World State imports are there to make the world feel personal and consistent, not to create vastly divergent scenarios which the developers need to account for.
Some choices will directly impact the sequels, but most will likely be used in dialogue or not at all. Those choices and consequences are actually mostly contained within the game itself. Is that not the point really? Do people play other non-import games and complain that their choices or actions had no meaning when they were limited to the game itself? I find this complaint to be odd.
The "feeling" that the setting is a continuous entity driven by the player is what's important. The consequences of your past choices are present and have the potential to pop up in the sequels.
For example, the Grey Wardens canonically have a schism after the ending of Inquisition. While Weisshaupt will be the center of the traditional Wardens, the "rebel Wardens" will likely be stationed somewhere else. If Western Tevinter/Eastern Anderfels/Par Vollen is the next setting (my prediction), then the rebels will likely be in nearby Tevinter.
Exiling the Wardens may prove to be beneficial in bolstering the traditional Wardens, while keeping them in Orlais may strengthen the rebels.
The consequences of that choice in next installments can be:
1) Passive: dialogue alterations (such as DA2 end-game choice in DAI)
2) Active: direct physical manifestations (such as Alistair appearing as a Warden in DAI). This is the most expensive solution.
3) Participant: choices available if certain choices in previous games were made (such as the Quarian-Geth conflict resolution depending on previous game choices)
Only one major scenario is created by the developers, while adding details and relevance to past games, without having to make completely different scenarios.
This is the only feasible and realistic solution. Otherwise, too many resources are spent accounting for previous games and would detract from the current game itself.
Retour en haut
