We must stop doing Bioware's work for them you know, I want them to explain.
Or people need to understand that to not hold so much weight to 2nd hand comments or understand that the info from 2nd hand information and change due to the revel of first hand events being found and stated. That happens alot in fiction. It's called a twist.
*Sigh....
https://twitter.com/...585267336142848
"Sorry. Thought it was pretty obvious and widely known. It's never been a secret."
-Mike Laidlaw
I notice someone has already mentioned the Loghain dialogue - could someone with a twitter account also ask about Alistair's dialogue re Maric cheating? if it hasn't been asked already. And possibly why none of it is even hinted at in Origins and why they went to so much effort to hide it from the Origins players convincing them his mother was a servant?
Guest_Caladin_*
Who his mother is for me dont change who he is, heck i mind my first play through of origins, on map i went right an no left, did fair bit afor i hit redcliff an then found out who he was the son of, an even then it still never changed who he was tbh
Only thing that changes him is you hardening him or your betrayal of him, an then hardening him just makes him stand up more an voice his own opinion instead of taking a back seat like before
Maybe the mother was simply an elven Servant Girl, making both Goldanna and Alistair elf-blooded and fixing all these Issues?
Or was it specifically confirmed that Fiona is the Mother? As far as I recall it's only confirmed that Alistair is elf-blooded.
I would literally laugh if this is true, but it isn't.
Now I'm more confused than ever.
Why would Mike Laidlaw think that it was "obvious and widely known"?
What percentage of the player base does Bioware think actually reads the tie-in material? I don't remember my copy of Origins Ultimate Edition coming with a copy of The Calling. Was a voucher inside saying "order this to find out what you've been misled about" that I missed? It quite clearly wasn't the Ultimate Edition.
This is very dismissive of those that actually just play their games imho. Aren't we their major customers?
It confirms my earlier assertion - Bioware considers themselves a publishing house that does tie-in games.
Guest_Challenge Everything_*
It is Hereditary. You confusing the issue of 2 wardens not making children with the concept of what hereditary means. It a person who can be resistant to the taint and can become a warden has children before they become a warden then that child has a high chance of becoming a warden. We already see in the lore that it happen, example the Amells. The fact that 2 people who are wardens can't have kids does not change that.
*bashes head against brick wall* YOU JUST ASKED ABOUT THAT! THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED IT!
The Amells are NOT proof that some people possess an "immunity". No one is immune to the taint. Not even Wardens. If Fiona were re-exposed to the taint, there is no evidence that she would NOT contract it again. Carver and Bethany survive the Joining, and one potential Amell survives it. If you did not play as a mage in DA:O then saying that the mage would survive the Joining is not factual. Such information is non-canon. I gave you a quote from The Calling which pretty much proves my point, and yet you keep turning the argument around, back and forth to different subjects. The only evidence you have given so far is non-canon statements, assumptions, and things you are saying are lore that aren't even lore. Even if they were lore, lore has proven to not always be accurate.
*bashes head against brick wall* YOU JUST ASKED ABOUT THAT! THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED IT!
The Amells are NOT proof that some people possess an "immunity". No one is immune to the taint. Not even Wardens. If Fiona were re-exposed to the taint, there is no evidence that she would NOT contract it again. Carver and Bethany survive the Joining, and one potential Amell survives it. If you did not play as a mage in DA:O then saying that the mage would survive the Joining is not factual. Such information is non-canon. I gave you a quote from The Calling which pretty much proves my point, and yet you keep turning the argument around, back and forth to different subjects. The only evidence you have given so far is non-canon statements, assumptions, and things you are saying are lore that aren't even lore. Even if they were lore, lore has proven to not always be accurate.
I never talk about immunity. I talked about being able to become a grey wraden. The means resistance to the taint. You brought in the concept of immunity based on an assumption you had on what I meant. The Amells are examples of the resistance to the taint being Hereditary. You quote from the calling just mean the Architect is wrong about tainted people having children not that taint resistance is not Hereditary. In the book we have a brother and a sister who were able to become Wardens. We have 2 twins and a cousin who can become wardens with the Amells. It pretty much point to the fact that taint resistances is Hereditary
Now I'm more confused than ever.
