In ME2 you could die and end the game. You could get everyone killed (except for Joker). I wonder what happened if you tried to import such a game into ME3?
I bloody loved the game. In my books the story was heads above Origins. The romance felt real, The music was fantastic, Bioware i thank you for one of the best games i have ever played.
@OP:
I think the evil path is one of those things Bioware simply doesn't want to put into their games. Anyone who has played their other games shouldn't be surprised by this. Regarding dismantling the Chantry, it is plausible that this is beyond your power.
As the for the anti-hero, there are two aspects to this:
(1) This time, we weren't hit over the head with an extreme presentation of the "necessary evil" kind of pragmatism, but it's still there, implicit in some decisions you make, for instance in Orlais. You can attempt to deliberately destabilize Orlais so that it'll come to depend on the Inquisition after the crisis is past, you can put Gaspard on the throne (which means you let an assassination happen you could have prevented) with the rationale that you need a stronger army against Corypheus and he's more likely to provide that than Celene. The game just doesn't prescribe an interpretation, and that's good because it gives you more freedom.
(2) I generally like the less extreme options. I always wanted to be determined without being an assh*ole, or diplomatic without coming across as moralizing, and if that means there are few assh*le options, then so be it. Beyond that, blame the paraphrasing. If people can't know in advance what their characters will be saying, and consequently have to be afraid the determined/aggressive option will make you come across as an assh*le without your being able to make an informed choice about it, fewer are likely to use it. If there's one thing I wish Bioware would do in their future games, it's that they do away with the damned paraphrasing. At the very least, make them drastically less vague.
DA:O 9.1
DA2 5,8
DA:I 7
Problem was that while you had a great areas for exploration they lack a story content, whole main plot was too short, and I could even be fine with that action combat and screwed up tactical cam, but most of the areas were made for MMO and not SP story driven RPG. Like seriously, even World of Warcraft managed to tell stories of zones better than did most of the zones in DA:I.
And btw, as a dalish I did not want to be a herald nor inquisitor, I just wanted to do my part, loose an anchor and leave asap, yet I was somehow forced into leading something that I did not care about, but unfortunately it´s with every BioWare game 
...
And btw, as a dalish I did not want to be a herald nor inquisitor, I just wanted to do my part, loose an anchor and leave asap, yet I was somehow forced into leading something that I did not care about, but unfortunately it´s with every BioWare game
Every story has a premise you can't change. Talk all you want about flaws of the game, but that's not one. I had my reservations about this as well, fearing that I'd be unable to distance my character from Andrasteanism, but I think it was handled nicely, almost everywhere. I knew that I would lead the Inquisition in this game, and I bought it in spite of my reservations because Bioware said all the right things about being able to give the Inquisition a direction and to play a character not invested in the faith. IMO that worked out nicely.
I agree that the Inquisitor was poorly written. One line of dialogue sums it up for me - when chatting up Josephine, an actual flirt response is 'i like spending time with charming women'.
I'm also inclined to agree with IGN. The main story wasn't that good. What was there was mostly excellent, and i enjoyed the more focused approach to main objectives, but there were so few of them. It's as though BioWare bought into the Bethesda idea that the main story doesn't matter, as well as the focus on exploration.
After Dragon Age II, i was pretty vocal about the Dragon Age universe offering a far greater fantasy role-playing experience to the likes of Skyrim. I actually think that Inquisition might be the game that gets a lot of people to agree with me... but in adopting so many of the traits of The Elder Scrolls, they've kind of diluted the core Dragon Age experience in my mind.
It's actually a bit like how the Grey Wardens must drink of Darkspawn blood and absorb their taint in order to defeat them. Sad, but the DAII critics ruined this game.
I have to agree with you, DA had a lot of flaws but the dialogue wheel & no main villain was unique.
development time
DA 2 put more focus on your character you could even see changes in the story based on your choices & you could even change the personality
this game was supposed to be a expansion pack to DA2 i'm sad that they didn't make it
it only had 8-12 months development time
We are basically forced into the herald of Andraste role, I can't think of a single ingame action that actively harms the Chantry, that was hugely disappointing. You can't be a dark character either and most of your companions are goody two shoes Andrastians. Why don't we get a character like Morrigan or Velanna? Again hugely disappointed on this part.
