Why? Because BioWare gives you a pretty sunset and a romance scene? That makes everything okay?
Conflict and resolution are absolute fundamentals of climaxes, endings, and stories in general. Not having any sort of conflict at the most important moment of the story is unacceptable for a good or even a mediocre story. So yes, I would absolutely say they are, if Inquisition is indicative of any sort of trend for BioWare.
Ah the baseless assumptions
I thought the ending was okay, not quite what I expected but still okay. I certainly wouldn't put it on the same level as ME3... That was REALLY! bad.
Maybe if you understood that the arbor wilds is part of climax.....
And stop using plots good for block buster summer movies as a pedestal for good endings.
You know, if so many people somehow "don't understand" that Arbor Wilds were part of climax, maybe... just maybe... they were not? Probably they were menat to be, I give you that. But if something being part of climax needs to be understood... and explained, repeatedly, by its advocates...
That generally means that it wasn't too good of a climax.
I liked ME3's ending. *Runs for cover*
DA2's ending was comparably terrible to DA:I's; totally cheesy with Meredith's bizarre transformation. Unnecessary as well since her actions were potentially defendable until invoking the rite of annulment without the addition of her becoming a red lyrium monstrosity.
Regarding DA:I... yes. I was hoping for more. We got a twist after the credits, but that wasn't enough. I was hoping there was more to Corypheus than him falling to his own pride in such a straight-forward fashion. I was half-hoping something terrible would happen after the celebration at Skyhold or there'd be more story, but nope. It was simply a rendition of DA:O's ending (the only DA game that did have a good ending).
You know, if so many people somehow "don't understand" that Arbor Wilds were part of climax, maybe... just maybe... they were not? Probably they were menat to be, I give you that. But if something being part of climax needs to be understood... and explained, repeatedly, by its advocates...
That generally means that it wasn't too good of a climax.
So many people? I don't see these hordes of people beating at the walls of these forum going on about the ending of dai. Most people are fine with the ending. And yes they were. Every bioware rpg has the climax of the story as a choice. Every last on of them. The well of Sorrows was that climax.
So many people? I don't see these hordes of people beating at the walls of these forum going on about the ending of dai. Most people are fine with the ending. And yes they were. Every bioware rpg has the climax of the story as a choice. Every last on of them. The well of Sorrows was that climax.
I already went over why that was choice didn't have the weight it was probably supposed to have and how any weight it had thrown out the window with post-credits scene... so I won't repeat myself. Tell me, however, how many times did you insist that people just don't understand and how AW was part of the climax, part of the ending or whatever?
I already went over why that was choice didn't have the weight it was probably supposed to have and how any weight it had thrown out the window with post-credits scene... so I won't repeat myself. Tell me, however, how many times did you insist that people just don't understand and how AW was part of the climax, part of the ending or whatever?
Except for the fact you choosing to be a slave or not. Sorry they have weight. How is a choice where you can become a slave to an elven god not have weight?
Nobody said it was 'amazing' or anything close. Merely that it fulfilled the basic requirements of a conflict and resolution.
You do realize you're condemning Inquisition with this shallow understanding as well? Because if you're right and Call of Duty is nothing but 'pew, pew, bad guy dies' and therefore terrible, surely we can agree that 'whack, whack, bad guy dies' is equally as bad?
i thought the ending was good it brought together a team that had built themselves up from nowhere and faced challenges and ofcourse Morrigan Solas is actually a God if you paid attention he was the Dredded Wolf Merideth talked about in 2 he traded flemeths power in exchange to give Morrigan immortality he gave corypheyes the orb and remember its how you decided in the prier and present decisions ofcourse understanding that would make you understand the ending after the credits it does matter
DA:I had a pretty bad ending.
But worse than ME 3? Not even close.
At this point I'm not only sceptical that you understand the literary meaning of theme but also of conflict and resolution.
Cut out the buzzwords, and all his arguments are basically, "I didn't like DAI's ending and neither should you."
To be honest, as much as I loved DA:I, every Corypheus encounter made cringe a bit, he's a sowewhat poor villain. I really liked the Haven scene with him! But everything else was a bit underwhelming, especially at the elven temple, when you beat him to the well and he looks like a pissed little kid stumping his foot on the floor, that was priceless. Same goes for the end battle, it was just really too easy and quick.
