223 réponses à ce sujet

[Aaleel]

The ones I made were.  I think my full believer playthrough was my favorite followed closely by my Dalish Elf.

[Cyonan]

agreed the Inquisitor was a wimp compared to other Bioware protagonists (Hawke, Shepard, The Warden)

I tried to be ruthless but I got the same bland and diplomatic responses

 

huge missed opportunity especially since the Inquisitor has so much power  (many interesting RP possibilities)

I remember people saying that Hawke was limited (he was human for one and also had personality) but in my opinion

the Inquisitor is by far the most limited Bioware protag so far

 

but hey at least the fans that were crazy about races got them right?

no because they are also just a half assed version of DA:O's races

 

thats the main problem with DA:I they tried to appeal to everyone and in the end the game itself is very shallow

 

The Inquisition has a weird level of freedom. There's quite a bit of variance you can get in your character in the minor details, but they all still have to be the diplomatic leader.

 

Meanwhile somebody like Shep can be nice or a dick, but is one dimensional beyond that.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I didn't find the inquisitor particularly interesting, but I didn't exactly have high expectations in that regard.

 

For me, it was primarily an issue of being handed all the power and influence in the opening scenes of the game. The story structure lacked the kind of conflict that generally defines an interesting character - even one that is supposed to be a relatively blank slate, in order to accommodate multiple players.

 

I did, however, like the rest of the cast, and found them interesting.

[Nefla]

While I really appreciated not being forced to play human, I think the inquisitor's personality was way too limited. You can't be evil, ruthless, inappropriate, racist or intensely pro mage/elf/dwarf/chantry/etc...You can't even be extremely selfless and self sacrificing or innocent. You're just kind of neutral all the time no matter what you pick. The only thing that separates my inquisitor's personalities in my mind is a few times where you can say that the chantry is good or bad and that you believe you are the herald or not. Other than that, they're all pretty much the same no matter what you pick. The fact that there are no side quests that give you choices or dialogue options to help define your character and that the very few main story choices are equivalent just adds to this.

[Ieldra]

I like my Inquisitors. The range of characterization options I had was not as big as in some other games, but the granularity within that range was improved. Also, some of the war table options gave me the opportunity for characterization through action, which together had significant weight.

 

All in all, I rate DAI's roleplaying as significantly better than DA2's, and better than all of the ME games. Comparing DAI with ME3 really illustrates how much of a joke ME3 was in that regard. Comparing with DAO is hard since the unvoiced protagonist feels so different. Overall, I think the range of characterization was bigger in DAO,  but I never used the more extreme jerkass options, and they wouldn't have been plausible for my Inquisitors anyway.  

[thats1evildude]

I thought my Inquisitor was a swell guy. Quite liked him. I have no interest in the "psychotic" options, so I don't mind that they weren't there. (As it was, you could still play the Inquisitor as quite a self-interested jackass.)

[dsl08002]

Not really, i got a apathetic feeling while playing as the inquisitor.

The warden is my number one character, but i liked hawke more than the inquisitor

[Pasta]

The way I see it.

 

The game focuses much on the Inquisition itself, not the Inquisitor. So to me The Inquisitor felt like an errand boy with the mask of a "leader" when the ones carrying out strategies and such are the advisors. He just have to make a big choice,

Spoiler

(EG. Templar/Mage, Fade Sacrifice)

but how to carry it out and the method of doing it are done by the advisors. He just went on to carry out the duty, mission complete, then onto the next one. 

 

Spoiler

As for the Fade sacrifice, why can't my Inquisitor have at least an input or anything / any idea to say / suggest before choosing who to "likely die" for him............ I thought the Fade would dig into my Inquisitor's personal life but no, it's just explanation of the lost memory and it's quite disappointing. Every other companion have been taunted bout their personal life, which comes with exclusive gravestone for them.

 

The companions are much more fleshed out. Inquisitor is just someone learning about the companions. War Table is a big disappointment for learning about the Inquisitor's origin, even more when it's just flavor text without anything to witness.

 

And personally, there's also a little bit of Mary-Sue in him. 

Spoiler

Superpowers. Ability to open a rift and walk physically into the Fade? Not suffering from frostbite from long exposure of freezing temperatures? Plot armor much.

 

I like a hero who is more down-to-earth, and no, I'm not hating on the Inquisitor, it's just that he's.... he's got a lot of holes in his character.

[NoRmAnDy-SR2]

The most disapponting thing, however, is the missing chemistry between the Inquisitor and other NPCs.

 

^ This.

[Abyss108]

Yup, favourite character yet. Hated the warden, Hawke was OK but never felt like my own character. Shepard was completely boring and had no personality outside of being diplomatic/ruthless. 

