This thread is hilarious. It started out with some moron bitching about the ending and how people enjoy companions and romance and now it's completely side-tracked into the Dalish and the Chantry.
Thank you for contributing to my thread staying on the first page so that everyone who looks at this forum sees it.
All we need is a mage vs templar debate thrown into the mix, some Gaspard vs Celene vs Briala discussion, and a debate on Flemeth, the Well of Sorrows and a pizza to cover all the ground necessary.
Those are better topics then this one. Let's keep at it till the topic is locked.
I was disappointed by the story's ending as well.
While playing through the game I was constantly doing two things, building up the Inquisition and weakening Corypheus; which had two effects:
I basically expected an ending similar to ME2's and DA:O's. That might have been my fault for expecting too much, but since the game told my inquisitor at so many points that strengthening his forces was such an important thing to do, I do not see how anyone can be okay with the army, they've been buidling up all this time not even being present for the final encounter. (Also; it really bugged me that my Skyhold's wall wasn't completely fixed even after every possible upgrade I could find.)
So I agree with OP on that the ending is disappointing, though it is far from the worst ending I have personally experienced in video games so far. I was actually also hoping for some kind of twist after sending my Inq to his chambers.
The revelation after the credits was the point where BW really dropped the ball though, having just experienced a rather disappointing ending that I could have lived with, it made the whole game i had just played feel like just a teaser for possible sequels. This really left a bitter feeling and doesn't really help motivate me to replay the game.
Those are better topics then this one. Let's keep at it till the topic is locked.
Good luck with that.
Good points made by Bad King. After the resolution of the civil war in Orlais, the Corypheus campaign just turns into a war of attrition. The quest to negate the Eluvian route for Corypheus is an important one though but surprisingly not developed. Still no evidence of the Maker anywhere! At least with ME3 whether you like the ending or not ( and I didn't ) there is no doubt about where the climax of the game occurs. I thought the idea of killing a villain was to get him at the height of his powers, not after he had been reduced to a near mewling infant! The common themes of self sacrifice in ME and DAO seem to have been abandoned in DAI in favour of potential reversion to relative anonymity. Or, are we seeing another "prophet". Can't wait to see what the Chantry is going to do with the Herald (yes I can) Bureaucrats and quill pens at the ready!
Thought i'd contribute this for anyone who respects the man and his work. I think it relates to the topic start at the 11:50 mark. "Disneyland fantasies"
https://www.youtube....h?v=Ms2LXYUlvc8
Thought i'd contribute this for anyone who respects the man and his work. I think it relates to the topic start at the 11:50 mark. "Disneyland fantasies"
The last person BioWare should be taking advice from is that clown.
The last person BioWare should be taking advice from is that clown.
This is rich.
Do explain how George RR Martin, one of the best writers of recent times, is a clown?
The last person BioWare should be taking advice from is that clown.
Huh, I thought the last person BioWare should take advice from is David7204.
I think they can add more elements from Martin into the story. They don't need to be as morbid as his universe, mainly since DA seems to be closer to a later period in time than Westeros, and is culturally more progressive.
No Marauder Shields to save you this time
I think they can add more elements from Martin into the story. They don't need to be as morbid as his universe, mainly since DA seems to be closer to a later period in time than Westeros, and is culturally more progressive.
I read George RR Martin's Game of Thrones books years ago (never seen the TV series). With a Martin type theme DAI moves from action to politics, conspiracy, assassination, and incest. Only one dwarf I'm afraid if memory serves and he's well into prostitutes that become political leverage. The battles are inevitable and largely one sided with the good guys (Starks and others) not necessarily coming out on top! An interesting if somewhat convoluted and complex read around mafioso style campaigns reminiscent of Shogun Total war.
