223 réponses à ce sujet

[Tensai]

Was the Inquisitor an interesting character to you?

 

No offense but this question is some what ridiculous.

 

Was the HoF interesting?

Was Hawke interesting?

Is the Inquisitor interesting?

 

With Hawke being the only expection, you are the Character, so u have to ask yourself, have you created an interesting character? It's about imagination & choices, that's what roleplaying is about.

 

The only  2 reasons some one could claim the warden more interesting than the Inquisitor are

 

1.Real Origins not just some stuff mentioned in dialogue.

2.Hard decision which let you form and develop the character in a more intense way.

[CottonMacabre]

After playing the awesomeness that is sarcastic Hawke, i knew that my inquisitor was going to pale in comparison regardless lol

 

But i always like my warden the most, mainly because Origins didn't have a bloody annoying para-phrase dialogue system that bioware has adapted into Mass effect and new dragon ages :/

[The dead fish]

 

With Hawke being the only expection, you are the Character, so u have to ask yourself, have you created an interesting character? It's about imagination & choices, that's what roleplaying is about.

 

In theory yes, but DA:I is quite limited. I had an interesting character for DAI in my head and this game quite limited with the development of the protagonist didn't allow me to have this character. Even having some flaws, like being selfish, rude or too ambitious is hardly possible in this game. 

 

I'm not really interested to play a nice, diplomatic and bland inquisitor either.

[Hazegurl]

The Inquisitor is the voice and the face of the Inquistion. He can be it´s heart.

 

He does not have to be a nice guy to be all of that. He can still be anything he wants to be.  It's going back to the logic that only nice guys can rule.

 

Leliana is your left hand. True. Does it make her loyal. No, of course not. She is loyal to "the cause". Not you.

 

She's loyal to the Inquisition and thus she is loyal to me.  Her number one goal is stopping the bad guys AND preparing to keep the organization going. She is loyal to the IQ because he's their best shot at doing both. As long as the IQ continue to do what is best for the organization she will follow faithfully. Like I said, she isn't going to do anything to the IQ for killing some people, et al. As long as it's for the Inquisition. At least not my Leliana. Heck the game had her doing all the stuff I wanted my IQ to do.

 

You think she would dispose of Cullen if you told her. Where is your evidence? There is none.

 

You have loyal soldiers who could deal with Cassandra. Who are they? What are their names?

Your army? Do you know them?

 

She had no problems cutting the throat of someone she knew who threatened us.  Why one earth would she go easy on Cullen if he threatened us?  Pay attention during the IB cut scene. They mention joining for their own reasons and for the Inquisitor, they don't mention anything at all about Cullen. Sure he has his

Spoiler

Templars, but you can refuse to train more AND recruit the mages who have no love for Templars at all

.  So let's see.

 

Spoiler

I have soldiers

loyal Mages

I can cut off Cullen's supply of Templar recruits

I have underworld connections to the Lyrium trade

 

Yes, I could have squashed both Cullen and Cass.  The opportunity is just not there. Besides, all of this is assuming Cullen would do anything to begin with, and I doubt it. He's happy in the Inquisition it's giving him purpose and he gets along well with Dorian and the others. It's not like the Skyhold walls should be painted black and everyone has to sit around twirling their staches all day because the Inquisitor isn't the nicest man in the neighborhood.

 

 

You could make Cullen a lyrium addict? Strange. I thought Templars are already lyrium addicts. The most you can do is undermine his decisions to stop taking lyrium.

 

 That's what I mean. I can get him hooked back on the stuff and leash him with it. Of course the idea of leashing him with lyrium is mere headcanon as the game only gives you one reason to express.

 

 

 

It seems we play different games.

 

Real Power is not about f***ing up everybody´s lives. It is not about getting what you want.

It´s about grinding your teeth and doing your job because no one else can.

 

 

 

No we played the same game, I just saw other opportunities that could have given us more rp. While you're stuck believing that only golden boys get to have power.  The reality is that powerful people do sometimes **** up people's lives, for whatever reason. Not all good people are deserving of only good things happening to them, not all bad people are deserving of only bad things, and people will and do follow leaders who aren't benevolent. 

[ThreeF]

That's my issue with DA:I. You can just say a meaningless thing like I am building my own power, and only once when you become the inquisitor but in reality, it doesn't really happen and the game doesn't allow you to truly behave that way, or then I don't remember having such possibilities. 

