327 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

berelinde wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Trivializing other people's concerns.

I can do it, too.

False equivalency.  I have all the information I need to justify trivializing your concern, in much the same way an adult would respond to a child worried about a monster in their closet.

To balance out how transparently condescending that statement is, I'll admit openly that if and when you can point to the unquestioned existence of said monster, I will be the first to line up and say I was wrong.  Until then, it's still an irrational and baseless fear that I have no problem labeling as such.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:24 .

[ElitePinecone]

The *spoilers* thing seems as though it happens at the start of DA3. Officially, the development team haven't mentioned anything about the storyline, and have said they aren't going to for a while.

We only know about it because the marketing survey leaked, so a) I'm wary of spoiling people who haven't read that yet, and Bioware does (understandably) want to control what gets released, when, and by whom.

It's possible to tell from Asunder that the Chantry isn't really in a good position going into DA3, but the spoiler thing changes a lot, and I think it should still be kept in spoiler tags until Bioware reveals the plot of the game in a while.

I definitely agree that there needs to be a good, long prologue explaining who is doing what, when, why, etc... ideally a sort of origin feature, but that might be wishful thinking. I'd love to have the option of attending the "conference" thing with a bunch of different origins (Templar warrior, mage, Orlesian noble, street thief) so we could hear about the various positions and sides before the event at the start of the game before emerging from them as the Inquisitor. It'd be a great and possibly not-expensive way to have origins in the game, and give a bit more background to our character than we had with Hawke.

[Huntress]

Vandicus wrote...

Anyways, my original point that the Warden was a character forced to join an organization with an official religious and political stance(worship of Andraste and nonintervention) still stands. If the DA3 is forced to join/lead an organization with particular religious beliefs that they may or may not share/agree with, it will be no different than being Warden Commander in Fereldan. The official religion of the Wardens? Andrastian. The official religion of the Inquisition? Andrastian(probably, assuming they even have an official religion). Does the Warden commander have to be Andrastian to lead the Grey Wardens? No, he can be a dalish elf worshipping those zany elven deities. 

What do warden's do? Kill darkspawns, they do not answer to the chantry because  they become and here is a funny word: NEUTRAL. see they do not care if they recruit a rivain guy  who doesn't belive in the maker/andraste but probably believe in the Qun or elves who already have a religion and are second class citizens or dwarves who workship rocks. did you get my message?

NOW what does an inquisitor do? search for someone or somethings that threaten their teachings and faith.

In other words: they  are intended to eliminate heretic's.

So am sorry if I do not think playing as a inquisitor is as glamorous as you think.
And is  nothing similar to been a warden NOTHING, and you should know by now the difference between neutral organization vs Zealotry organizations.

Modifié par Huntress, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:34 .

[Vandicus]

Huntress wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

Anyways, my original point that the Warden was a character forced to join an organization with an official religious and political stance(worship of Andraste and nonintervention) still stands. If the DA3 is forced to join/lead an organization with particular religious beliefs that they may or may not share/agree with, it will be no different than being Warden Commander in Fereldan. The official religion of the Wardens? Andrastian. The official religion of the Inquisition? Andrastian(probably, assuming they even have an official religion). Does the Warden commander have to be Andrastian to lead the Grey Wardens? No, he can be a dalish elf worshipping those zany elven deities. 

What do warden's do? Kill darkspawns, they do not answer to the chantry because  they become and here is a funny word: NEUTRAL. see they do not care if they recruit a rivain guy  who doesn't belive in the maker/andraste but probably believe in the Qun or elves who already have a religion and are second class citizens or dwarves who workship rocks. did you get my message?

NOW what does an inquisitor do? search for someone or somethings that threaten their teachings and faith.

In other words: they  are intended to eliminate heretic's.

So am sorry if I do not think playing as a inquisitor is as glamorous as you think.
And is  nothing similar to been a warden NOTHING, and you should know by now the difference between neutral organization vs Zealotry organizations.

The protagonist is joining an organization with predetermined beliefs. I personally think the Wardens were rather fanatical about eliminating the darkspawn, something in their beliefs about protecting humanity from the darkspawn at all costs 


Now I'm not sure where you're getting all these ideas about the Inquisition in DA having to do with hunting down heretics. From what we've discovered so far they're investigating something related to a behinds the scene mastermind, maybe a Flemeth type character causing all the havoc in the world.

[berelinde]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

False equivalency.  I have all the information I need to justify trivializing your concern, in much the same way an adult would respond to a child worried about a monster in their closet.

You've seen the script for DA3? Astonishing!