How Martin kept track of all the families/ intermarriages, characters, servants, and brothel keepers is beyond me. From the Starks having some magical bonding with wolves and Danaryies? being a dragon brood mother, to the heads of families and dynasties plotting to overthrow their neighbours. A successful blend of fantasy and gritty political realism - not for DAI I think if it is to retain its's "traditional" Bioware style which I think is in doubt. EA/ Bioware has a history of ignoring such realism as prejudice (apparent in GoT and in Skyrim). DAO was a great game for me but the idea in Awakening that the warden commander takes control of the Arldom of Amaranthine is ridiculous. Apart from such things flying totally against Grey warden interests and traditions, when your PC is an elf or a dwarf it becomes ludicrous to suggest that an important satrapy be handed to a slave or a foreign national, and that the new ruler would be tolerated for very long. Any Ferelden monarch that was daft enough to do such a thing would find the crown difficult to keep on his head for longer than 6 months. If handing the wardens a huge power base in a prosperous part of the country isn't bad enough there is also the matter of a huge slap in the face for the Teryn of Highever (Fergus Cousland) whose arldom it was (The Howes were vassals of the Couslands) A civil war in Ferelden and one in Orlais would make for a difficult game
I read George RR Martin's Game of Thrones books years ago (never seen the TV series). With a Martin type theme DAI moves from action to politics, conspiracy, assassination, and incest. Only one dwarf I'm afraid if memory serves and he's well into prostitutes that become political leverage. The battles are inevitable and largely one sided with the good guys (Starks and others) not necessarily coming out on top! An interesting if somewhat convoluted and complex read around mafioso style campaigns reminiscent of Shogun Total war.
How Martin kept track of all the families/ intermarriages, characters, servants, and brothel keepers is beyond me. From the Starks having some magical bonding with wolves and Danaryies? being a dragon brood mother, to the heads of families and dynasties plotting to overthrow their neighbours. A successful blend of fantasy and gritty political realism - not for DAI I think if it is to retain its's "traditional" Bioware style which I think is in doubt. EA/ Bioware has a history of ignoring such realism as prejudice (apparent in GoT and in Skyrim). DAO was a great game for me but the idea in Awakening that the warden commander takes control of the Arldom of Amaranthine is ridiculous. Apart from such things flying totally against Grey warden interests and traditions, when your PC is an elf or a dwarf it becomes ludicrous to suggest that an important satrapy be handed to a slave or a foreign national, and that the new ruler would be tolerated for very long. Any Ferelden monarch that was daft enough to do such a thing would find the crown difficult to keep on his head for longer than 6 months. If handing the wardens a huge power base in a prosperous part of the country isn't bad enough there is also the matter of a huge slap in the face for the Teryn of Highever (Fergus Cousland) whose arldom it was (The Howes were vassals of the Couslands) A civil war in Ferelden and one in Orlais would make for a difficult game
On the Awakening point, it's stated that Fergus approves of giving Amaranthine to the Wardens (especially if the WC is his younger sister/brother).
Also keep in mind that the Wardens just saved Ferelden from both the Blight and their own Civil War with a monarch in place whose heavily indebted to the Warden. So it's not too farfetched that Ferelden would give the Wardens a token of appreciation in the form of land where they can regather and grow their numbers.
Also, while this is unusual for the Wardens, the First Warden lets it happen to wait and see how things turn out. In an age where many consider the Wardens to be a relic of the past, having a Warden Commander as the successful lord of an arling could prove as an assuring precedent for the future and potentially a sign that change in Warden policy is possible and beneficial.
And not everyone approves of the Warden's lordship in Amaranthine. Two riots occur outside the gates of the Vigil and there was a political conspiracy to have you overthrown. But otherwise, the people either like you for being the Hero of Ferelden (I imagine the response being different if you're Orlesian) or they'll start to see the huge benefits of having you around once you start moping up darkspawn and clearing out food and trade routes so that people can eat.
On the Awakening point, it's stated that Fergus approves of giving Amaranthine to the Wardens (especially if the WC is his younger sister/brother).
Also keep in mind that the Wardens just saved Ferelden from both the Blight and their own Civil War with a monarch in place whose heavily indebted to the Warden. So it's not too farfetched that Ferelden would give the Wardens a token of appreciation in the form of land where they can regather and grow their numbers.
Also, while this is unusual for the Wardens, the First Warden lets it happen to wait and see how things turn out. In an age where many consider the Wardens to be a relic of the past, having a Warden Commander as the successful lord of an arling could prove as an assuring precedent for the future and potentially a sign that change in Warden policy is possible and beneficial.