I can see how one would like for the world to be more reactive and to be with more obvious opportunities. Personally I didn't saw much difference between  DAO and DAI in terms of how I played my character. I found the limitations to be similar. What makes the difference in games is how much a game dictate your character and how much of it aligns with how you envision your character. Everything else (such as whenever you find your character interesting or not) depends on your willingness to adapt and I should add that there is nothing wrong with not wanting to adapt, I don't play games where I'm not willing to adapt.

[ThreeF]

lol one choice like that.. hardly comparable to DA:O where you could pull **** like this in every major quest or even in side quests

the "ruthless" Inquisitor is just a complete wimp compared to The Warden and Hawke

 

so bland and the voice actors aren't helping either its like they bored most of the time

Hawke was a caricature a lot of the times, and lets not start discussing all the meaningful ways warden could be "evil", it was done for laughs with no real consequences.  While you might find all that entertaining, I find it boring, so opinions etc.

[Hazegurl]

 

To this day, I still struggle to complete Male Shepard playthroughs, because of Mark Meer. And not because he's a bad actor, but because of this decision that has been taken to rein him in and have him just be neutral and even in tone all the time. Same with Alix and Curry etc in Inquisition. We know they're better than this - Sumalee at least seems to have ignored that and actually puts in a proper performance.

 

 

I agree with everything. However, I would never say Meer's Shepard was as neutral as the IQ's. Never. Meer had great comedic timing and his renegade Shepard is way better than Hale's more emotional one. The IQ practically spent the entire game standing around (mostly in a hunched over position) with the Warden's blank slate facial expression. 

 

But i guess it all goes back to the point you made about the actors interpretation of the character. It's the reason why we can disagree on which actor does what better.  This is why you will hardly see any threads about which Inquisition actor did a better job, or any discussions on how we interpret the story through the dialogue and how it was spoken. We essentially have four actors who simply did the same thing. 

 

@John, I think what it boils down to is that players who enjoy playing diplomatic characters got a ton of RP options so they got a chance to do a lot with the diplomatic type.

[ThreeF]

@John, I think what it boils down to is that players who enjoy playing diplomatic characters got a ton of RP options so they got a chance to do a lot with the diplomatic type.

It's not so much the diplomacy as the range of more subtle and nuanced ways you could approach things with. You could be disdainful, snotty, bossy, irritated, calculative, manipulative in ways that felt natural.

 

I loved that one moment I could try and be reasonable with cleric and the next instance seamlessly be all pissed off at Lord seeker. I could be disdainful and snotty about Roderic and about being noble. Could tell Cullen to shut up and stop the whining and still make him do what I wanted. Actually the number of types  of relationships and the spectrum you could have with this particular character is amazing (and I'm one of those people who do not headcanons).

[Majestic Jazz]

Hawke was a caricature a lot of the times, and lets not start discussing all the meaningful ways warden could be "evil", it was done for laughs with no real consequences.  While you might find all that entertaining, I find it boring, so opinions etc.

 

And? At least we had options to take our character's personalities, even if they were 3 extremes such as too diplomatic/nice, too funny/not taking things seriously, and outright being a no nonsense jerk. In DAI there basically is just one path, diplomatic which VERY LITTLE variance in how that is done.

 

Again, for the Warden, at least we had these options. They might have been boring to you but at least there was the options. I could be an almighty super nice Warden or I could have been that psychotic dude who wanted to kill for the lulz. Again, the dialog options gave us the.....well....options.

 

DAI lacked this. Which is the essence if our arguments.

[ThreeF]

And? At least we had options to take our character's personalities, even if they were 3 extremes such as too diplomatic/nice, too funny/not taking things seriously, and outright being a no nonsense jerk. In DAI there basically is just one path, diplomatic which VERY LITTLE variance in how that is done.

 

Again, for the Warden, at least we had these options. They might have been boring to you but at least there was the options. I could be an almighty super nice Warden or I could have been that psychotic dude who wanted to kill for the lulz. Again, the dialog options gave us the.....well....options.

 

DAI lacked this. Which is the essence if our arguments.

DAI has different options, the kind you don't like and so you see it as very little variance and that's about it. Again, it's a matter of preference.