And btw, as a dalish I did not want to be a herald nor inquisitor, I just wanted to do my part, loose an anchor and leave asap, yet I was somehow forced into leading something that I did not care about, but unfortunately it´s with every BioWare game
You could always not play the game... The game is about you leading the inquisition, you bought it surely knowing this.
It would be kind of cool if you could join with Cory and he'd kill you, and you'd get "Game Over, Good Job Destroying the World" type screen. I'm confused as to why the word "antihero" is in the post title, though - you can totally be an anti-hero in this game (a hero who does questionable things along the way). You can't be villainous - but that's not an antihero. Antiheroes still want to save the day in the end, like Rick in Casablanca.
I personally think being able to immediately destroy the Chantry would be ridiculous. But I suppose there could be more "evil"/questionable actions included. I never saw the Envy Demon or Ishmael in my first playthrough though.
That's not what makes an RPG an RPG. Being able to develop a character's abilities/class/etc through EXP and levels is what makes an RPG an RPG (there are other factors, including usually a highly developed story and setting) more than being able to direct their personalities. For evidence of this, see basically every JRPG ever. There's no rule to the RPG genre that suggests you must control the PC's personality. Just saying.
Yes there is. It is the core of the actual roleplaying. Being able to create a character with his own goals, views, personality etc. tats and abilities is just the mechanics.
JRPGS are hardly evidence. Most of them are just interactive movies, with turn based combat in between the scenes. Most of them are as linear as they can possibly be.
And btw, as a dalish I did not want to be a herald nor inquisitor, I just wanted to do my part, loose an anchor and leave asap, yet I was somehow forced into leading something that I did not care about, but unfortunately it´s with every BioWare game
The whole plot in DA:I doesn't lend itself well to evil acts, truth be told. But I think Bioware did a good job with adding evil choices and such things in Kotor. Doing evil just for the sake of it, doesn't always enhance a game. But if it is presented as an actual endgame option, it is all good.
Note: This is not my theory, but it's something I picked up from my SPOILERFILLED thread regarding the ending and what the Dread Wolf is planning to do.
''I think new revelations in Dragon Age: Inquisition clear up a lot of the lore. And I think Solas is going after the Maker.
I like this theory, but what sort of retarded creator god would create some sort of plague that is so powerful that it would affect him/her/itself?
I like this theory, but what sort of retarded creator god would create some sort of plague that is so powerful that it would affect him/her/itself?
The sort which is as imperfect as humans are. Perfection can only exist in the realm of ideas.
Slavery / Tevinter and forced morals on your character
My character supports slavery, blood magic and the Tevinter culture by default in many dialogue options. All things my Inquisitor supported as a social darwinistic Nihilist. This happens over and over in the game and each time is like character-assassination to my Inquisitor. Your characters has morals forced upon him/her!
While I approve of your inherent dark side when it comes to playing CRPGs, I hate to break the news to you: Bioware has not given anyone the option to be a truly evil ******* since Baldur's Gate 2 and maybe NWN, with exceptions also DA:O. I relished in playing the Sith Inquisitor and Sith Warrior in SWTOR to the fullest (though especially as the Inquisitor there were things you just couldn't do... -.-). But being a bad guy in ME1/2/3, DA2/DA:I (and actually also DA:O)? Sorry, not even in the slightest. I always start out as being as big an ******* I can be, but always wind up being a slightly renegadish paragon of a hero who just saved everyone.
Never had those problems in SWTOR or any KotoR game. So apperently, the faults does not really lie with me but the games.
Bioware threw true CRPGaming out of the window long ago, which is only emphasized by the inability to shape your character based on stats in DA:I.
The trailer promised that we could lead this world to its bitter end.
I thought it'd be nice if we could do that. Lead the Inquisition really badly, or in such an evil way that its mission fails.
Something that'd be cool:
Add a reputation meter to the inquisition, which represents how willingly people support it. If you do something really awful and tell everybody how much you hate them, the reputation falls again. Lower reputation means harder game (automatic negative perks). Below a certain threshold, the Inquisition will have failed, is overrun by Corypheus forces and it's game over.