And not everyone approves of the Warden's lordship in Amaranthine. Two riots occur outside the gates of the Vigil and there was a political conspiracy to have you overthrown. But otherwise, the people either like you for being the Hero of Ferelden (I imagine the response being different if you're Orlesian) or they'll start to see the huge benefits of having you around once you start moping up darkspawn and clearing out food and trade routes so that people can eat.
The point I am making is just because "it is stated" that doesn't mean to say we should just accept any major culture change as read, let alone from expansions produced in indecent haste! After all the original game was designed to appeal to young adults not gullible 10 year olds. Leaving out political ramifications of decision making at royal level is nothing short of negligent! Loghain used political leverage and his astuteness in consolidating his power base. Are we suddenly expected to ignore that and just endorse a "New idea let's go with it!"philosophy? I think not especially after all the hullabaloo at the Landsmeet.
The first thing any surviving wardens do is talk to the hand at Weishaupt and sort out the joining necessities and their secrets. In Awakening I smell echoes of the Drydens here with wardens taking sides in a political fight. That ended as a disaster. Warden priorities do not include managing an estate and it's peoples. Mopping up as you put it is a job for the local militia and maybe a task force from Denerim. Obviously wardens will assist as that is their duty and their sole one working towards the permanent solution of the Darkspawn problem
As for a new broom in an arling after the sitting tenant and his family were evicted, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an attempt to oust the new lord if it weren't a managed replacement appointed by the Cousland Teryn's (with Royal Assent of course). even then any capable lord will anticipate resistance to his management style
The ideal base for a warden is Warden's Keep whether or not you took the small dlc quest to clear it of demons. Don't understand why that was cast aside. From a Ferelden Monarch's point of view rather than hand a deadly fighting force a perfect fortress there is always Ostagar, an ideal fixer upper opportunity for a new owner, a good training venue and plenty of combat practice against the Chasind. Earlier in DAO it is explained in great detail how only wardens have an early warning radar effective against darkspawn and that they are immune to the taint. Yet nothing is done to improve relationships with Orlais by admitting their band of wardens to help with the clean up despite the presence of a senior warden from there who died in the battle against the archdemon
Fanciful as Awakening is I don't find it lore friendly and an early sign of how fragmented Bioware was starting to become in plot compilation. DAO had a nice tight vicious political plotline (amongst other great things) a shrink wrap version of GoT if you like. DAI didn't make it in that department and while a convert to a GoT style would be very immersive, with areas sizes the game would be enormous and unless broken up into manageable pieces, take far too long to complete
Finally I'm sure Fergus would have his own ideas about who should be running Amaranthine. A sibling would be ideal and better than him or her being a bann, but wardens can't hold rank anyway too distracting from purging DS and saving Thedas. That vacancy would be better filled from noble allies in the fight against the darkspawn not a grey warden
The point I am making is just because "it is stated" that doesn't mean to say we should just accept any major culture change as read, let alone from expansions produced in indecent haste! After all the original game was designed to appeal to young adults not gullible 10 year olds. Leaving out political ramifications of decision making at royal level is nothing short of negligent! Loghain used political leverage and his astuteness in consolidating his power base. Are we suddenly expected to ignore that and just endorse a "New idea let's go with it!"philosophy? I think not especially after all the hullabaloo at the Landsmeet.