[Biotic Flash Kick]

no the inquisitor is the worst DA protag thus far

the mute warden had more interesting dialogue than the inquisitor 

[Majestic Jazz]

DAI has different options, the kind you don't like and so you see it as very little variance and that's about it. Again, it's a matter of preference.

 

Lol, DAI has "options" to mold your Inquisitor into? Sorry, the only character options are the race and class. Beyond that the IQ is a bland state that really does not deviate far from being neutral on everything.

 

With KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, DAO, and DA2 I could play the game the first time with a certain type of character then turn around and play the same game but play as a different type of character personality wise and while the story was the same, it felt different because of the different approaches I took. DAI this cannot happen. I play the game as a Human who is pro Chantry and then I turn around and play the game as a Dalish Mage is who is everything Elf related and anti Chantry and even in the Elf playthrough, it never truly felt as if I was molding my character into being that pro Elf/[...] the Chantry character. I mean when we get to the Elvian ruins, a certain character had to EXPLAIN to my DALISH Elf what certain things meant!?!?! I mean this was fine if I am playing as a Qunari/Human/Dwarf but not as an Elf. I can go into more detail about this but I wont. Point is, the options just aren't there. With past Bioware games since KOTOR we could drive Cadillac SUV, Toyota sedan, Ferrarri, or Suzuki motorcycle. With DAI, we are given 2 sedans to drive, a Toyota Corolla and Camry. Yes the Corolla and Camry are "different" bu the varience isn't as wide as say a Corolla vs Camry as opposed to a Corolla vs Suzuki motorcycle.

Modifié par BioWareMod02, 23 février 2015 - 12:35 .
Edited for inappropriate language

[ThreeF]

Lol, DAI has "options" to mold your Inquisitor into? Sorry, the only character options are the race and class. Beyond that the IQ is a bland state that really does not deviate far from being neutral on everything.

 

With KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, DAO, and DA2 I could play the game the first time with a certain type of character then turn around and play the same game but play as a different type of character personality wise and while the story was the same, it felt different because of the different approaches I took. DAI this cannot happen. I play the game as a Human who is pro Chantry and then I turn around and play the game as a Dalish Mage is who is everything Elf related and anti Chantry and even in the Elf playthrough, it never truly felt as if I was molding my character into being that pro Elf/F**k the Chantry character. I mean when we get to the Elvian ruins, a certain character had to EXPLAIN to my DALISH Elf what certain things meant!?!?! I mean this was fine if I am playing as a Qunari/Human/Dwarf but not as an Elf. I can go into more detail about this but I wont. Point is, the options just aren't there. With past Bioware games since KOTOR we could drive Cadillac SUV, Toyota sedan, Ferrarri, or Suzuki motorcycle. With DAI, we are given 2 sedans to drive, a Toyota Corolla and Camry. Yes the Corolla and Camry are "different" bu the varience isn't as wide as say a Corolla vs Camry as opposed to a Corolla vs Suzuki motorcycle.

I was able to play a sheltered human mage who was a terrible diplomat had terrible people skills but became wiser by the end of the game.

I was also was able to play as an archer who never thought much about being noble, didn't cared about Chantry, didn't want to be a leader but was forced to make decisions because nobody else would.

I'm currently pondering whenever I want to play as a self-servicing bossy champion who pretends that she is a believer in order to get power or a really devoted snobbish one whose believes will be crushed by the end. 

I'm also seeing a potential in playing a Dalish or Tal-Vashoth whose sole purpose is to destabilize the humans and a carta thug who sees opportunity to gain more money and power.

 

It's really a matter of perspective.

[Majestic Jazz]

no it sounds more like headcanon to me you are mistaking two things here
I have played as a qunari and there were never options to express my hatred towards humans or that I wanted to destabalize them

same with the carta dwarf
in the game itself the Inquisitor is mostly diplomatic and bland
there are many dialogue options to choose from but its only an illusion

there are also very few interesting choices to make
in DA O and DA II even in side quests you could make choices that defined your character

Does he care for others? Is he just out for power ?
all that got tossed out the window in DA I and we got a boring protagonist

 

+100

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. He is confusing molding your character through dialog options vs molding your character through head cannon techniques. 