A more valid, less condescending analogy would be that you are ignoring the hurricane warning and leaving your garbage cans out because there's only a 40% chance of a category 3 storm.

My entire point is that DA3 is still in development. By discussing peoples' concerns *now*, it may enable BioWare to address them without strafing the neighborhood with banana peels and soggy paper towels.

Edit: And I'm late for work. No opportunity to post again after this, so feel free to be as insulting as you like.

Modifié par berelinde, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:47 .

[Jerrybnsn]

ElitePinecone wrote...

We only know about it because the marketing survey leaked, so a) I'm wary of spoiling people who haven't read that yet, and Bioware does (understandably) want to control what gets released, when, and by whom.


I definitely agree that there needs to be a good, long prologue explaining who is doing what, when, why, etc... ideally a sort of origin feature, but that might be wishful thinking.
 

Yeah, the DA3 prologue can't be like ME3 beginning. 

"Hey Shep!  You're back on earth, what's up?" 

"Oh, the usual, on trial for committing mass genocide.  What's up with you?"


Wha-a-at?

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:45 .

[Vandicus]

berelinde wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

False equivalency.  I have all the information I need to justify trivializing your concern, in much the same way an adult would respond to a child worried about a monster in their closet.

You've seen the script for DA3? Astonishing!

A more valid, less condescending analogy would be that you are ignoring the hurricane warning and leaving your garbage cans out because there's only a 40% chance of a category 3 storm.

My entire point is that DA3 is still in development. By discussing peoples' concerns *now*, it may enable BioWare to address them without strafing the neighborhood with banana peels and soggy paper towels.

He hasn't seen the script but presumably he knows what the Inquisition is about. As elite pinecone mentioned in his spoilers, the main focus of the Inquisition is not hunting down heretics. Since we know what the main focus of the Inquisition is, it is not reasonable to assume that the main focus is hunting down heretics, when we've already been told what the main focus is.

[Uccio]

Thats a deal breaker for me, I will not be forced to play a religious zealot.

Modifié par Ukki, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[upsettingshorts]

berelinde wrote...

You've seen the script for DA3? Astonishing!

Your instinct for missing the point is astonishing.

My argument is that you have not seen the script.  Stop pretending you know what the game is about.

It does not follow that I have seen the script and know what I'm talking about, only that I have the sense not to invent what I imagine the game will be out of next to nothing.

berelinde wrote... 

A more valid, less condescending analogy would be that you are ignoring the hurricane warning and leaving your garbage cans out because there's only a 40% chance of a category 3 storm.

Hurricane warnings are based on scientific observations and measurable data.  This is another false equivalency.

You heard a noise in your closet, therefore it has to be the monster you dread.  Despite the evidence - such as is being offered by ElitePinecone - that implies it may be something else entirely.

berelinde wrote...  

My entire point is that DA3 is still in development. By discussing peoples' concerns *now*, it may enable BioWare to address them without strafing the neighborhood with banana peels and soggy paper towels.

 

I thought your entire point was to assert your irrational fear of BioWare's alleged anti-mage agenda.

Telling everyone within earshot that about the monster in your closet isn't voicing concern, it's paranoia.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:02 .

[Olmerto]

I have an issue with people who doubt or deny the creativity and creative rights of Bioware and, in an effort to control that creative process, post long-winded threats and ultimatums that they will not buy or support the game unless Bioware "do as they command".  These people have rashly formed all manner of presumptions about the story Bioware intends to tell, condemned it, and have posted extensively in an effort to make others become similarly irate and get them, too, to threaten a boycott.  Please, if you don't like the product, just boycott; don't threaten and speechify.

And please, don't try to soft-peddle the title or plot of the game to these malcontents.  The title is "Inquisition".  Bioware clearly knows the import of this term both as to Earth history and Thedas history.  They embrace it.  (I embrace it if they do.) If that doesn't interest you, or turns you off, then just leave without the speeches.  This game and this IP are not about YOU and your personal expectations.  It doesn't matter if you've become too invested in the politics of Thedas to play a role that Bioware deems realistic, immersive and exciting.  Frankly, we don't even know how this Inquisition comes into being or how the player becomes a part of it. But if you're prone to reject every possibility simply because you've got one angle in this setting and one angle only, and if that angle isn't embraced by Bioware then to hell with it, then by all means just leave.

Every Bioware game I've EVER played has had an extremely engaging plot and story. I am looking to buy a game designed by the professional writers and designers at Bioware exercising their creativity and inspiration to develop the best product they can.  I am not interested in a game passing the democratic muster of BSN, as manipulated by the threats and usurpation of a malcontented few.  The direction of this IP should not be subject to a vote nor require unanimity among those posting on BSN. 