The first thing any surviving wardens do is talk to the hand at Weishaupt and sort out the joining necessities and their secrets. In Awakening I smell echoes of the Drydens here with wardens taking sides in a political fight. That ended as a disaster. Warden priorities do not include managing an estate and it's peoples. Mopping up as you put it is a job for the local militia and maybe a task force from Denerim. Obviously wardens will assist as that is their duty and their sole one working towards the permanent solution of the Darkspawn problem
As for a new broom in an arling after the sitting tenant and his family were evicted, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an attempt to oust the new lord if it weren't a managed replacement appointed by the Cousland Teryn's (with Royal Assent of course). even then any capable lord will anticipate resistance to his management style
The ideal base for a warden is Warden's Keep whether or not you took the small dlc quest to clear it of demons. Don't understand why that was cast aside. From a Ferelden Monarch's point of view rather than hand a deadly fighting force a perfect fortress there is always Ostagar, an ideal fixer upper opportunity for a new owner, a good training venue and plenty of combat practice against the Chasind. Earlier in DAO it is explained in great detail how only wardens have an early warning radar effective against darkspawn and that they are immune to the taint. Yet nothing is done to improve relationships with Orlais by admitting their band of wardens to help with the clean up despite the presence of a senior warden from there who died in the battle against the archdemon
Fanciful as Awakening is I don't find it lore friendly and an early sign of how fragmented Bioware was starting to become in plot compilation. DAO had a nice tight vicious political plotline (amongst other great things) a shrink wrap version of GoT if you like. DAI didn't make it in that department and while a convert to a GoT style would be very immersive, with areas sizes the game would be enormous and unless broken up into manageable pieces, take far too long to complete
Finally I'm sure Fergus would have his own ideas about who should be running Amaranthine. A sibling would be ideal and better than him or her being a bann, but wardens can't hold rank anyway too distracting from purging DS and saving Thedas. That vacancy would be better filled from noble allies in the fight against the darkspawn not a grey warden
So having the warden receive land and titles is equivalent to appealing to 10-year olds? I always that that the challenge of managing a territory seemed like something that appealed to adult/mature audiences as opposed to straight-up adventures. The idea behind the Warden running Amaranthine was a sign of good will from Ferelden and though it's unorthodox, the First Warden is waiting to see what HAPPENS. Again, this is an experiment and he's waiting to see what occurs before determining whether Warden policy should change in new age or stay the same.
The Dryden incident is a false-equivalent. Sophia Dryden was asked by the people of Ferelden to help them against the reign of a tyrant. Said-tyrant banned the wardens for daring to not stay neutral. (King Arland sounds very similar to Joffrey anyway) But if Arland was overthrown, do you think that the people of Ferelden would appreciate the Warden's refusal to help them? This was a mortan's fork and a demonstration of the potential weaknesses of the Warden Neutrality policy (As was the 5th Blight when Loghain took power and back-stabbed the Wardens)
The Wardens are not taking any political sides in Amaranthine, they are using it as a base to regrow their numbers. They are fighting against the darkspawn armies that are still terrorizing the area as well as any other major threat to Amaranthine's safety and stability. And honestly, most of what you do to effect the area is either done to improve the livelihood of the people, strengthen fortifications, or clear out trade/food routes. So clearly the pluses outweigh the negatives here. There will be detractors, but there's no doubt that this was a good choice especially if the Warden chose to save Amaranthine and Vigil's Keep managed to endure.
Not to say that Soldier's Peak wouldn't be a better ideal place to rebuild the Wardens, I agree there. In fact, I never got why we couldn't use the fortress as a forward command post in Origins.
But for what the developers were going for in Awakening, they did pretty well and still maintains a decent air of maturity.
In my mind, Warden's Keep is there to act as Temporary Headquarters for the Wardens while Vigil's Keep is being repaired after they saved Amaranthine. Or their secret fort from where Avernus continues his studies on the Blight.
The problem I had with Wardens being given Amaranthine is that Amaranthine is still part off Ferelden and subject to its king as well as - to lesser extent (feudal system in Ferelden is strange and I don't think it should be really considered feudal because of how it works) - to Teyrn Cousland.
So, basically, the whoever-holds-the-equivalent-of-arls-title becomes King Alistair's/Queen Anora's vassal. If the king goes to war, the arl is obligued to gather his army and join the war effort. Now let's imagine a war with Orlais - now we have the leader of Fereldan Gray Wardens who should - as the ruler of Arling of Amaranthine - go and fight said war.
Basically, it would make so much more sense if - in appreciation of Warden's help - the Wardens were given Ostagar. It's a good place (After all, that's the direction Darkspawn came from), it's also not an important strategic location for Ferelden (as long as Chasind are not considered to be an immediate threat), it could be re-built to become a magnificent fortress... basically, it could become a good base for Wardens to settle in and start rebuilding Fereldan branch of their order, withouth all that mess of getting involved in Fereldan politics, internal or otherwise.
Ostagar is a terrible location to rebuild the Order. It's been in disrepair and ruin for so long that years would pass and lots of money spent before it's completed. Not to mention that it's on the edge of the wilderness vulnerable to constant attack from the Chasind (who managed to overwhelm the fortress at least once in it's prime) and that area was just infested by the taint which means that food and water supplies will be terribly lacking.