Why would Mike Laidlaw think that it was "obvious and widely known"?
What percentage of the player base does Bioware think actually reads the tie-in material? I don't remember my copy of Origins Ultimate Edition coming with a copy of The Calling. Was a voucher inside saying "order this to find out what you've been misled about" that I missed? It quite clearly wasn't the Ultimate Edition.
This is very dismissive of those that actually just play their games imho. Aren't we their major customers?
It confirms my earlier assertion - Bioware considers themselves a publishing house that does tie-in games.
I imagine it's shorthand for "those who keep up with the media and Internet, and actually care about Alistair's parentage."
I imagine it's shorthand for "those who keep up with the media and Internet, and actually care about Alistair's parentage."
I don't remember Alistair's change in parent being announced on any newsfeed or major news site. I did care about Alistair's parentage actually, but my first play through of Origins seemed pretty consistent on this point and I could never of guessed there was much more to know.
I don't remember Alistair's change in parent being announced on any newsfeed or major news site. I did care about Alistair's parentage actually, but my first play through of Origins seemed pretty consistent on this point and I could never of guessed there was much more to know.
Why would a book spoiler be put up on a major news site?
I don't remember Alistair's change in parent being announced on any newsfeed or major news site. I did care about Alistair's parentage actually, but my first play through of Origins seemed pretty consistent on this point and I could never of guessed there was much more to know.
It appears as though they overestimated the number of people who read The Calling either way.
Oh well, no worries in my end. I just hope they do more with Fiona.
Why would a book spoiler be put up on a major news site?
No reason at all. Just being sarcastic. Sorry folks.
His humble beginning as a bastard prince? I... don't know about that.
It wouldn't really be surprising if a king had bastard children with tavern wenches and prostitutes. That Alistair's mother would be no one of note does kind of make his beginnings somewhat humble. If not for Duncan, he would simply have lived and died as some unhappy Templar.
I don't remember Alistair's change in parent being announced on any newsfeed or major news site. I did care about Alistair's parentage actually, but my first play through of Origins seemed pretty consistent on this point and I could never of guessed there was much more to know.
This is why I ignore the books overall. If I read one and like it then I'll consider it as a part of the lore of the story but if I didn't read it or don't like it then I could care less. If BW didn't think it was important to add into the game then tough luck. I see no sense in trying to headcanon a dream sequence of visiting Alistair's "sister" just to harden him as a person. Or make up a story about how Alistair was deceived and thus we spent our time arguing with this stranger who was paid to lie or whatever. IMO, I don't see how they can claim that scene never happened/was a mistake when it is a pivotal moment in defining Alistair as a person and even change his entire outlook on life and people and influence his actions as King. I have a hard time believing it was a communication mishap. But whatever.
It wouldn't really be surprising if a king had bastard children with tavern wenches and prostitutes. That Alistair's mother would be no one of note does kind of make his beginnings somewhat humble. If not for Duncan, he would simply have lived and died as some unhappy Templar.
*Sigh....
https://twitter.com/...585267336142848
"Sorry. Thought it was pretty obvious and widely known. It's never been a secret."
-Mike Laidlaw
Exactly the reaction of many to this thread.
This is very dismissive of those that actually just play their games imho. Aren't we their major customers?
It confirms my earlier assertion - Bioware considers themselves a publishing house that does tie-in games.
I think you're reading too much into this and being too literal.
Why is the situation with Goldanna less defining for Alistair if she isn't really his sister? Both he and Goldanna believed they were related.This is why I ignore the books overall. If I read one and like it then I'll consider it as a part of the lore of the story but if I didn't read it or don't like it then I could care less. If BW didn't think it was important to add into the game then tough luck. I see no sense in trying to headcanon a dream sequence of visiting Alistair's "sister" just to harden him as a person. Or make up a story about how Alistair was deceived and thus we spent our time arguing with this stranger who was paid to lie or whatever. IMO, I don't see how they can claim that scene never happened/was a mistake when it is a pivotal moment in defining Alistair as a person and even change his entire outlook on life and people and influence his actions as King. I have a hard time believing it was a communication mishap. But whatever.