[ThreeF]

no it sounds more like headcanon to me you are mistaking two things here
I have played as a qunari and there were never options to express my hatred towards humans or that I wanted to destabalize them

As I said before I understand that some people want more obvious choices but actions sometimes can speak more than words and I personally prefer that to obvious verbal choices. Playing as a sheltered mage I didn't headcanoned it, I was given the option to define it in my conversation with Josephine and Cullen and then continue defining it in my conversation with companions like Sera and Iron Bull and other characters by picking "diplomatic" choices that I knew would backfire and then slowly changing the dynamic, it was pretty interesting to see the difference in the relationship that this created. Same goes with my archer, nothing I ever did with her outside of what I was given in dialogue, I told that I didn't know if the Maker existed and insisted on that through the game, I told Viv I did not care for appearances, i told Josephine I was glad she was there to deal with diplomatic stuff and that I was rather go take a nap than close Briges and I never actively pursued the chantry elections, although I did made sure that Vivienne had no stake in it because I knew it would create more conflict and I really needed that nap.

 

You don't need to say "I hate humans" but there are many options to  say  "f off, I don't care"  and show it and again I'm  not saying that the option you want shouldn't be there, but that doesn't mean there are no options whatsoever, just not the options you would like.

[Hazegurl]

It's not so much the diplomacy as the range of more subtle and nuanced ways you could approach things with. You could be disdainful, snotty, bossy, irritated, calculative, manipulative in ways that felt natural.

 

I loved that one moment I could try and be reasonable with cleric and the next instance seamlessly be all pissed off at Lord seeker. I could be disdainful and snotty about Roderic and about being noble. Could tell Cullen to shut up and stop the whining and still make him do what I wanted. Actually the number of types  of relationships and the spectrum you could have with this particular character is amazing (and I'm one of those people who do not headcanons).

I was able to play some of those types as well. But it was more headcanon than anything the game itself manifested for me.  For example, most of the options to be stern usually resulted in a lackluster delivery and in some cases outright cowardice.  I would never again threaten IB during his recruitment for this very reason.

 

"Cassandra will get you."

 

So we'll have to agree to disagree on the rp possibilities here and what is considered natural.  If I remove my headcanon and focus on what was actually given to me in game. The IQ comes across as disinterested, cowardly in some cases (IB recruitment example, Vivienne disapproval scene), and generally as a person who stands around not knowing what the heck is going on.

[Majestic Jazz]

I was able to play some of those types as well. But it was more headcanon than anything the game itself manifested for me.  For example, most of the options to be stern usually resulted in a lackluster delivery and in some cases outright cowardice.  I would never again threaten IB during his recruitment for this very reason.

 

"Cassandra will get you."

 

So we'll have to agree to disagree on the rp possibilities here and what is considered natural.  If I remove my headcanon and focus on what was actually given to me in game. The IQ comes across as disinterested, cowardly in some cases (IB recruitment example, Vivienne disapproval scene), and generally as a person who stands around not knowing what the heck is going on.

 

Which is the essense of everything that is wrong with the IQ, everything depends on head canon. In Mass Effect, I did not have to head canon a Shepard that was pro-human, I was given the actual dialog to be that. I didn't have to head canon being selfish and believing in the ends justify the means as I was given the dialog to be that. 

[ThreeF]

I was able to play some of those types as well. But it was more headcanon than anything the game itself manifested for me.  For example, most of the options to be stern usually resulted in a lackluster delivery and in some cases outright cowardice.  I would never again threaten IB during his recruitment for this very reason.

 

"Cassandra will get you."

 

So we'll have to agree to disagree on the rp possibilities here and what is considered natural.  If I remove my headcanon and focus on what was actually given to me in game. The IQ comes across as disinterested, cowardly in some cases (IB recruitment example, Vivienne disapproval scene), and generally as a person who stands around not knowing what the heck is going on.

I actually don't see many options as being strictly aggressive/diplomatic (which is something I like), some of them are pretty awkward but then again why shouldn't they be? Why PC always needs to have the upper hand? Maybe someone wants to play a buffoon who thinks he can intimidate Bull, but just because you chose to measure your dick doesn't mean it will actually rise up to the occasion.  I can see how such trollish options can be seen as unwanted by someone who wants to play it straight, but I personally don't mind, I might use them for an appropriate character.

