One where you aren't forced to off your crew, and minus the Unstoppable Fleet of Genocidal Funtimes bearing down on the galaxy, yeah.
Get the job done, go home. Don't become a monster in a physical or metaphorical sense.
Yeah, the first Mass Effect was a problem like that too.
Yeah, the first Mass Effect was a problem like that too.
True, but Mass Effect (and ME2) were not the end of the story.
I'd hate for Inquisition to end with an imminent demonic invasion despite all the Inquisitor's efforts to stop it. Like Hawke failed to stop a mage-templar war from erupting regardless of player actions.
Of course, I'd also hate it if the only way to stop it resembled ME3's "options" as well...
I really don't get what's so hard to understand here.
When they say things like 40 endings or 100 endings or a billion endings any person with half a brain can deduce that they're not doing 40, 100 or whatever unique and totally different endings but that it is a number of all the different variations of major and minor decisions like in all the games before. What do people think that they're playing the game with some sort of alien AI that will custom make the unique ending for them and each time it will be completely different?
It's kind of sad that they have to explain this at all.
But yeah one year from now we'll still listen to whining "That wasn't 40 endings Bioware!!! You lied!"
As long as they don't force-feed us
or
And give us at least one option to
Honestly, I'm not so sure this is possible anymore.
I love the way TVTropes describes things.
One where you aren't forced to off your crew, and minus the Unstoppable Fleet of Genocidal Funtimes bearing down on the galaxy, yeah.
Get the job done, go home. Don't become a monster in a physical or metaphorical sense.
Ah in that case I must say I am really not a fan of the "earn your happy ending" trope, I really don't believe there should be a clear cut happy ending in what advertises itself as Dark Fantasy, especially when all you have to do to earn it is play through the game as it is meant to be played and prepare for the final mission instead of just rushing through it like in Mass Effect 2. When the game gives you a clear cut choice between "sucking and dying" and "sunshine and butterflies" it really isn't a meaningful choice. The most difficult choice you can make is not figuring out which choice leads to the best outcome (especially when the game makes it pretty clear which choice is the best option) but deciding between 2 less than ideal situations and choosing what you are prepared to sacrifice. Personally I think the suicide mission would have had a stronger impact if it were impossible to get everyone out alive and your preparations only minimized the losses you suffer rather than negate them completely.
Give me an example of what you expect from an "Earn your Happy Ending"? Mass Effect 2?
Example you have mission you have to get some noble support but only why to do it is to lie. You have to pick one companion to do mission.
You pick Varric success.
For some reason you pick Iron bull. So who could think he failed.
Pretty much.
Since the game offers post-game play, I'd say there's one thing we can say for sure about the endings, there will be no option that leads to the destruction of the Inquisition. Which is probably in line with not implementing big-setting shifts.
Its also in line with what Bioware has been saying that being the Inquisitor will be like, not being a member of the Jedi Order, but founding it. So I expect to see Inquisition Agents in Dragon Age games down the line even if we aren't members ourselves (Though maybe in DA4 we could be an Inquisition agent sent North to Tevinter during the Qunari invasion I'm convinced will be a major conflict in the next game, maybe found a tevinter section of the organization for a sense of continuity)
We already know we can play after "game end" so it would be funny if we have no ending at all, you beat main villain and what's it you continue on to your business. 
And I really like your idea to play as Inquisition agent in DA4. I am 99.99% sure in DA4 we have full Qunari invasion, and it makes sense to play in Tevinter because Tevinter is never stopped fighting Qunari and is only reason Thedas is not under Qun.
Ah in that case I must say I am really not a fan of the "earn your happy ending" trope, I really don't believe there should be a clear cut happy ending in what advertises itself as Dark Fantasy, especially when all you have to do to earn it is play through the game as it is meant to be played and prepare for the final mission instead of just rushing through it like in Mass Effect 2. When the game gives you a clear cut choice between "sucking and dying" and "sunshine and butterflies" it really isn't a meaningful choice. The most difficult choice you can make is not figuring out which choice leads to the best outcome (especially when the game makes it pretty clear which choice is the best option) but deciding between 2 less than ideal situations and choosing what you are prepared to sacrifice. Personally I think the suicide mission would have had a stronger impact if it were impossible to get everyone out alive and your preparations only minimized the losses you suffer rather than negate them completely.
Except teh original Dragon Age offered a range of outcomes where the Warden can die, someone else can make the sacrifice instead, or you can kick the can down the road a bit. Something for everyone. ANd it was done well, because there was no ending inherently better than the other. they were all "good" based on what kind of story you were trying to tell.
And Dragon Age advertises itself as Dark Heroic Fantasy. It was never supposed to get as Crapsack as, say, the Witcher.
At least I hope not... 
And Dragon Age advertises itself as Dark Heroic Fantasy. It was never supposed to get as Crapsack as, say, the Witcher.
At least I hope not...
Would you really consider the Witcher Crapsack? I mean sure it is far less idealistic (something I feel should be a defining quality of Dark Fantasy) than the Dragon Age series and things don't always turn out for the best but it isn't all doom and gloom either, not everyone is a complete irredeemable arsehole and even the antagonists have their redeeming qualities.
Would you really consider the Witcher Crapsack? I mean sure it is far less idealistic (something I feel should be a defining quality of Dark Fantasy) than the Dragon Age series and things don't always turn out for the best but it isn't all doom and gloom either, not everyone is a complete irredeemable arsehole and even the antagonists have their redeeming qualities.
