There was loot?

I'm pissed I got Viv who slaughters all my mages and is basically horrible.  I did all I could not to and my Inquisitor would literally go to war with her if she decided on genocide- which she does.  I can not imagine the Inquisition just standing by as she kills all the mages that don't do as she says, and that it occurs on a single frame screen while I can only read the consequences and do nothing is extremely galling.

It seems like the gods of the elves were warring with each other and having the elves do the same, to end the war he locked/tricked/packed up/banishd the gods to the veil where they seem to have forgotten themselves. He went to sleep himself and when he awoke saw the races weren't doing better than when he left and in fact there were new problems, the darkspawn.  Also, Solas does not see spirits as most do and recognizes that they are shapd by the desires of men, so opening the viel between worlds would, for him, not be about unleashing demons.  I think he was probably trying to set free the other "gods."

I don't think racist is the right term for him; he has seen the weakness of the races of women and men and their selfishness- he's lived longer and seen more.

If there's no reason to like her or dislike her, then she isn't a special snowflake Mary Sue.

 

That said, neither of those labels are correct. Literally the only thing that makes her stand out from any other character is the removal of the Blight within her body, which she herself didn't even accomplish. If we're going with the "siding with Tevinter" angle to hate her in DAI, then try to think critically and put yourself in Fiona's shoes. She had a (legitimate) fear that Templars were going to exterminate the rest of the mages that followed her, so she sided with the one group of people who she believed were on her side. She had no way of knowing that they were effectively doomsday cultists and served an ancient Magister (that isn't exactly something you advertise). To Fiona, they were 'sympathetic' Tevinters, or as sympathetic as Tevinters can be, given what we know of them. I would argue that she didn't make the right choice, but that would require the scenario to be viewed in hindsight (and thus irrelevant, since it would then be confirmation bias), but that's no reason to hate her. It wasn't as if she forced the other mages to go with her to the Venatori, they went with her willingly. Those who opposed it left.

Everyone knows of Tevinter, the idea that she and her mages would be anything but fodder or slaves to them is ludicrous. Also, Redcliffe has mages in it who voted against the alliance and were forced to go along with it.  She could have reached out to a variety of sources including the Inquisition and the crown, but instead, she hurried into a Tevinter alliance which apparently she didn't look into at all.

For me the "I never went to Oralis" thing stuck in my craw, feels like a stupid lie and is never explained, if it is time magic, something that has never before existed inDA, the rules of time travel need to be laid down or hinted at.  I kinda think the problem with Fiona is the bad writing and set-up for that quest that does no one any favors.

It was an elf story.  You've got Solas, elven gods, truth about elves, all kinds of elven ruins, dialogue you can't understand unless you're an elf- elf centered story.  It really seems like you're missing something if you don't play as an elf.  The qunari are cool and I wanted to learn more about them, but you really get very little, and nothing more if you play as one.  Bull will fill you in no matter who you are and your qunari PC wasn't really qunari. Plus the qunari get fewer armors, and some bad design choices; every other race has race specific armor- even if it is hard to find, but not the qunari.  I tried playing as a dwarf, got a few hours in, but it seems like there is nothing for you.

I didn't mind playing as a human Hawke and I wouldn't have minded playing as an Inquisitor elf, especially if it meant more and better design choices when it came to character including a body slider, better hair, and cool armor.

I think they should have just made everyone an elf, and made the elf models less twiggy.  The dwarves and qunari didn't seem to make much difference in the story and the qunari had a distinct lack of, well, everything, compared to the other races.

As humble as you probably believe your letter was, I'm pretty offended by it.  You are basically asking the company to apologize for not making the game you wanted them to make.  You insult the people who worked hard to create DAI, and you seem to believe that any problems with the game are easy ones for them to solve or things they shouldn't have done in the first place.  Did they work for years on the game?  Yes?  Did they create something beautiful and interesting, a game better than most on the market?  yes?  Can we assume that they worked incredibly hard and wanted to produce something they are proud of and we would love.  yes.  With all of that, with all they have done, you are demanding more, and asking they be sorry they did not please you- you individually. On top of this you post the letter publicly on their own forum.  None of that is humble.  It is the exact opposite of humility.