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

What I have gotten out of what I have read is that just because you are playing as an inquisitor does not mean that it is by the chantry. It may be from some other faction that this comes into play. From what I have read out there, it has been implied you will have to find out who or what is pulling the strings. Supposedly there is an all out templar/mage war, but not that you are choosing sides as you did in DA2 necessarily. More as to finding out who is behind and fueling the conflict. I agree, I do not want my character forced into a predetermined belief. I had a hard time with DA2 in trying to side with anyone because they were both (in my opinion) too fanatical and I didn't agree with either side. I hope that if they go this route, you are not siding with either side but trying to find out and destroying who or what is behind the war to bring peace.

[RolandX9]

kibblesticks wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

What I do find interesting is the potential for subversion: both of the player's expectations of what an "Inquisition" should be, and the internal logic of the gameworld - it's possible we could use the rhetorical/legal power of being part of "an Inquisition" without actually having to resort to the methods it used or the causes it supported.

Wow, I was thinking the exact same thing only I couldn't word it properly.  Thanks for writing my thoughts for me.

C'mon guys, stop getting riled up over a name.  Just because "Inquistion" has negative/extremist connotations, doesn't mean DA3's Inquistion will adhere to them.  It might only be a chantry organisation for funding purposes, but really you have complete autonomy to get the job done.

It's not that simple. The RL Inquisition is one of the foulest, most despicable organizations ever formed by man, and that it still creates such strong feelings centuries later should be Warning Flag #1 to Bioware. I, and apparently a lot of people, will never play a willing member of the Inquisition, let alone its leader (c.f. http://en.wikipedia....s_de_Torquemada).

[berelinde]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

berelinde wrote...  

My entire point is that DA3 is still in development. By discussing peoples' concerns *now*, it may enable BioWare to address them without strafing the neighborhood with banana peels and soggy paper towels.

 

I thought your entire point was to assert your irrational fear of BioWare's alleged anti-mage agenda.

That's a pretty big assumption. It's also dead wrong. My point was always to discuss ways to avoid alienating players who are uncomfortable with the religious and political focus of the future inquisitor. I hoped that by stating these concerns openly while there is still time to make alterations, BioWare would be able to clarify or adjust what was necessary to retain the interest of fans like me. Had you read the other half of my posts, you would have read the part where I stated over and over how what I have seen so far is not reassuring, but that I'm going to have to wait to see how things pan out.

But it's more fun to ignore the parts that don't support your assumption, so I do understand the conclusions *you* jumped to. I really do have to leave for work now, so I don't have time to google any clever conclusion-jumping images for your benefit.

[upsettingshorts]

RolandX9 wrote...

It's not that simple. The RL Inquisition is one of the foulest, most despicable organizations ever formed by man, and that it still creates such strong feelings centuries later should be Warning Flag #1 to Bioware. I, and apparently a lot of people, will never play a willing member of the Inquisition, let alone its leader (c.f. http://en.wikipedia....s_de_Torquemada).

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the Medieval Catholic inqusition to be relevant to discussion of Dragon Age's Inquisition.  

berelinde wrote...
Had you read the other half of my posts, you would have read the part where I stated over and over how what I have seen so far is not reassuring, but that I'm going to have to wait to see how things pan out.

There has been nothing to see.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:12 .

[R2s Muse]

As an interesting point of note in this discussion, even the original Inquisition was not part of the Chantry. It only started working for the Chantry when they signed the Nevarran Accord and decided to split the Inquisition into two groups moving forward, the templars and the seekers. Prior to that they seem to have been more like a private, mage & heretic hunting militia. Anti-magic, according to David Gaider, but not necessarily part of the Chantry. The Chantry was young at the time and apparently the two groups, Inquisition & Chantry, found they had common cause. So... if there are connections to the historical group... they may not necessarily be religious ones.

The other thing I wanted to point out is that David Gaider has also mentioned the rise of a future Inquisition in the context of the old... so making an explicit connection, altho indeed it was just as a hypothetical. So again, not so far fetched that they're related in some way, beyond the obvious thesaurus/word choice issues. Personally... I guess I'm still leery of the leaked plot description... altho it gives me hope that the new Inquisition is not quite as sinister-sounding as the old.