Hence why Soldier's Peak would be a better choice. It's still relatively stable despite being abandoned for 200 years, it's situated in the mountains in a location unknown to only a few people and even when occupied by less than 100 wardens the fort endured for a long time against an army numbering in the thousands. It's also closer to Denerem or Highever for the purposes of trade, recruitment and assistance when needed. Not to mention that the lands would be much more fertile for food and other supplies.
As for the Warden-Commander being subject to Ferelden's King. That's something of a grey area though I see your point. See, when Ferelden's king gave the arling of Amaranthine to the Wardens, he essentially granted that territory semi-independence. Even the WC's position as an arl is a "ex officio" technicality. Therefore, the WC has complete independence regarding Warden affairs though would have to use Amaranthine's wider resources to assist Ferelden.
Long story short, the WC may have to send out Amaranthine troops to aid the Ferelden king as they are Ferelden citizens, but no warden would be obligated to be part of that force.
As for Ostagar's condition - have you seen this place? Rebuilding it would take some time and money, but as long as you want to have "just" a good fortress, not a Fort Drakon-grade keep, it seems quite promising. Tevinter was really building well.
I'd give the Dwarves more credit for it then Tevinter. Tevinter had the Dwarves build it and paid them for their trouble, to be sure, but it was probably Dwarven designs that went into it -- since you learn that it is in fact Dwarven-make.
So having the warden receive land and titles is equivalent to appealing to 10-year olds? I always that that the challenge of managing a territory seemed like something that appealed to adult/mature audiences as opposed to straight-up adventures. The idea behind the Warden running Amaranthine was a sign of good will from Ferelden and though it's unorthodox, the First Warden is waiting to see what HAPPENS. Again, this is an experiment and he's waiting to see what occurs before determining whether Warden policy should change in new age or stay the same.
The Dryden incident is a false-equivalent. Sophia Dryden was asked by the people of Ferelden to help them against the reign of a tyrant. Said-tyrant banned the wardens for daring to not stay neutral. (King Arland sounds very similar to Joffrey anyway) But if Arland was overthrown, do you think that the people of Ferelden would appreciate the Warden's refusal to help them? This was a mortan's fork and a demonstration of the potential weaknesses of the Warden Neutrality policy (As was the 5th Blight when Loghain took power and back-stabbed the Wardens)
The Wardens are not taking any political sides in Amaranthine, they are using it as a base to regrow their numbers. They are fighting against the darkspawn armies that are still terrorizing the area as well as any other major threat to Amaranthine's safety and stability. And honestly, most of what you do to effect the area is either done to improve the livelihood of the people, strengthen fortifications, or clear out trade/food routes. So clearly the pluses outweigh the negatives here. There will be detractors, but there's no doubt that this was a good choice especially if the Warden chose to save Amaranthine and Vigil's Keep managed to endure.
Not to say that Soldier's Peak wouldn't be a better ideal place to rebuild the Wardens, I agree there. In fact, I never got why we couldn't use the fortress as a forward command post in Origins.
But for what the developers were going for in Awakening, they did pretty well and still maintains a decent air of maturity.
The point is that wardens should not be awarded land and titles in the first place. Unorthodox is perhaps a mild term. Precedent setting is perhaps more appropriate as wardens with estates can eventually be expected to run the entire kingdom/empire as they have the best military capability to enforce their will should they feel the need. Far too risky a proposition with any ruler to contemplate. As for the Drydens Sophia was grafted into the wardens as a way to either end her life via the joining or remove a threat to the standing monarchy. The fact that she survived the joining was for Ferelden's monarch an unlucky break but at least in theory it took her out of the power struggle so it was thought anyway. Yes having the warden receive land AND titles is daft to anyone with a smidgeon of political awareness. Land fine, titles? NO WAY!!
By virtue oif the fact that at least one Warden has become ennobled and thus loyal to the monarch first, and his own cause second, the political ramifications are obvious. A tithe from estate income is paid to the crown as an acknowledgement that the lord is but a vassal of said crown and subject to it's will. The wardens have a responsibility which supersedes that therefore while accepting land is acceptable accepting allegiance in the same capacity cannot be as it undermines the raison d'etre of warden's existence
I agree Awakening was a good expansion, but to my mind there was no need whatsoever to allocate lordship of an arling to a warden, A castle and lands would be essential to establish a warden base, and would be consistent with the way a warden presence was encouraged within the realm. However inviting a warden to take an active part in the political running of the realm itself as an Arl is both unjustified (to other lords) and dangerous to the stability of the kingdom
I didn't find Inquisition's ending bad at all. It didn't blow me away like ME2's did back in the day, nor did it become the cherry on top of a terribad-sundae like ME3's.