Though I found the end scene after the credits pretty cool, as we hopefully learn more about this in the next game.
And for the record, I loved ME3s ending.
Too bad. My ending with my Kadan was perfect.
Loved mine. Hickey and all.
So many people? I don't see these hordes of people beating at the walls of these forum going on about the ending of dai. Most people are fine with the ending. And yes they were. Every bioware rpg has the climax of the story as a choice. Every last on of them. The well of Sorrows was that climax.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I think it's important to make the distinction that a climax can be many things, and in fact, a game or movie may have multiple climaxes done well.
An action oriented climax would be the high point of the action, but an emotionally driven climax may occur before or after the height of the physical action based on a characters death or even a tragedy that affects a characters life like the loss of a relative or a loved one, or something along those lines.
But all climaxes must have some form of conflict.
I think choosing to drink from the well or not is the climax of the arbor wilds, and the arbor wilds themselves serve as the rising action leading up to the physical confrontation with Corypheus, the revelation with Flemeth being the emotional climax of the game in regards to finding out you're a slave to a dead elven god or Morrigan is enslaved to the will of the person she spent her whole life trying to break free of, with the final boss battle being a climax of the physical threat.
Too bad. My ending with my Kadan was perfect.
You do realize that posting these pictures only convinces me further that I'm dead on in thinking people are only satisfied because the ending has romance and friendship moments and consider the writing of the plot pretty much irrelevant?
You do realize that posting these pictures only convinces me further that I'm dead on in thinking people are only satisfied because the ending has romance and friendship moments and consider the writing of the plot pretty much irrelevant?
If you want to straw man me, you can at least put more effort than that into it. We here at BSN see these types of posts and posters with sentiments similar to yours way too often. No amount of explaining will change your mind or remove your bias, so don't expect us to waste any. But I have some dragon slaying with my kadan to get back to.
It had nothing to do with the central conflict of Dragon Age: Inquisition. Which is "How do we close the breach and stop whoever/whatever caused it?"
Solas gave Corypheus the orb, and Cory used the orb to open the breach so yes, it does have to do with the central conflict.
Solas gave Corypheus the orb, and Cory used the orb to open the breach so yes, it does have to do with the central conflict.
No. It doesn't. At no point in the entire story does the protagonist or any of the protagonist's allies ever struggle with or ever have any sort of confrontation with Solus regarding him being a God or giving Corypheus the orb or whatever. It's entirely tangential to the conflict of Inquisition.
Solas gave Corypheus the orb, and Cory used the orb to open the breach so yes, it does have to do with the central conflict.
Others already tried. Just let the Maker handle this one.
No. It doesn't. At no point in the entire story does the protagonist or any of the protagonist's allies ever struggle with or ever have any sort of confrontation with Solus regarding him being a God or giving Corypheus the orb or whatever. It's entirely tangential to the conflict of Inquisition.
It doesn't need to have that to have an impact on the story. The fact alone that it's the cause makes it part of the conflict.
No. It doesn't. At no point in the entire story does the protagonist or any of the protagonist's allies ever struggle with or ever have any sort of confrontation with Solus regarding him being a God or giving Corypheus the orb or whatever. It's entirely tangential to the conflict of Inquisition.
Seriously, still arguing the Arbor Wilds isn't the climax of the game?
Geez, you have to ignore every single thing the advisors say to you after the Arbor Wilds to make that work. Everything they say screams: you've won.
Considering Inquisition's conflict wouldn't even exist without Solas giving the orb to Cory, calling it tangential to the conflict is rather incorrect.
I'll go even further than that: Without Solas (for God's sake BabyPuncher: with an A not a U.) and Flemeth, nothing in Dragon Age would've happened. Dragon Age: Origins woud've ended at Ostagar.
Let it sink in for a bit. Solas and Flemeth are the real players in the story. They shape the history and future of the Dragon Age universe
Considering Inquisition's conflict wouldn't even exist without Solas giving the orb to Cory, calling it tangential to the conflict is rather incorrect.
Completely and entirely irrelevant. Every human villain in existence has a mother. Does that mean their mother is 'real' conflict of the story because the villain wouldn't have even existed if she didn't give birth to him? Does that mean she's always an important character because without her that conflict would never have existed? No. That's ridiculous.
Retour en haut