The trailer promised that we could lead this world to its bitter end.
I thought it'd be nice if we could do that. Lead the Inquisition really badly, or in such an evil way that its mission fails.
Something that'd be cool:
Add a reputation meter to the inquisition, which represents how willingly people support it. If you do something really awful and tell everybody how much you hate them, the reputation falls again. Lower reputation means harder game (automatic negative perks). Below a certain threshold, the Inquisition will have failed, is overrun by Corypheus forces and it's game over.
Not a good idea if you want to allow for truly dichotomous gameplay. It is essentially: If you are not a lawful good Paladin, you won't get the allies we have in store for you and then you fail and everybody dies including you. Bah.
The trailer promised that we could lead this world to its bitter end.
I thought it'd be nice if we could do that. Lead the Inquisition really badly, or in such an evil way that its mission fails.
Something that'd be cool:
Add a reputation meter to the inquisition, which represents how willingly people support it. If you do something really awful and tell everybody how much you hate them, the reputation falls again. Lower reputation means harder game (automatic negative perks). Below a certain threshold, the Inquisition will have failed, is overrun by Corypheus forces and it's game over.
It would have been cool if they had done this in DA2. Hawke having to gain allies and favors in his rise to power. Using politics, corruption, crime, or whatever else. Instead everything just fell into his lap.
Excuse me i dont care about your personal feeling towards the chantry, for a medieval fantasy with Europe as ispiration the chantry is a vital component of the lore, and the developer for obvious reason cannot let you to destroy an entire part of the background of the series, this is just your frustration.
Not a good idea if you want to allow for truly dichotomous gameplay. It is essentially: If you are not a lawful good Paladin, you won't get the allies we have in store for you and then you fail and everybody dies including you. Bah.
It neither has to be that drastic, nor that obvious. There are always multiple ways to solve a problem.
However, when you are the head of an organisation that wants to inspire people and wants them to follow you on the basis of faith, you should be some kind of inspiring person.
If we are talking about a game with "choices and consequences for the Inqusition", shouldn't those consequences be part of that if you are an ass, people will treat like you an ass?
Right now, the solution is either "we won't let you take certain actions" or "you can say what you want, it doesn't have any effect". Is that the agency we need?
Well, but even then, you will end up with someone allying you. Either the mages or templars, then the three options in Orlais. Whether you banish the Wardens or get the Qunari is irrelevant at that point, because you couldn't **** up allying the first two.
So to truly fail and have a working reputation-meter which would allow you to fail, you would need to be able to utterly fail at allying people for starters.
I think my disconnect from my Inquisitor (human noble) was my biggest issue. I liked her well enough, but overall she was pretty bland and I never got a good grasp on who she is, what her history is, or what she wants beyond "saving the world". This is completely at odds with my Warden and my Hawke...because of their backgrounds (well explored) and circumstances, I knew how they'd react to situations and people. Each felt like fully realized characters, and I had a grasp on their lives before the events of their games and even somewhat after.
Maybe we needed something like an Origins-style prologue. Interacting with your family or clan or whatever, heading out to the Conclave, then waking up outside the breach with the mark on you. I can doubt that I'm Herald, sure. I can be weepy-eyed or a hardass when someone dies. But the bigger picture never came into focus for me...a lot of that is because no one really asked me. Aside from one or two small convos with Varric and Cassandra, no one gave two nug droppings about who I was as a person, my history or anything. I never got to flesh out my own personality very much, and so I certainly ended up feeling the least attached to Quizzy out of all of my DA protagonists. Left the whole thing a bit hollow, which is weird since I really loved the game.
Note: This is not my theory, but it's something I picked up from my SPOILERFILLED thread regarding the ending and what the Dread Wolf is planning to do.
''I think new revelations in Dragon Age: Inquisition clear up a lot of the lore. And I think Solas is going after the Maker.
