2068 réponses à ce sujet

[FireAndBlood]

Now are we absolutely sure Iron Bull is a companion? Why haven't we seen a picture of him with the party like we did with Solas?

[Phate Phoenix]

Well, Arishok also has TWO swords, but Iron Bull is only ever seen using ONE. Even if Arishok's "rogue" status isn't a game play vs story issue, it's still not all that accurate to compare them. We don't have any evidence of Iron Bull actually using two weapons.

 

But I think I get it, people are just employing wishful thinking to stretch a little evidence a long way.

 

Agreed. If Cullen is a companion, then either the party distribution is uneven, or the Iron Bull isn't a companion, or the Grey Warden isn't a companion.

 

It's mostly likely the first. In which case, I think we might actually get a third mage over a third rogue this time. Which would be fun.

[Phate Phoenix]

Now are we absolutely sure Iron Bull is a companion? Why haven't we seen a picture of him with the party like we did with Solas?

 

That's my theory, that the Iron Bull is an NPC.  But he was confirmed in several magazines, but I'm taking nothing but Dev confirmation as gospel.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Agreed. If Cullen is a companion, then either the party distribution is uneven, or the Iron Bull isn't a companion, or the Grey Warden isn't a companion.

 

It's mostly likely the first. In which case, I think we might actually get a third mage over a third rogue this time. Which would be fun.

I'm not really convinced Cullen is a party member yet, honestly. 

[Darth Krytie]

I'm not really convinced Cullen is a party member yet, honestly. 

 

Me neither. I'm not convinced of much, though. I wonder if they'll confirm all of them before launch or not. Did they do so with Origins or Kirkwall? I can't recall.

 

The ONLY way having an uneven party balance makes sense to me is if they are doing something particular with the builds...like having a Grey Warden in the party can functionally do something another warrior cannot. Then, it might make sense to me.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Me neither. I'm not convinced of much, though. I wonder if they'll confirm all of them before launch or not. Did they do so with Origins or Kirkwall? I can't recall.

 

The ONLY way having an uneven party balance makes sense to me is if they are doing something particular with the builds...like having a Grey Warden in the party can functionally do something another warrior cannot. Then, it might make sense to me.

Well, back a few pages I think David Gaider implied they may be announced before and we're just being overly impatient if we expect to know NOW. Which is obviously true. lol

 

It seems to me he implied we'd probably/maybe know about Cullen before launch, though? Here is a link to the page that's on;

 

http://forum.bioware...8#entry16377280

[Darth Krytie]

Well, back a few pages I think David Gaider implied they may be announced before and we're just being overly impatient if we expect to know NOW. Which is obviously true. lol

 

It seems to me he implied we'd probably/maybe know about Cullen before launch, though? Here is a link to the page that's on;

 

http://forum.bioware...8#entry16377280

 

If we weren't impatient, then they wouldn't be doing their jobs, am I right? Impatience is interest and they like it.

[ElitePinecone]

Iron Bull will likely be warrior, because... a rogue? ... I have hard time imagining it. He would get stuck in the ground with his horns if he ever tried to do a back-flip. Or kill someone accidentaly

 

Hahaha! 

 

Now are we absolutely sure Iron Bull is a companion? Why haven't we seen a picture of him with the party like we did with Solas?

 

Four magazines said he was, yes, based on a visit to Bioware in late Feb. It might be five now, given an Australian magazine is just about to publish their preview.

 

(The survey in September 2012 also called him a companion.)

 

I'm not really convinced Cullen is a party member yet, honestly. 

 

Ditto. I'm highly doubting it, in fact.

[ElitePinecone]

Cullen is the trickiest because of these Greg Eillis tweets.  The fact that we know that he's a major character based on his time spent in the recording studio pretty much solidifies that:  1.)  he's a major character; and 2.) the guy in the concept art who looks like Cullen is Cullen.  Do we know if he's a companion?  No, but if the numbers are accurate and his time in the studio would correspond to about 1200-1500 lines, then he's probably a companion, given that most companions end up with between 600 and 1200 lines of dialogue (the numbers are in one of these threads, maybe a Cullen one).  Now, he could just be a major NPC, but we don't really have any good NPC characters to compare him to because none have had anywhere near that many lines before.  However, the "companionship" tweet is pretty much useless because Greg Ellis didn't know what it meant when he answered and we haven't ever seen Cullen with a weapon in any of the concept art, so maybe he really is an advisor who has a ton of dialogue.  If I had to guess, I'd say he's in because the evidence is leaning that way, but he's far from confirmed at this point.  Regarding the romance issue, I think it's much more likely to think that he's an LI given what Greg Ellis stated in his tweets.  Is it possible that he's not?  Sure.  But is it likely? Probably not.  I would say, regardless of his role, he's probably an LI.