[Nohvarr]

See I really liked being the Inquisitor because of the ways I got to define the character. I was kind, but still pragmatic in that I wouldn't waste the lives of my people unless I had an achievable objective that would benefit the Inquisition on the whole. I also supported the restoration of the circle, but allowed rebel mages to join my cause as Allies because chaining them up was impractical (while keeping a discreet eye was much easier especially with Viviennes help). My judgments were not blood thirsty by any stretch....but were often ruthless to my enemies in ways I KNEW would REALLY get under their skin.

[dongsaeng]

My first playthrough was kinda boring, since I did everything to save and please everyone.

My second inquisitor got interesting, when I started gambling with people's lives.

Its a tie between Warden and Quizzy on who's more interesting. I find Hawke to be the most interesting among the three.

[pawswithclaws]

Oh yes, very much so! 

[Uccio]

Not really, I had no connection to him, so bland character and no connection to his past which didn´t manifest in the game at all. Nor was I particularly interested of being Jebus 2.0. Life of Brian, except I couldn´t run from the crowd.

[Paragonslustre]

I grew to like my Inquisitor, but I wish there had been more of an introduction to the characters to begin with like in Origins and DA2.

[Al Foley]

couldn't disagree more
I wasn't a fan of the autodialogue in ME3 but ME2 had a great dialogue wheel
DA2 too there were a lot of options for RP

I'm not sure how you can say DA I is better just because there are more options to choose from
thats only an illusion because no matter what you pick the Inquisitor will be the same: boring diplomatic

it seems many here were easily fooled by it (and the option to pick from different races again)
the Inquisitor is more limited than any other Bioware protag so far

...or we simply have a different opinion.  Crazy, I know.  

[pinkjellybeans]

I tried liking my Inquisitors. And in some moments I did. But like some people already pointed out, I think the Inquisitor, being the leader, is too diplomatic no matter what dialogue you choose. And to me, it makes them a boring PC to play, because I'm not a fan of the whole righteousness thing. The fact that we don't know anything about their background also didn't help me care about them. To me, the Inquisitor just felt like a random NPC. I really liked playing Hawke because at least you had a personality, even if they were 3 extremes.

 

Also this:

 

The most disapponting thing, however, is the missing chemistry between the Inquisitor and other NPCs.

[sim-ran]

The fact that we don't know anything about their background also didn't help me care about them.

I too think they could have done better here. In early game I got niggling "who are you?!" feelings in many of the conversations. You had lots of choice in how to make the Inquisitor respond but with so little insight into the backstory I found it harder to RP and decide how they SHOULD respond.

They probably left the backstory vague to leave the player open to fill in the gaps as they wish, which I suppose makes a lot of sense, but I personally prefer the PC to have an established history.

Jade Empire's beginning, the DA Origin and ME1s CC still did a decent job of this I thought, and all in different ways.

[Phoe77]

I never felt like being more diplomatic prevented the Inquisitors from having their own unique personalities.  I've created Inquisitors with a wide range of goals and motivations, and the fact that they primarily employ diplomacy to reach those goals was never a particularly big problem.  In some ways, it's refreshing to play a protagonist who is, at least so some extent, bound by public perception.  His main-characterness doesn't allow him to go and do off-the-wall things like some other protagonists can do without batting an eye.  

 

I also don't really agree that every Inquisitor feels the same, regardless of what options you choose to flesh them out with.  A person or a character still holds the ideals that they hold even when those ideals don't directly affect how an event plays out.  When I play Champions of the Just with a mage who has a grudge against the templars, it feels very different than when I play through with one who believes in the order's merit.  Things play out similarly, but that doesn't mean that my Inquisitors are similar.  

 

I also like the war table.  I forgot to mention that I thought that that was a neat way to flesh out your character as well.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

NOPE.

 

Warden and Revan are the most interesting because they have a past and we get to live it (The Warden) or learn about it in great detail (Revan). Should've cut off half the side quests and just given us origin stories.

 

Edit: Also I didn't get to say "Shem" once.

[Lebanese Dude]

 Should've cut off half the side quests and just given us origin stories.

 

 

There's a game for that.

It's called Dragon Age: Origins.

 

[pinkjellybeans]

There's a game for that.

It's called Dragon Age: Origins.

 

 

So DAO is the only game capable of giving the player an insight about their PC's background? It's not like we're asking for a DAO2. I just think that a few lines of a super vague text about my PC is not enough to make me care for them. Maybe those who are all about headcanons prefer it that way, and it's fine, but I don't. 

[Ryriena]

I think the inqusitior is veryily boring to me, since I dont have the options to define my personality.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

There's a game for that.

It's called Dragon Age: Origins.

 

 

Because making more origin stories is going to somehow kill DAI right?