If it is going to be a quest make it something besides find 3 out-of-the-way and random areas and them minerals on a completely different map; give me a dungeon or specific area, a gauntlet, not a fetching.  I do think it would be better for them to transfer.  I found a trainer.  I talked with them.  They trained me.  Specialization accomplished.  

Completely disagree with OP.  Games evolve.  Players want different experiences even from the same franchise.  DAO had numerous dlc's and a large expansions I did not want any more of that game.  If I want more I will play it again.  I just find it odd that folks seem to think gaming was perfected in one particular era and should just be an endless spawn of whatever they interpreted that to be.  Accept the game for what it is/  It can be enjoyable and lovely; it is not going to be DAO.

Amen.  At the very least they should make them transferable as in DAO, so you do it once you've got them in following playthroughs.  Making them so hard to find and not just random drops in areas was an additional fun killer.

Depends on my Inquisitor, one thought there is no way the Qun are going to honor an alliance when it is no longer valuable to them, especially if it is headed by a Tal-Vashoth or mage.  On the other hand, one Inquisitor thought he would help be a force of change in the Qun, and as Gatt pointed out, fix the stuff he doesn't like from the inside.  The Chargers are soldiers; they knew what they were getting into.  Bull says early on hard decisions are what make a leader.  I agree with Dr. Rush though, it seems like Bull should be the one to decide, but I guess he would be ruining a possible alliance for the Inquisition.  

Love them both, but felt so connected to the place and people in Kirkwall after spending so much time with them.

DA2 was always a good game.  It wasn't perfect, but I loved that it took place only in Kirkwall- loved the characters, loved the story, loved Hawke.  Loved it.

Fetch quests?  I don't see how more content is a problem.  I don't see how exploring and expanding the world is a bad thing.  The areas are not generic, and they are worth being experienced.  They seemed lived in; they seem like someone cares about them.  Given that one of the biggest complaints about DA2 was reused environments and limited scope it seems odd that the opposite is now the complaint- especially because the quest are optional.

My compliant is replay: I don't like having to search for schematics all over again, or those very specific specialization quests.  I would like to be able to do that stuff once and then just have it there as in DAO.  

RPGs are not evolving (or at least not in the sense you imply) - Divinity OS, Pillars of Eternity, Torment ToN, Wasteland 2, Age of Decadence, Lords of Xulima, Legend of Grimrock, Loren the Amazon Princess, and more actionish ones like Grim Dawn, Path of Exile, Aarklash Legacy, The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing... the list goes on. These are all successful RPGs (with the exception of Pillars and Torment - they are yet to be released) that stick to the old formula. Not much evolving here.  

Huge molochs like EA are evolving to extend their reach. And the more reach you have, the more money you milk. For some, such state of affairs is displeasing, as they see their beloved series (which started, and this is key here, as a true-to-roots RPG and they, as fans, have the right to voice their concerns regarding the sequels, which depart for the original formula) turn more casual-action-game with every next installment. For some though, it's all good. 

But do not dismiss those hardcore RPG gamers that hoped DA:I would at least resemble DA:O in its overall mechanics. First, there was an RPG, then it became an action game.

 

Peace.

You're listing RPG's that use their retro-ness as a selling point.  I don't know if calling something the worst ever is voicing concerns.  I don't see that games becoming accessible to more players and expanding their story-telling capabilties and complexity as a bad thing.  I can't see DAI as some sort of betrayal because it wasn't as punishing as DAO.  I didn't find Divinity compelling.  We can argue the combat was better, but I found it repetitive and the story really weak.   I will readily admit I love the stories Bioware tells and the worlds it creates; I don't think anyone does it better.  The killing stuff part is not nearly as interesting to me.  There are games that are pure strategy.  Dragon Age has never been one of them.  So, to me, there is no way it can be the worst.  It works, it has a little something for everyone, and it does what Bioware does best- tell a good story and create an interesting world. 