From Thedas UK interview:
As a matter of fact the Templars were once all part of a group called the Inquisition. There was an Inquisition in Thedas. It existed around the time that the Chantry started to come to be. This was a time after the First Blight, after Andraste's March, when there was chaos everywhere, the Imperium had broken apart, you had the Old God cults, so a lot of blood magic. There was a lot of chaos, you had the cults of Andraste...and the Inquisition sort of arose as a group of people who said "Enough is enough, somebody has to do something about this magic that is tearing apart the world." And when the Chantry came to be they went to the Inquisition and said "Hey, we're of the same mind on this, why don't we pull together" and that's when the Inquisition turned into the Seekers and the Templar Order. They kind of merged. It'd be interesting to see if the Inquisition ever rose up again.

Also, disclaimer... berelinde you and I have discussed this all previously, so not trying to change your mind or your reservations! Just adding to the general discussion of what the Inquisition might be.

Modifié par R2s Muse, 18 septembre 2012 - 06:00 .

[RolandX9]

RolandX9 wrote...

kibblesticks wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

What I do find interesting is the potential for subversion: both of the player's expectations of what an "Inquisition" should be, and the internal logic of the gameworld - it's possible we could use the rhetorical/legal power of being part of "an Inquisition" without actually having to resort to the methods it used or the causes it supported.

Wow, I was thinking the exact same thing only I couldn't word it properly.  Thanks for writing my thoughts for me.

C'mon guys, stop getting riled up over a name.  Just because "Inquistion" has negative/extremist connotations, doesn't mean DA3's Inquistion will adhere to them.  It might only be a chantry organisation for funding purposes, but really you have complete autonomy to get the job done.

It's not that simple. The RL Inquisition is one of the foulest, most despicable organizations ever formed by man, and that it still creates such strong feelings centuries later should be Warning Flag #1 to Bioware. I, and apparently a lot of people, will never play a willing member of the Inquisition, let alone its leader (c.f. http://en.wikipedia....s_de_Torquemada).

Edit:

Olmert wrote...

I have an issue with people who doubt or deny the creativity and creative rights of Bioware and, in an effort to control that creative process, post long-winded threats and ultimatums that they will not buy or support the game unless Bioware "do as they command". 

Well, tough. The only way to influence a company is to let them know what you think -- and whether or not you'll spend your money on their products. And I think that playing the (willing) leader of the Inquistion is disgusting and won't buy a game with that premise. This is not the same thing as rejecting their right to create such a game -- I absolutely support their creative right to publish any gorram game they want. They have no right to my money, however, and I feel no obligation to be shy about saying so.

[upsettingshorts]

RolandX9 wrote...

Well, tough. The only way to influence a company is to let them know what you think -- and whether or not you'll spend your money on their products. And I think that playing the (willing) leader of the Inquistion is disgusting and won't buy a game with that premise. This is not the same thing as rejecting their right to create such a game -- I absolutely support their creative right to publish any gorram game they want. They have no right to my money, however, and I feel no obligation to be shy about saying so.

I can picture it now:

BioWare guy 1:  "There's someone on our forums who says he won't play Inquisition because the real life Catholic inquisition was a truly awful thing."

BioWare guy 2:  "What does that have to do with anything?"

BioWare gal 1:  "Beats me, I never go to the BSN."

BioWare guy 2:  "Probably for the best."

Mission.  Accomplished.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:20 .

[Vandicus]

berelinde wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

berelinde wrote...  

My entire point is that DA3 is still in development. By discussing peoples' concerns *now*, it may enable BioWare to address them without strafing the neighborhood with banana peels and soggy paper towels.

 

I thought your entire point was to assert your irrational fear of BioWare's alleged anti-mage agenda.

That's a pretty big assumption. It's also dead wrong. My point was always to discuss ways to avoid alienating players who are uncomfortable with the religious and political focus of the future inquisitor. I hoped that by stating these concerns openly while there is still time to make alterations, BioWare would be able to clarify or adjust what was necessary to retain the interest of fans like me. Had you read the other half of my posts, you would have read the part where I stated over and over how what I have seen so far is not reassuring, but that I'm going to have to wait to see how things pan out.

But it's more fun to ignore the parts that don't support your assumption, so I do understand the conclusions *you* jumped to. I really do have to leave for work now, so I don't have time to google any clever conclusion-jumping images for your benefit.

That's a pretty big assumption.

It is clear that you are opposed to an anti-mage stance for the game, and it is also clear at this time that the anti mage stance is alleged rather than proven.

So far all we know regarding religious affiliation is that the Inquisition is affiliated with the Chantry. Well guess what, the Wardens are officially affiliated with the Chantry. The Orlesian government is affiliated with the Chantry. The Fereldan government is affiliated with the Chantry. Nearly every human man, woman, and child in Thedas is affiliated with the Chantry. Even the Tevinter Imperium is affiliated with their own version of the Chantry. 