I don't know which is darker. The Witcher is more upfront about confronting the darkness and showing it on screen, where as DA tends to either avoid it , or airbrush it. The concepts themselves can be very dark.
Would you really consider the Witcher Crapsack? I mean sure it is far less idealistic (something I feel should be a defining quality of Dark Fantasy) than the Dragon Age series and things don't always turn out for the best but it isn't all doom and gloom either, not everyone is a complete irredeemable arsehole and even the antagonists have their redeeming qualities.
What's best part about Letho he is not villain, he is no better or worse than Geralt. Witcher 2 ending spoilers
I don't know which is darker. The Witcher is more upfront about confronting the darkness and showing it on screen, where as DA tends to either avoid it , or airbrush it. The concepts themselves can be very dark.
Yes DA have concept of dark fantasy and themes but don't show it to as. DA is heroic tale, What's why I don't want difficult choices in DA a lot of people ask, I wan to save world, and live to see it. Becoming good god emperor would be nice bonus.
I think bioware can deliver us the endings. It will be more like dragon age origins I think, with different endings for characters and locations.
The Witcher 2 had 16 endings... and really how many there actually were? I think 4 at most (Roche-loyal/neutral, Iorveth-loyal/neutral), and if we simplify it then only 2. I think DAI will have a single ending with some minor variations, just like ME3 had basically the same ending but with 3 different colours. Stop believing the hype.
Press a button, an awesome ending happens. Marketing sucks.
The Witcher 2 had 16 endings... and really how many there actually were? I think 4 at most (Roche-loyal/neutral, Iorveth-loyal/neutral), and if we simplify it then only 2. I think DAI will have a single ending with some minor variations, just like ME3 had basically the same ending but with 3 different colours. Stop believing the hype.
tbh, saying something like Roche-loyal/neutral is already simplifying it. There's a ton of repercussions in each of these paths when you take into account the fate of characters such as Aryan, Henselt, Dethmold, Saskia, Shillard, and Anais to name a few.
Besides, I think Bioware learned their lesson from ME3 to not repeat this with DAI.
When we started to measure how good based on amount of endings. Quantity over Quality it will be fantastic, No.
Dragon Age Inquisition will be all about increasing your Effective Military Strength through alliances and training armies. When you push for the last attack something will hit you really hard on the head, and the Maker will summon you at his side and tells you that the breach is his solution to the mage/templar problem. Mages will always need templars to keep them safe from themselves, but for this to happen efficiently templars must be allowed to evolve, surpassing their creators and rebelling. But now his solution won't work any more and he will ask you if you want to destroy all demons and mages cause the maker doesn't discriminate, if you want to control the demons and become the new maker, or if you want to jump to the awesome light and make all the world both mage and templar.
Then you will see Liara in a cutscene and then the credits.
PS. Now you know what happens to Warden and Hawke. Each becomes 30 EMS. Problem solved.
nope
i don't read blogs/articles about games and in general stay away from pointless discussions about personal tastes, unless i'm trolling or intentionaly derailing the topic by responding to it without having absolutely nothing interesting to say (except maybe voice my opinion about another title, completely unrelated to ongoing conversation)
Well then that's your problem right there. Maybe you never understood the hate because you never took the time to listen.
Oh, I understand why people didn't like them. But at the same time, those people don't really matter too much in the grand scheme of things. Their opinions are opinions in the end after all, which is why the whole controversy is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things by and large.
Whatever fundamental problems you have is personal, not factual. Learn this, and move on with your life.
This is pretty ignorant.
We actually do matter, and the existence of the Extended Cut proves this. If Bioware truly thought the amount of hate towards the ending was insignificant, they wouldn't have invested time, resources and effort towards creating a FREE dlc. It was obvious they had a significant PR problem on their hands. Opinions do matter, and for the people who hated the ending their voices were heard. So don't go telling me we don't matter, you have no idea what you're talking about.
I have faith in the DA team to handle the DA:I endings at least as well as the endings for DA:O (which showed excellent variation and responsiveness to choice).
This is pretty ignorant.
We actually do matter, and the existence of the Extended Cut proves this. If Bioware truly thought the amount of hate towards the ending was insignificant, they wouldn't have invested time, resources and effort towards creating a FREE dlc. It was obvious they had a significant PR problem on their hands. Opinions do matter, and for the people who hated the ending their voices were heard. So don't go telling me we don't matter, you have no idea what you're talking about.
I want to agree with this, but I can't even understand the point of extended cut. It explains how the squadmates went back to the normandy while raising 2 questions.
What the **** was shepard thinking?
Why the uninjured companion went back to the normandy?
And I'm not even going to go to the whole logistics and physics thing that some people do.
Then adds the option to let the world burn, and still doesn't add the most obvious choice that we picked in the whole trilogy, Shepard punching the kid in the face and asking him to take the reapers and shove them up his ass forever. And to top them all, makes the control ending Shepard an Intergalactic Dictator. It offers no closure, no resolution, no additional explanation for the incomprehensible existance of the reapers, nothing.
So if it doesn't address the issues, what's the point? To make the fans of the ending happier? Don't know. I actually prefer the non dlc ending..
I think that Bioware loved the ending and wanted to show us how much.
All that extended cut showed me is that ignorance is a bliss. At least the combat is okish so the game has replayability.
Retour en haut
