4 réponses à ce sujet

[Elvis_Shepard]

 I'm positive that the Architect and whether he should be spared or killed has been discussed many times over, but I find it a facsinating subject.

I let him continue his work. I figured that he was making progress, the Messenger was proof of this. I find the decision one of the most difficult in the game. When I first met him I thought "what's to lose, letting him continue, even if he's lying?" A moment later I facepalmed at my stupidity. The attack at Vigil's Keep, turning Velenna into a psychopath, all the damage caused by the Mother, the Blight (although I didn't know this at the time of course), all, inadvertanly or not, his doing. 

So I put my controller down and thought it over. My character was a noble and rational Dwarf Commoner. I decided to, as the Architect puts it, take a leap of faith. I let him go in the hopes that he didn't cause anymore damage, and his intentions were as he said.

[Thetri]

No matter what you do Dragon Age 2 says hes alive. I kept him alive because i believe he may become a powerful ally in DA3.

[Xilizhra]

I let him live as well, for similar reasons.

[Saberchic]

He's alive in one of my games and dead in the other. He thinks that in order to coexist, we must all get the taint. No. Freaking. Way. I'm not dooming the races of Thedas to corrosion just so the nasty darkspawn can live.

As far as him always being alive for DA2, it's a bug they're working on.

[Elvis_Shepard]

Saberchic wrote...

He's alive in one of my games and dead in the other. He thinks that in order to coexist, we must all get the taint. No. Freaking. Way. I'm not dooming the races of Thedas to corrosion just so the nasty darkspawn can live.

As far as him always being alive for DA2, it's a bug they're working on.

When did he say everybody must get the taint?