It is premature at this point to judge the depth and type of affiliation the Inquisition will have with the Chantry, when we know almost nothing about it. We do know at least that the focus of this Inquisition is not the same as our real world Inquisition. Much of Thedas and Dragon Age is related to the real historical locations and organizations, but they're not carbon copies in the least. If we were to transpose the history of Thedas onto the various peoples whose countries they represent, I expect people would be very insulted.

[ziyon conqueror]

I heard a rumor that the new character for the game is going to be called "The Inquisitor", who will either trying to stop or encourage the fighting, but it was just a rumor.

[LolaLei]

Berelinde: I know we've discussed it before in length, but at the moment it's too early to worry about what the Inquisitors job entails. Not to mention that we have no idea how or why our protagonist will end up involved with the Inquistion.

For example, due to a series of unfortunate events he/she could be mistaken for the new Inquisitor. Regardless of the circumstances in which the protagonist becomes involved in this new organisation, I'm sure the DA team wouldn't force us to run around needlessly slaughtering mages (unless we wanted to). Hell, Shepard was forced to work with Cerberus in ME2, but you could still screw them over by sending info to the Alliance and then tell The Illusive Man to go shove it up his arse.

And you never know, we might get the option to release sensitive Chantry secrets to the whole of Thedas, surely that in itself is incentive enough for you to play DA3?

[Jerrybnsn]

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

What I have gotten out of what I have read is that just because you are playing as an inquisitor does not mean that it is by the chantry.

It is by the Chantry

  It may be from some other faction that this comes into play.

It isn't.

 From what I have read out there, it has been implied you will have to find out who or what is pulling the strings.

Not really.  Or else it would be called Dragon Age: Investigation

 Supposedly there is an all out templar/mage war, but not that you are choosing sides as you did in DA2 necessarily.

From the leaks, it seems that you won't have to chose sides.  Your mission is too important for that.

  I agree, I do not want my character forced into a predetermined belief.

Which no one wants and is why the OP's post is a reasonalbe concern

 I had a hard time with DA2 in trying to side with anyone because they were both (in my opinion) too fanatical and I didn't agree with either side.

 
As did many.  It made the third act almost unbearble to play

I hope that if they go this route, you are not siding with either side but trying to find out and destroying who or what is behind the war to bring peace.

There will be a big backlash if Bioware pulled another third act on us.  We just have to wait for confirmation on this, but from the rumors it seems like DA3 won't be as dull or as pigeon holed as the title suggests.

[Jerrybnsn]

For more knowledge of the Inquisition.  Please watch the History of the World Pt. 1 on the Inquisition.

[Wulfram]

I wouldn't mind being the PC forced to a broadly pro-chantry or pro-mage view, as long as there was still a wide degree of freedom to define your own character.  I think it's likely to allow the telling of a better story than one in which the PC may have wildly different or simply unknown motivations.

I think one of the reasons DA2's story struggled was that it had to cater to the possibility that Hawke had no real interest in staging a "Rise to Power" and thus had to make their rise purely a question of happenstance, rather than goal they could work towards.  And because it had to cater to both pro-mage and pro-templar, Hawke was required to be a spectator rather than a participant.

Upsettingshorts wrote...

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the Medieval Catholic inqusition to be relevant to discussion of Dragon Age's Inquisition.  

We're speaking english, and words carry baggage.  If Bioware are not deliberately invoking the real world connotations of the word then they're idiots.

[upsettingshorts]

If there was only one "inquisition" ever in history, the term had no other meanings, uses, or implications, sure.  You know like the word "Holocaust."

It's one thing to say "well there was a real inquisition and they did things that are bad" and another to say  "obviously Dragon Age 3 will be a game about torturing mages because the real inquisition would have done that."  The former is fine, the latter is complete nonsense.  

Lacking a direct link between those two ideas means wasting any time talking about how bad the Catholic inquisition was is pointless.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 07:04 .

[upsettingshorts]

Furthermore, if we're going to go down the rabbit hole of "BioWare is drawing a direct reference to the Spanish Inquisition" we can't cherry pick. The game would then have to be about uncovering crypto-Mages who are pretending to be mundane humans/elves and torturing them into revealing their powers and thus being tranquiled or imprisoned in the Circle.

Since it is 100% not going to be about that, the acts of the real inquisition remain irrelevant to Dragon Age 3.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 18 septembre 2012 - 07:11 .