44 réponses à ce sujet

[Behindyounow]

Back when the game was being shown (before it was released), wasn't there an option to side with Uldred and have abominations help you in a battle instead of templars? Or something along the lines of that?

[The Angry One]

I don't recall that, but keep in mind a lot of things get dropped before release for various reasons.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

I am rather curious about that since he talks a great deal about it.

[Behindyounow]

I understand that things get dropped, but it was too good an option to pass off.



Whether you side with the templars or the mages, the mages are still controlled by the chantry, or worse.



Siding with Uldred could've ushered in a new age of mage/abomination supremacy. Especially considering that the codex describes most abominations as being a merge between mage and demon, as opposed to a human controlled by a demon.

[The Angry One]

It's precisely because it would've been a big deal that it might have been dropped to save time mind you.

[RunCDFirst]

Behindyounow wrote...
Siding with Uldred could've ushered in a new age of mage/abomination supremacy. Especially considering that the codex describes most abominations as being a merge between mage and demon, as opposed to a human controlled by a demon.

Maybe it was dropped because there was no logical reason for the rest of Fereldan to side with... you know... abominations. Especially since the only outcome would be an entire nation turned into abominations. And... well... there's the tricky problem that allying with Uldred would require a demon being put into you.

[Mnemnosyne]

If they dropped it because they felt it would take too much effort to introduce appropriate reactions elsewhere throughout the game, then I agree. It's not like the reactions of everyone else in the game, including Arl Eamon and the Landsmeet, wouldn't be different when they hear that you killed the templars and let a horde of abominations loose on the land with nothing more than an agreement for them to fight the Blight for you (and then what!?)

Indeed, after doing that, I can hardly see the nation uniting behind you, considering how evil everyone believes Abominations to be (and in general from what we saw at the tower, with good reason).

While I agree that there could theoretically be much more mutually beneficial joining of mage and "demon" (and remember that demons are no different from spirits, technically speaking, other than the emotion or feelings they choose to focus on), the ones at the tower are hardly shining examples of the possibilities.

[DavidSims]

Sometimes previewers get the wrong impression, and write things which are not true.

[SnakeStrike8]

Abominations running around all over Ferelden? That won't end well, will it? Before long you'll have the Orlesian chantry calling up a crusade against the heathens of Ferelden (and they'll probably suceed, too).

[Dunhart]

There were a few moments near the end of the Circle Tower drama that made me wonder if it was possible to side with Uldred (or have Irving possessed). It would have been an interesting third option, to be sure. They could have been stealth abominations, too, so none of your other allies would have noticed it before the last battle!

[Varenus Luckmann]

Yeah, I reacted strongly to that too. He makes this big "join me!" speech and leaves the choice up to you - and the only replies you get are four or five variations of "You horrible, horrible man. You should be ashamed. I refuse to consort with demons. Have at yeee!".

[Rainen89]

And everyone was perfectly fine marching off to war with a legion of werewolves? I thought it seemed like a possibilty given the dialogue with Uldred he seems genuinely inclined to ally with you but they probably removed the ability to do so. Granted it would've made no sense whatsoever for you to have abominations or for abominations to even side with you given demons have probably more interesting things to do then say help a person, or even listen to Uldred.

[The Angry One]

Chantry dogma says little about werewolves to my knowledge.

It does however have a whole lot to say about abominations, so yeah, I think people would have a harder time accepting abominations as the heroes of the day than werewolves.

[Mnemnosyne]

Well, the werewolves aren't quite built up over centuries to be the most evil thing ever and must be destroyed at all costs, the way the Chantry builds up abominations to be. Even some of the stories of Dane that I saw in the codex have werewolves not being just mindless killers. I can definitely see the people of Thedas being more willing to accept werewolves than abominations.

[The Angry One]

You know the funny thing is for all the bru-ha-ha about abominations, the ones we fight in game are complete crap. 99% of them turn into meatball heads with hardly any spells that spend most of their time trying to melee you with their bare hands.

That'd make a terrible army really.

[Kolaris8472]

I too got the impression there were dialogue options removed in the Uldred scene - a Werewolf-esque option seems like it was in the works at one point.

[Mavkiel]

Werewolves make sense. According to a codex entry you can find, most nobles believe that the nation was founded by a son of a werewolf. Although that same codex entry, mentions that it could have simply been his temper that was like a werewolf.

[Dunhart]

Well, someone mentioned this in another thread and I think it could make sense, Avernus mentions that the darkspawn taint is alien to demons, so they probably wouldn't be able to possess darkspawn. Therefore they'd have a vested interest in not letting them conquer the world.

[Saurel]

Did Uldred merge with a Pride Demon or what exactly had happened to him?

[David Gaider]

DavidSims wrote...
Sometimes previewers get the wrong impression, and write things which are not true.

Yes, I don't think we ever said that you could side with Uldred. There are plenty of horror stories I could tell you all about plots and such which were cut, or changed due to many other reasons -- stories of anguish where I bang my head against a table -- but this is not one of them. It was never in there.

And, anyway, my horror stories would still not be as bad as Chris Avellone's.

Modifié par David Gaider, 05 décembre 2009 - 03:59 .

[Varenus Luckmann]

Then why the offer of cooperation without an actual choice? It just SCREAMS "cut". Being able to strike a deal with a demon in Redcliffe, just to later denounce abomination-kissing blood mages as amoral bastards just feels.. wrong.

The offer shouldn't even be there.

[Dunhart]

David Gaider wrote...

DavidSims wrote...
Sometimes previewers get the wrong impression, and write things which are not true.

Yes, I don't think we ever said that you could side with Uldred. There are plenty of horror stories I could tell you all about plots and such which were cut, or changed due to many other reasons -- stories of anguish where I bang my head against a table -- but this is not one of them. It was never in there.

And, anyway, my horror stories would still not be as bad as Chris Avellone's.

Too bad, it would have been an awesome idea to have a horde of demons at your beck and call!  (spot the reference)

A bit unlikely, yes, but I'm sure you could have cooked up some justification for it.

[Suron]

Behindyounow wrote...

Back when the game was being shown (before it was released), wasn't there an option to side with Uldred and have abominations help you in a battle instead of templars? Or something along the lines of that?

except the whole...abominations becoming mindless thralls of his and he specifically says he wants to make you one.

yah..no

[Mnemnosyne]

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

Then why the offer of cooperation without an actual choice? It just SCREAMS "cut". Being able to strike a deal with a demon in Redcliffe, just to later denounce abomination-kissing blood mages as amoral bastards just feels.. wrong.
The offer shouldn't even be there.

It's not really an offer, he wants to make you an abomination.  Clearly this isn't something you're going to go for, since it'd put a demon in control, it's not some mutually beneficial arrangement he's proposing.

Not to say that it sounds like every demon/mage union would have to be so one-sided.  Given that demons and spirits are technically the same thing, differentiated only because demons feed off "negative" emotions, a mutually beneficial partnership similar to Wynne's is entirely reasonable, if you could find a demon that's willing to accept such terms.

Modifié par Koyasha, 05 décembre 2009 - 04:28 .

[Maria Caliban]

Behindyounow wrote...

Back when the game was being shown (before it was released), wasn't there an option to side with Uldred and have abominations help you in a battle instead of templars? Or something along the lines of that?

No.

David Gaider wrote...
Yes, I don't think we ever said that you could side with Uldred.

You never said or implied that. In fact, when people first started asking about siding with Uldred, you and Mary Kirby both tried to explain why that wouldn't work.

It's simply fan speculation that's morphed into fact.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 05 décembre 2009 - 04:33 .