon is but i love you so much :>
genre in this sense is i think a bit badly-defined. from my 15 (oh my god) or so years of reading fanfic, all things being equal, it seems like there’s a cultural understanding that, say, ‘fluff’ is an indicator that a given fic is happy and free of what troubles lie elsewhere in the source.
and i don’t like that.
idk, i’m always kinda of the opinion that fanfiction, like a truly good piece, should run narratively parallel to or be in some sense a microcosm of its source.
say you write a fic of, idk, hawke and tragic love interest going kitten shopping. it’s cute, solid prose, maybe you’ve even got the voices down. that’s good exercise, sure, but what gives it merit? what elevates it from words and actions with familiar backdrops and familiar names to hawke and tragic love interest go kitten shopping, and everything that entails? i’m not saying every da2 fanfic ever has to end with a knife in the back or two wounded people running from a burning city, but what have you given us that remembers that that knife, be it stayed or bloody, is part of their reality? what do you have that remembers and respects the journey they take?
the same goes for angst or any other ‘genre’ of fanfic. you’ve got the sad bits, right, but what of the bits that aren’t sad, the bits that are just as important to the story?
it’s like, you bake a pie, and you want me to taste that pie, you cut a slice of it, but all the slice has is apples. it’s a slice, sure, but it’s not representative of the whole pie, and those apples may be fine on their own but we’re missing out on everything that pie is.
the other day i said something about ‘fucking refusing to write straight-up fluff’ for hawke/anders, and this is what i was getting at. okay, they have their happy moments, they have their heartbreaking moments, they have their passionate and pained moments, and all that together is what makes them them in the first place.
the easiest way to answer your question is to say that i love anything that takes the heart of its source, reduces it to its most basic level, a distilled idea, and never forgets that idea.
…failing that, i don’t like slavefic.
Anonymous asked: What do you think Cassandra's role will be in DAIII?
honestly, until i watch dawn of the seeker, that’s a difficult question to answer and pretty much pure (if educated) speculation.
what mike laidlaw and david gaider i think definitely understand at this point is that the series lacks a neutral or even moderate major perspective. every world-informing character is in some way biased, as is yknow the nature of an oppressor-oppressed system. the warden and hawke fit this, at least to some degree, but they are player characters who inherently neither inform nor shape the world. elthina posited herself as a neutral party, but as we all know, inaction from a member of an oppressive regime is still totally taking sides.
given what we’ve seen from cassandra so far—specifically, her journey from uninformed to informed—and her unique role as a sort of internal affairs agent for the main problematic political group, it seems like they’re grooming her to fill in that void. seekers have so far shown themselves to be corruptible by the chantry, sure, but cassandra specifically shows traits of real understanding of da2’s events. as she gains knowledge, she recants her accusations and slowly turns to neutrality.
and honestly, from a narrative perspective, if we’re to have a subjective protagonist (ie create-able character) again, having cassandra as a squadmate doesn’t actually make a lot of sense. she’s a true neutral party, and the entire point of modern bioware titles is taking sides. characters in your squad are supposed to supplement and react to player decisions, and the way cassandra looks to be playing out, she would be inadequate in that role.
…unless, of course, our character is also a chantry seeker or some similar investigative agent.
which mannnnnnnn that would be so cool
THIS IS THE CALM THE MOTHERFUCK DOWN POST
so i took a muscle relaxer last night and passed the fuck out and woke up fifty years later to find my dash was about 95% freaking out because, allegedly, amazon.com and EA’s origin are accepting customer dissatisfaction returns for mass effect 3.
this is hot on the heels of the announcement that da2’s expansion pack has been canceled, and a whole lot of people are left blowing in the wind, wondering about the future of their favorite company.
i’ve heard a lot of concerns. in the past 24 hours, and there’s a lot of good cause behind them, but when things boil to a head like this, sometimes we just have to step back, let the fear was out of us, and evaluate what we know.
dragon age 2 was a game with a non-traditional narrative, and mass effect 3 attempted a (hamfisted) speculative ending. what about the future of innovative bioware storytelling?
this is probably the most valid concern of all. with the writers of both games having disappointed large swaths of loyal customer base, it’s unreasonable to fear for the future,and dragon age 3 will most likely feature a much more straightforward narrative. however, it’s important to remember that the main complaint of dragon age 2 was its rushed gameplay elements. also: mike laidlaw, the creative director of dragon age 2 and now 3, is a stubborn sumbitch, and he’s defended dragon age 2’s direction to hell and back. 3 will be different, but it will not be origins: part 2.
what about queer characters and love interests? both games incorporated them, and both games are poorly-received!
once again, it’s important to remember that the main complaints were mass effect 3’s ending and dragon age 2’s rushed gameplay elements. there definitely were some whiners on bsn who complained about the all-bisexual LI cast in da2, and while i as a consumer can’t give definitive insight, from my observation on bsn, i can at least attest mike laidlaw and david gaider were very adamant about holding their ground on queer inclusion. we’re especially helped by mass effect 3’s inclusion of queer options under enormous fan pressure, and perhaps even lucky that the ending has drawn potential fire away from its gay stuff. while we might not see another instance of queer advances on the protagonist (like with anders), we will most definitely see more queer options. will it be an all-bi cast? given david gaider’s famous stance on equality, it’s very possible.
i’m worried about dragon age 3. i loved da2’s direction with the faster combat, voiced protagonist, better cinematics, and extensive character interaction, but it received so many complaints and negative comparisons to origins.
the developers have already said they will not be returning to an unvoiced protagonist, and with a voiced protag comes the ability to incorporate the kind of cinematics we saw in 2, plus a more personalized story and feel. the faster combat was never a significant complaint (and was often viewed as a major improvement); what will likely change is core rpg elements. both da2 and me3 incorporated inter-character interaction, and again it was seen as a huge improvement in the games. it is extremely unlikely we will see less of it in future titles.
what about people demanding refunds for mass effect 3? it could impact future funds for future titles.
first off, these are still rumors. with the huge money pit that is swtor, it’s reasonable to feel concerned, but the fact is that only one or two people have allegedly obtained refunds, and at this point the issue of it ‘affecting future funds’, be they sales revenue or EA allocation, is moot. if full refunds become allowed, there is no denying that refunds en masse will adversely affect bioware and ea’s bottom lines, which could in turn affect future releases, however the extent of this impact given total bioware sales is unlikely to halt the company’s movement.
right now, everything involving mass effect 3 is a waiting game. EA and bioware are in full PR mode right now, and there is pretty much nothing to be done except continue to loudly make your satisfaction or dissatisfaction known. on that note…
hypothetically speaking, dissatisfied customers have a right to their dissatisfaction. does that entitle a universal full refund policy? perhaps. if the company allows it, then obviously they judged it as such. a company will not offer a full refund on used services if it will put their fiscal well-being is in jeopardy. that’s just business 101.
so there it is.
while i’m a smart consumer and i try to keep my finger on the pulse of fandom, i’m still just a consumer, and i don’t know shit. if you have anything to add or debate, reblog it, let’s a get a good discussion really moving.