 
Just on this, David wrote a bit of a clarification in another thread:
 

 

David Gaider wrote...

 

ahellbornlady wrote..
He's recorded 1000+ lines by now, at least.

 
Umm...no. You guys are reaching.
 
Party members in previous games have done up to 20 sessions total. You cannot take that number and multiply it by x to get the number of lines for a given character, particularly when sessions vary in length (depending on the complexity of the lines being recorded), we do a lot of re-records, and actors often record for multiple characters.
 
I get the hope that's in this thread, and I feel ya, but I'd advise keeping a rein on your extrapolations--for your own peace of mind.

 

(side note: I really do not like this new quoting system. I know it's meant to cut down on quote pyramids, but it's virtually impossible to quote someone and include quotes they used in their post. Frustrating.)

[daveliam]

Yeah, I read that quote from Gaider.  I go back and forth on whether he is a companion or not.  Perhaps he really is a companion and Gaider simply wanted to correct an incorrect assumption that people were using because it was being taken with a lot of merit.  Perhaps he's not, but just a major NPC.  I could go either way, but my gut is saying companion and romanceable, even though I could be wrong on both accounts.  I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he was an advisor NPC, though.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I realize this isn't really proof of anything and it's also possibly a marketing thing, but we've not seen devs jump in and tell people to rein in their expectations on any other single companion prospect. It does make me a little more skeptical than I'd be otherwise. I could easily be reading too much into it, though.

[FireAndBlood]

The number of companions being nine was revealed in the Game Informer coverage, the fact that there was no DLC companion was revealed a few weeks ago. Maybe when they revealed the number of companions during the GI coverage they were actually planning to have a DLC companion at the time, but then they decided against it and included that companion in the main game, bringing up the number of companions to ten, this would make the 3:3:3 ratio work but with one extra companion.

 

A bit of a stretch I know, but it's something to think about.

[ElitePinecone]

I realize this isn't really proof of anything and it's also possibly a marketing thing, but we've not seen devs jump in and tell people to rein in their expectations on any other single companion prospect. It does make me a little more skeptical than I'd be otherwise. I could easily be reading too much into it, though.

 

Oh, yeah. They're being meticulous is not confirming anything except actual misconceptions, which is admirably maddening

I guess the important bit was that we can't assume how many lines Cullen has recorded - and all the CSI: BSN stuff about comparing his total to DAO companions or whatever could be entirely irrelevant. 

[ElitePinecone]

The number of companions being nine was revealed in the Game Informer coverage, the fact that there was no DLC companion was revealed a few weeks ago. Maybe when they revealed the number of companions during the GI coverage they were actually planning to have a DLC companion at the time, but then they decided against it and included that companion in the main game, bringing up the number of companions to ten, this would make the 3:3:3 ratio work but with one extra companion.

 

A bit of a stretch I know, but it's something to think about.

 

The website still says nine, unless it's being deliberately sneaky. 

 

(I always thought maybe they were just leaving out the DLC companion, but now we know there won't be one.)

[Nocte ad Mortem]

The number of companions being nine was revealed in the Game Informer coverage, the fact that there was no DLC companion was revealed a few weeks ago. Maybe when they revealed the number of companions during the GI coverage they were actually planning to have a DLC companion at the time, but then they decided against it and included that companion in the main game, bringing up the number of companions to ten, this would make the 3:3:3 ratio work but with one extra companion.

 

A bit of a stretch I know, but it's something to think about.

The companion number isn't just from a magazine. They give the number 9 on the actual game site. I think it's one of the most legit pieces of information we have, considering.

[Darth Krytie]

The website still says nine, unless it's being deliberately sneaky. 

 

(I always thought maybe they were just leaving out the DLC companion, but now we know there won't be one.)

 

Did they ever answer whether or not we had an either/or companion? Like a one or the other type situation?

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Did they ever answer whether or not we had an either/or companion? Like a one or the other type situation?

