Mike explains the framed narrative here:
1UP: Having experimented with a framed narrative, any interest in trying it again down the road? Is there anything you would want to change about your approach?
ML: I think ultimately, the framed narrative does a very good job of two things: one, it tells the story in a different way, and that was something we consciously wanted to do with Dragon Age 2 — which was to set out and not do the traditional rehash; we didn't want to just do the Origin story all over again, and two, to not tell the "classic fantasy story" with the big bad looming over the hill that you can sort of see and then target.
And he also asks this intriguing question - is it true or is Varric make things up - or embellishing things:
But it adds a layer of meta-storytelling; are there other elements that Varric [the narrator] is exaggerating that we don't get called out on? It creates a layer of thought that lingers with you after it's done, and makes you go, "well, what's next? How much of that was real?
This is something, you'll need to take into account when playing the game. However, from what I can understand, Bioware wanted to tell the story of Hawke's rise to power, from the man or woman to the legend. Then tell this story, and tell it as good as possible. And be honest about it. I, and many others would have had no problem, if Bioware have said this: "For DA2, we want to tell a story about a human, man or woman, and his or her rise to power. This has some, or major effect, on gameplay.
There will be fixed ending this time (just like in adventure games like Syberia) because we want to develop the DA world a certain way. And oh, yes, your followers belong to us, not you. You'll still have followers, but they'll 1) do their own thing when not in your party and 2) when they're in your party, you'll have limited control over them - just like in Neverwinter Nigts. For story reasons of course - since we want to tell this story." Or Bioware could have made the followers temporarily follow you - so that they fitted to the story they would like to tell.
And it is 10 years: Varric's tale takes place after 10 years has passed, e.g. ten years after Hawke's fleeing of Lothering. Interestingly, Mikes take on the Dragon Age world is this:
And one thing that, in my mind, sets Dragon Age apart from what Mass Effect is doing — not in a bad or good way, but just "different" — is that we look to Dragon Age as being about the world, and the characters, places, times, and events that affect that world. As opposed to a singular character, who in Shepard's case, dropkicks his world — which is great.
I don't think this was advertised enough or made clear to people when they released DA: Origins.
And then there's also this comment:
And specifically, what we wanted to do was, as lead writer David Gaider comments, "kick over the sandcastle." The endstate of Origins was that the world had been saved: "good job, we stopped the Blight, and we're good now, right? Everything good, right?"
I think Bioware set out to do another game similar to Planescape Torment in which player's expectation were turned completely upside down for what to expect next.
Sadly, it seems that Bioware do not have the creative talents of the defunct Interplay, current forming the bulk of Obsidian developers.
And 7 years to wait to see the Viscount, gee, seems like a long time
Maybe Bioware need to talk to Bethesda about how to create a changing world, or maybe talk a bit with CD Project. I mean, even in Witcher 1, the game content changes (buildings are burned down at the end of Chapter One, Kalkstein the alchemist moves from outside to Vizima to inside Vizima and other stuff to the same effect…) a great deal. It is also interesting how much CD Project did get out of the Aurora engine that they licensed from Bioware…
I do get that people are tired of seeing the same areas over and over again, but how is the story? And it is all true - or is Varric telling the truth, or maybe holding something back or is he putting weight on certain things and not others? It is, Varric, an unreliable narrator, that tells this tale.
The question I'm asking is this: Is the story any good at all? Is it designed well?