It seems that originally there were the creator gods (the Elven Pantheon), and the Old Gods (the Forgotten Ones). The Creator gods had dominion over the Fade, while the Old Gods had the physical realm. If this is true, it means that the Elven All-Father, Elgar'nan, is the figure now associated with the Maker, while Mythal, aka Flemeth, was his bride. We know that the Creators and the Old Gods were at war with one another, and we know that Elgar'nan was a wrathful god, per his name "the god of vengeance" and the story of him throwing the sun down from the sky (which I believe is a possible allusion to the creation of the Darkspawn Taint).Here's what I think happened, long ago. At some point, for some reason, Elgar'Nan (The Maker) created the Darkspawn Taint as a weapon against the Old Gods. The fact that it targets them proves that it's designed against them. We know that the Taint is ancient, far moreso than the Darkspawn, because Red Lyrium is Lyrium corrupted by the Darkspawn Taint, and its presence in the Primordial Thaig shows that it predated the First Blight by a long, long time. However, in creating the Darkspawn Taint, Elgar'Nan was himself corrupted by it. Knowing the dangers of what would happen if the Darkspawn Taint reached Thedas and turned the Old Gods into Archdemons, I believe Fen'Harel took action, duping the Old Gods into imprisonment for their own safety, and sealing Elgar'Nan and most of the rest of the creators in the Golden City (turning it into the Black City, and making it a prison for the gods).This explains several things:1. Why the city was already blackened when the Magisters set foot in it2. Why the Elven Pantheon seemingly abandoned the Elves, leading them to flee Arlathan3. Why the Maker is absent4. Why the Tevinter statue in the Mage Origin from the first game drops the hint that the Black City is a prisonIn effect, Fen'Harel saved the world by this act. Mythal was not imprisoned and remained afoot in Thedas, seeing the wisdom in it. Fast forward a ways, and the imprisoned Old God Dumat makes contact with the Tevinter Imperium from his prison. He teaches them Blood Magic, and believing Elgar'Nan still responsible for his imprisonment, advises the Magisters to assault the Gold City (Black City) to exact his revenge against Elgar'Nan. However, as Corypheus says, they arrived to find the city blackened and corrupted, and became the first Darkspawn. They brought the Darkspawn Taint back to Thedas, thereby unleashing the weapon that is the Taint and corrupting Dumat into an Archdemon. And so began the first Blight.What Fen'Harel had hoped to prevent by imprisoning everyone had happened anyway, thanks to the Tevinter Imperium. So after the first Blight had ended, it would make sense that Fen'Harel and Mythal would seek to remove the threat that Tevinter posed. Enter Andraste. I believe Flemeth/Mythal was Andraste. It fits perfectly. Perhaps Andraste was a real person and Mythal possessed her at some point in her campaign, but regardless, Andraste's claim to be being the "Bride of the Maker" is now ironically correct, when you realize that Mythal is the bride of Elgar'Nan. Andraste's campaign against Tevinter significantly weakened Tevinter, as well as eradicated their worship of the Old Gods. Problem solved, for the time being.Ever since them, the Blight has come and gone and Archdemons have risen and fallen, slain by the Grey Wardens. Mythal/Flemeth appears to have spent her time consolidating power (arranging to take Urthemial's soul, for instance). I believe Mythal and Fen'Harel's end-game is to consolidate enough power to enter into the Black City, confront the corrupt Elgar'Nan (The Maker), and purify or destroy him for good, thereby forevermore ending the threat of the Blight. ''I think this may help those that think the plot was bad.
Interesting theory however as you said the elven gods have only dominion upon the realm but they are not the maker, the maker is absent for obvious reasons of lore, creator of the Universe not just of Thedas and it's planet.
Why does the game force me to save the world? I want to be a farmer!
Because that would be far too challenging and time consuming. Imagine the survival of your character if there's a drought. (No magic allowed)
But these threads are always gold throughout Bioware history.
"Why can't I side with The Archdemon!?"
"Why are the reapers the bad guy!? I WANNA BE A REAPER!"
Here's how it goes: If you side with the bad guy, the world is gone and you lose. To experience this, quit the game or die. Bam. Bad guys win, you get your evil fan fiction ending and everyone else keeps the "Good guys win" ending.
Retour en haut