I'm pretty certain they haven't given any word on this. I've actually wondered if mutually exclusive party members wasn't a justification for the likely 6/3 gender split, since Origins had a similar number accounting for both Alistair and Loghain. 

[FireAndBlood]

The website still says nine, unless it's being deliberately sneaky. 

 

(I always thought maybe they were just leaving out the DLC companion, but now we know there won't be one.)

 

 

The companion number isn't just from a magazine. They give the number 9 on the actual game site. I think it's one of the most legit pieces of information we have, considering.

Yeah I meant  at the time they made the site they were planning nine companions and one DLC companion but afterwards they decided to include that companion in the main game. I'm most likely completely wrong but I thought I'd throw that theory out there. 

[ElitePinecone]

Did they ever answer whether or not we had an either/or companion? Like a one or the other type situation?

 

Nothing about that yet. From what we know in this thread I'm tempted to say maybe not? I can't really see any two companions that would be substitutable (I hope that's a word), unless it's something like Companion A refuses to join if Companion B is also a party member. 

 

The downside to mutually exclusive companions is that they seem awfully expensive (which we kinda saw in DA2's case, where Bethany and Carver were absent for so much of the game). 

[Nocte ad Mortem]

My reservation with mutual companions is also that I don't exactly see where the clash would be, but I guess we also don't know anything about the positions of a lot of these characters. It could also be something like the choice between Kaidan and Ashley in ME1, though. Possibly you can only save one person during a recruitment mission, or some other scenario that doesn't necessarily require a clash between party members. It was basically like that with DA2's siblings, also.

 

I would be much happier without mutually exclusive companions, though. I've never been a big fan. I always avoid losing people if at all possible. I'm never the type to proclaim my desire to murder knife a possible character. I like keeping everyone around for whatever content they might have attributed to them. lol

[CENIC]

I'm convinced on Sera, Iron Bull and the Grey Warden. But the last two slots are pretty much up in the air! There isn't an overwhelming amount of evidence for any of the possible candidates, unless you don't require any evidence that Dorian is DHMG (in which case, his presence in a couple pieces of concept art is optimistic)

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I kind of feel like someone would have given us a hint if we were completely wrong about Iron Bull. None of the devs have given him the "Cullen treatment". Why wouldn't they mention it if they knew everyone assumed he was a companion and he wasn't, if they're bringing it up with Cullen? They obviously want to keep Cullen ambiguous, for some reason, but it seems like they're fine with allowing us to continue thinking Iron Bull is a companion. If they're fine with everyone thinking so, it seems like maybe it's because they know they already told some of those magazines it was true. Just a theory, though.

[azarhal]

I kind of feel like someone would have given us a hint if we were completely wrong about Iron Bull. None of the devs have given him the "Cullen treatment". Why wouldn't they mention it if they knew everyone assumed he was a companion and he wasn't, if they're bringing it up with Cullen? They obviously want to keep Cullen ambiguous, for some reason, but it seems like they're fine with allowing us to continue thinking Iron Bull is a companion. If they're fine with everyone thinking so, it seems like maybe it's because they know they already told some of those magazines it was true. Just a theory, though.

 

Dev do not give hints, wrong or false, about "story" stuff that haven't been official announced (and followers are part of the story), because it might be a spoiler*.  They either present content officially, like saying early on that Morrigan is not going to be follower, or let people make all sort of assumptions. They don't mind all the speculations.  Some are going to correct assumption about the development process though, like Gaider correcting assumptions over actors knowing about gameplay elements like followers and VO recording.

 

*That is the general idea, some even prefer not talking about anything because they are unsure what is safe to talk about and what isn't.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

So, this source says we will get an even class distribution;

 

http://ladyinsanity....pax-weekend-was

 

Thoughts? Which warriors are out or not warriors? Cassandra/Cullen/Grey Warden/Iron Bull would be too many warriors.

 

Also, who do you think the extra rogue and mage are?

[ManOfSteel]

So, this source says we will get an even class distribution;

 

http://ladyinsanity....pax-weekend-was

 

Thoughts? Which warriors are out or not warriors? Cassandra/Cullen/Grey Warden/Iron Bull would be too many warriors.

 

Also, who do you think the extra rogue and mage are?

I suppose either Iron Bull or the Grey Warden could be an Arcane Warrior? We've seen no evidence that either of them have magic potential in the slightest, but never say never right?