Guest_Challenge Everything_*
I never talk about immunity. I talked about being able to become a grey wraden. The means resistance to the taint. You brought in the concept of immunity based on an assumption you had on what I meant. The Amells are examples of the resistance to the taint being Hereditary. You quote from the calling just mean the Architect is wrong about tainted people having children not that taint resistance is not Hereditary. In the book we have a brother and a sister who were able to become Wardens. We have 2 twins and a cousin who can become wardens with the Amells. It pretty much point to the fact that taint resistances is Hereditary
I know that you were, but it doesn--.
You know what? Screw it. I'm done. *walks away*
Now I'm more confused than ever.
Why would Mike Laidlaw think that it was "obvious and widely known"?
What percentage of the player base does Bioware think actually reads the tie-in material? I don't remember my copy of Origins Ultimate Edition coming with a copy of The Calling. Was a voucher inside saying "order this to find out what you've been misled about" that I missed? It quite clearly wasn't the Ultimate Edition.
This is very dismissive of those that actually just play their games imho. Aren't we their major customers?
It confirms my earlier assertion - Bioware considers themselves a publishing house that does tie-in games.
I cant remember how and when I learned this, but I certainly knew it to the lore. Lets not forget the story of the Feynriel.
I know that you were, but it doesn--.
You know what? Screw it. I'm done. *walks away*
The only way to win is not to play.
Guest_Faerunner_*
Now I'm more confused than ever.
Why would Mike Laidlaw think that it was "obvious and widely known"?
What percentage of the player base does Bioware think actually reads the tie-in material?
I think it's likely they assumed those that read the tie-in material would spread the word. After every DA related piece of news, from new games to novels to dev tweets, these forums alone blow up with tons of posts and threads filled with people saying "NO WAI!" "YES WAI!" I guess they figured it was the same with Alistair's parentage.
I'm not bothered that they thought this was common knowledge as much as they assumed people took for granted that it was canon despite the ambiguous ending. BioWare plays fast and loose with canon all the time. The end credits to Origins and Awakening are "just rumors," often ignored or contradicted in future games, companions who can be killed in some playthroughs turn up no matter what in future games (like Leliana and Anders), and any vague information can mean anything goes (like Maric's definite death at sea 5 years ago turning out to mean he's still alive).
Since The Calling didn't come out and say "And they named Fiona's and Maric's baby Alistair," many people were afraid to just assume it was him. What if Gaider kept it vague on purpose so they could introduce another royal bastard in future books, comics, or games? What if X, Y, and Z? Then Laidlaw says, "Sorry, thought it was common knowledge."
UGH! We can't win!
This is why I ignore the books overall. If I read one and like it then I'll consider it as a part of the lore of the story but if I didn't read it or don't like it then I could care less. If BW didn't think it was important to add into the game then tough luck. I see no sense in trying to headcanon a dream sequence of visiting Alistair's "sister" just to harden him as a person. Or make up a story about how Alistair was deceived and thus we spent our time arguing with this stranger who was paid to lie or whatever. IMO, I don't see how they can claim that scene never happened/was a mistake when it is a pivotal moment in defining Alistair as a person and even change his entire outlook on life and people and influence his actions as King. I have a hard time believing it was a communication mishap. But whatever.
Alistair thought Goldanna was his sister. That's important to who he is as a person. The fact they aren't related by blood is completely irrelevant to the significance she has for his character, and the significance of being rejected by her to his development.
So basically ... they say one thing in the video game and another in the book, which have elements that contradict each other, complicated by an additional book that contained errors, say that there is no such thing as half elves in terms of physical appearance, then decide to include Feynriel, avoid addressing the issue for years, witness huge debates like this thread, for years, and then turn around and say "sorry, thought it was obvious"?
I don't see ho its a contradiction. Not everything you're told in the game by characters within the world is literal, factual truth. Our perspectives don't need to be flawless. Chalk it up to faulty narrator basically. Its hardly the first time its happened anyways. I mean, who at this point buys Flemeth's origin story as it was originally given? Oh wait, it was given like 3 different ways.
Retour en haut