I'm really tired of these hyperbolic posts.  The gist seems to be if it is not the exact game you wanted or it is not the perfect game it is the absolute worst.  I loved Inquisition.  Like ME3 it built the world.  The environments told a story, NPC's added to it, and then there was the main quest, which in many ways is secondary to looking at what Thedas is and who its people are.  Is this different than RPG in days of yore?  Yes, they did not have the ability or the history to let much beyond text tell a story.  RPG's are evolving with the technology and the games that came before.  I feel like a number of the whingers are just missing the point.  

I want to love Dorian.  Annoyed we get a gay stereotype, he's bitchy, beautiful, and loves drinking.  He has some moments, but the party banter I've heard has all involved alcohol and pettiness.  Please tell me there is more.

I have the same problem.

I might feel better about her if it was explained who asked the inquisitor to see the mages.  Her denial of it seems like a lie since we have seen no other instances of impersonation, magical or otherwise, and no one steps forward to claim responsibility, there also don't seem to be any hints on who else it might have been or why they would send us her way and do nothing else on behalf of the mages.  Aligning with Tevinter was just, mages aren't well-liked and Tevinter less so, how did she imagine that would ever work out, and why does she get to speak unilaterally for all the other mages?  It seems completely insane to me.  

He's on of my favorite characters in the game.  So great, so, so, great.

nooooooooooooooooo!   

PvP is about separation.  Dragon AGe and Bioware games are about creating worlds and communities, about uniting peoples.  They're also about individuality, your choices.  It is a struggle against a greater foe.  PvP is one-upsmanship, degradation, brutality, ruthlessness.  It's about showing who the "real players" are versus the noobs.  I don't want it and I don't see it as a fit.

I thought I saw on the wiki interpretations of the tattoos, but given that the art book comes out with the game and the reference guide in April I'm holding out hope it will be found in those places.  Maybe the Dalish tattoos are related to specific clans, or maybe based on a Keeper's vision that is not explained to the receiver.  I wish there were more tattoos, so I admit to my bias, but I also think the elf is not Dalish without them.  I feel like asking them to be taken out would be like asking for  a tall dwarf or a tiny qunari.  Yes, it is possible in the world, and it could make for an interesting story, but then doesn't it take away from the actual story?  Wouldn't people constantly be remarking on it, "So you're a city elf?"  "No, I'm Dalish."  "No, you're not."  "where is your blood writing?"  "I thought it looked stupid, so I ran off from my clan."  "So, you're not Dalish."  "I can make my hand glow."

meh.  An elf who wants to deny the dalish just moves to the city.  I'm not sure when it happens, but it is pretty young.  It's a rite of passage.  So, I don't find a elf denying his clan that interesting.  I want to know more about the dalish.  I like tattoos, so yeah, elf with no tattoos is boring to me.

I love the tattoos, and it is a Dalish elf, this is what they do.  It is part of the culture and lore.  Throw a helmet on them, choose a light color close to skin tone and the smallest tattoo and then make a really boring elf.  

They have said there is not a half hour intro before the character creation, that in fact it is almost immediate, so going back to fix things shouldn't be a big pain.  They have also said their could be something similar to a mirror of transformation coming.  Did they implement numbers or codes so we can share inquisitors or quickly tweak them?

Also, OP your language seems insulting in title and tone.  I have seen very few games where you can change a character in game.  I would love the feature, but I could hardly call it a screw up.  It is a choice of resources not a mistake.  It does not change how the game plays or runs.

I don't understand why Loras is used as an example.  He's vain and naive.  In Marin's world the Knight in Shining Armor is a fool who is playing by archaic rules no one else follows and at best is a pawn and at worst is beheaded.  Loras just wants to play at battle and have flowers thrown at him.  

I think what you're looking for is a male Cassandra, romantic, serious, powerful, dedicated to an ideal, uncompromising.  Before I thought Sebastian, but he was pretty wishy-washy.  I think the closest actually is Varric, charismatic, loyal, and manly.  I'd be for a dwarven knight.  I'd love a qunari one.  Sten was pretty knight-ish.  I'm also sure he had a crush on my male warden.