The next generation of consoles is right around the corner, but for BioWare, many of the big releases it has in store are continuations of its flagship franchises, includingDragon Age 4and a plannedMass Effectsequel for the next gen (though this is likely far off).
The developer has already announced that it is working onDragon Age 4and the nextMass Effectgame, but after the lessons learned fromAndromeda’s disappointing reception, there’s one big pitfall it’s clear theMass Effectseries has fallen into thatDragon Age 4needs to avoid.
RELATED:Every Bit of Evidence That The Mass Effect Trilogy Remaster is in the Works
The Player Power Problem
As theDragon Agegames have progressed, the player character has gradually increased in individual political power. InDragon Age: Origins, the player is one of two known surviving FereldenGrey Wardens. It’s a position of prestige but no real power, and the story works in part because of the overwhelming odds stacked against the main characters. As the player and their followers travel the land to try and gain the support of its various factions, there is no doubt left about the power dynamic – every person the Warden has to appeal to is far more powerful than them.
InDragon Age 2, Hawke, the player character, can become the Viscount of Kirkwall, a city inthe Free Marchesin which the main action of the game takes place. ByDragon Age: Inquisition, the player character is not only the leader of the Inquisition, but the Herald of Andraste, worshiped by many from the end of the game’s first act.
The scope of the player character’s influence on the world of Thedas byInquisitionis no better set out than on the game’s war table itself, where the player receives letters and news from world leaders. By the end of the game, the player has chosen the new Divine of the Chantry, is friends withVarric, the new Viscount of Kirkwall, and has former followers in positions of power all over the continent.
The increased influence that the player character has on the world as a whole causes the same big problem theMass Effectseries had to deal with. At theend ofMass Effect3, Shepard’s decision has an impact on the very nature of life itself across the Milky Way galaxy, choosing whether to destroy, control, or synthesize life with the Reapers. Not only does every decision lead to a completely new system of living, but those realities are implied to have drastically different long-term effects across the cosmos players got to know in the original trilogy.
As a result,Mass Effect: Andromeda’s setting needed a huge physical and temporal shift, using the slow speed of space travel to explain that characters who had left the Milky Way 600 years prior had no knowledge of life after Shepard’s final decision were now exploring a completely untouched part of the universe.
In short, ifDragon Age 4continues the trend of increasing the influence of the player on the broader world, the series will find itself in a position where the following games will either have to acknowledge the big decisions made by players in previous games, having completely separateDragon Agetimelinesfor the huge diversity of impacts players are able to have, or the far more likely possibility that the series will have to abandon Thedas entirely and take players somewhere new.
Player Impact vs. Player Choice
This may not sound like a bad plan – after all, many players want to explore some of the peripheral places mentioned in the franchise like the Qunari homeland across the sea and far from theTevinter Imperium. However, it is evident from its execution inAndromedathat this approach leads to a few big problems. WhileAndromeda’s setting acknowledges the player’s decisions in the previous games, it is essentially an avoidance tactic necessitated by the completion of the original trilogy, and the decisions made by Shepard in the end are made necessarily irrelevant in order for the story to continue.
Furthermore, large-scale player impact should not be mistaken for complex player choice. The ending ofMass Effect 3left many fans hugely disappointed precisely because it did not feel like a real choice built upon the foundations of their personal decisions made throughout the trilogy so far. Though the impact of the final decision is implied to be huge in the story, it has no impact on the game, and very little impact onAndromeda.
Similarly, by puttingDragon Ageplayers in a position where they have influenced the Divine, the Viscount of Kirkwall, thePrince of Starkhaven, the King of Ferelden, and others, BioWare is escalating the impact that the player has on the world in the story as a replacement for presenting them with decisions rooted in their personal story, and relating to the character dynamics developed between them and their companions.
InDragon Age: Origins, the origin of the player character leads to some very meaningful decisions later in the game. For example, if the player chooses the Dwarf Noble track, they will find themself later having to choose between two new potential kings of the city they grew up in, one of whom is a conservative older dwarf, and the other who is more open to the outside world, but also the brother who betrayed and left the player for dead in their prologue.
Ultimately, the choice is exciting not because of the scale of influence the player feels their character has on the world, but because of the personal investment in the characters involved, helping to make it one of thehardest choices inDragon Age. Indeed, when playing this part of the game as one of the other origins, the choice is not nearly as interesting – though those other origins have their own equivalent moments.
Not only that, but bothDragon Age: OriginsandMass Effect 1work in part because the player character is aware of a great threat, but their lack of influence and the unwillingness of the world to acknowledge that threat creates the fundamental tension that drives the story. In the originalMass Effecttrilogythe player is ignored by the council again and again about the threat of the Reapers, causing Shepard to form a rag-tag crew to try and solve the problem themselves.
Dragon Age: Origins’ main characterknows a Blight is coming, and yet is forced to involve themselves in the petty politics of the world in order to get ahead and gain allies while the true threat grows stronger. In essence, both games pose the politics of the wider world as something fundamentally adverse to change and beyond the player character’s control. ByInquisition, the player is commanding entire armies, and the threat feels far less ominous and personal.
RELATED:Mass Effect 5 Needs to Bring Back One Key Feature From Original Trilogy
The Future of BioWare RPGs
Giving the player too much influence over the broader world in the story only ends up shrinking that size of that world to a few key characters, especially afterInquisition’s Trespasser DLC. These characters include Varric, Alistair if made king, and the new Divine, all of which have come to represent giant powers in the world that inOriginsfelt insurmountable. It gives the sense that the victories gained are not against all the odds, but are increasingly won on a relatively level playing field, which is far from satisfying.
If BioWare wants the future of either franchise to have the same satisfying stories as the developer’s heights, escalating the breadth of the player’s impact cannot bewhat’s next forDragon Age 4. The next generation of consoles needs to see RPGs which tap into unexplored depths of character and raise questions about the complexity of the kinds of interactions and stories players can be a part of in video games, not the breadth of the influence and power they can wield in those fantasy worlds.
Dragon Age 4is in development.
MORE:Dragon Age 4 Needs to Resolve One Big Dragon Age: Origins Mystery Somehow