I think ME3's ending was by far Bioware's worst ending, especially considering all that led up to it.
It is a shame that people praises the ending so blindly and even judge the OP as being just another person to just rant because he have no knowledge of the franchise or bioware games and all his advice will lead to is terrible, future games.
Dragon Age Inquisitions ending was awful, terribly anti-climatic and just boring beyond belief. What could have been different, use the freaking fortress the inquisition has spent time rebuilding during the game. Have the dragons clash in the sky while inquisition forces and allies along with yourself defend the walls of skyhold from demons, make it a major clash like we had in Dragon Age Origins with the combined forces under the warden against the darkspawn.
Dragon Age Inquisition's setting and story was perfect for an ending like that and you blew it with something so awfully anti-climatic as just stepping onto a stone where Corypheus was waiting.
The entire game, not only the ending, lacked a story that was connected. Celene or Gaspard as the leader of Orlais? It does not matter you will not hear about it in the game anyway, not until the slideshow atleast. At least Dragon Age Origins had different forces you could summon depending on your past choices, it is a very small thing but it is there.
Even the rifts you were closing or did not close could have become far more meaningful, adding or taking to/from Cory's forces in the end battle or even added or taking from your own forces because aggressive demons roaming the world might slow down your allies.
Much could have been done to make a much better story but the most simple would probably be to make a much better ending.
The gameplay was nice though, but I do miss my tactic slots.... a lot.
It is a shame that people praises the ending so blindly and even judge the OP as being just another person to just rant because he have no knowledge of the franchise or bioware games and all his advice will lead to is terrible, future games.
Dragon Age Inquisitions ending was awful, terribly anti-climatic and just boring beyond belief. What could have been different, use the freaking fortress the inquisition has spent time rebuilding during the game. Have the dragons clash in the sky while inquisition forces and allies along with yourself defend the walls of skyhold from demons, make it a major clash like we had in Dragon Age Origins with the combined forces under the warden against the darkspawn.
Dragon Age Inquisition's setting and story was perfect for an ending like that and you blew it with something so awfully anti-climatic as just stepping onto a stone where Corypheus was waiting.
The entire game, not only the ending, lacked a story that was connected. Celene or Gaspard as the leader of Orlais? It does not matter you will not hear about it in the game anyway, not until the slideshow atleast. At least Dragon Age Origins had different forces you could summon depending on your past choices, it is a very small thing but it is there.
Even the rifts you were closing or did not close could have become far more meaningful, adding or taking to/from Cory's forces in the end battle or even added or taking from your own forces because aggressive demons roaming the world might slow down your allies.
Much could have been done to make a much better story but the most simple would probably be to make a much better ending.
The gameplay was nice though, but I do miss my tactic slots.... a lot.
No one's saying that Inquisition is perfect or didn't have disappointments or flaws.
Where the OP is objectively wrong is by comparing it ME3's ending and saying that Inquisition's ending is inferior. Personal tastes aside, multiple reasons have already been posted as to why this is simply untrue. The OP would've been better-off with just saying that he didn't like the ending and then he'd appear to be more credible.
No one's saying that Inquisition is perfect or didn't have disappointments or flaws.
Where the OP is objectively wrong is by comparing it ME3's ending and saying that Inquisition's ending is inferior. Personal tastes aside, multiple reasons have already been posted as to why this is simply untrue. The OP would've been better-off with just saying that he didn't like the ending and then he'd appear to be more credible.
I do not know about ME3 but fact is that the ending of inquisition was absolutely terrible. I would rather converse with my brother and friend seeing as the two of them have played both ME3 and Inquisition, but as of now, the ending in inquisition, I honestly can not imagine an ending worse than that.
It may have made far more sense than any other ending.
But that doesn't really matter when it was as boring as lying in the bed and staring at the ceiling.
Retour en haut