 

edit: if I was to criticize the dialogues then I would say that the paraphrasing needs to be worked at and fine tuned more to make the dialogues more instinctive and that often there are way too many investigate options/questions and if you are choosing them all the dialogue's flow waters down significantly. These two things affect a lot how your character end up interacting.

 

Outside of the dialogue I think what hinters the interactions is not so much VA and options as the rigid animation and awkward expression.

[Hazegurl]

I actually don't see many options as being strictly aggressive/diplomatic (which is something I like), some of them are pretty awkward but then again why shouldn't they be? Why PC always needs to have the upper hand? Maybe someone wants to play a buffoon who thinks he can intimidate Bull, but just because you chose to measure your dick doesn't mean it will actually rise up to the occasion.  I can see how such trollish options can be seen as unwanted by someone who wants to play it straight, but I personally don't mind, I might use them for an appropriate character.

It's not about having the upper hand all the time it's about standing on equal ground with the people around you.  I see no reason to threaten IB with something someone else will do when it is solely my choice to recruit him. Why would I rely on Cass to clean up my mistake?  Sure I'm no leader at this point, but it's still my mess if IB turns out to endanger us.  It's not about wanting IB to shake in fear of me, it's about letting this guy know that I will take responsibility if he turns out to not be legit. Instead you push the responsibility onto someone else. Heaven forbid if the IQ offends anyone.

 

Most of the dialogue sets you up to argue with the companions even when you don't want to and most of the time it ends with the companion dropping the mic and the IQ standing around with his thumb up his ass.  It's hardly measuring your dick here. If the game is going to set me up with an inescapable argument then I want the option to stand toe to toe with the other, even if it ends in a tie.

 

Ex: Getting on Dorian about slavery. Every option sets you up for an unavoidable argument with him, an argument you start (because you can't back out the of conversation and all three options are the same), in which he drops the mic and the convo is over.

 

Vivienne's entire dialogue is littered with this same bs...if you disagree with her.  Try playing a Qunari who disagrees with IB and the Qun and see how far you'll go without headcanon. Meanwhile, Solas has the argument with IB that I believe belongs to my Qunari IQ.  smh.

[ThreeF]

It's not about having the upper hand all the time it's about standing on equal ground with the people around you.  I see no reason to threaten IB with something someone else will do when it is solely my choice to recruit him. Why would I rely on Cass to clean up my mistake?  Sure I'm no leader at this point, but it's still my mess if IB turns out to endanger us.  It's not about wanting IB to shake in fear of me, it's about letting this guy know that I will take responsibility if he turns out to not be legit. Instead you push the responsibility onto someone else. Heaven forbid if the IQ offends anyone.

 

Most of the dialogue sets you up to argue with the companions even when you don't want to and most of the time it ends with the companion dropping the mic and the IQ standing around with his thumb up his ass.  It's hardly measuring your dick here. If the game is going to set me up with an inescapable argument then I want the option to stand toe to toe with the other, even if it ends in a tie.

 

Ex: Getting on Dorian about slavery. Every option sets you up for an unavoidable argument with him, an argument you start (because you can't back out the of conversation and all three options are the same), in which he drops the mic and the convo is over.

 

Vivienne's entire dialogue is littered with this same bs...if you disagree with her.  Try playing a Qunari who disagrees with IB and the Qun and see how far you'll go without headcanon. Meanwhile, Solas has the argument with IB that I believe belongs to my Qunari IQ.  smh.

The first case is about not having the option you want, which is potentially difficult to predict or  maybe there is a different reason to it, who knows. The  Dorian slavery dialogue was made on purpose that way, Sera has couple of "no win" dialogues, Anders had at least one such dialogue too, I'm not entirely sure why they exist, actually, I suspect it is to tone down the concept of PC being perfect so no you can't stand toe to toe there by design but this is not exclusive to DAI. Vivienne had to be made smarter than IQ for her character to work. Perhaps you are just noticing it here more. All three games had restrictions of different kind. I can't say that DAO dialogues where particularly smooth sailing to me or that I always had the option I wanted.

[Draining Dragon]

The Inquisitor sounds perpetually bored. There's nothing memorable about them.

I actually miss Hawke.

[Hazegurl]

The first case is about not having the option you want, which is potentially difficult to predict or  maybe there is a different reason to it, who knows. The  Dorian slavery dialogue was made on purpose that way, Sera has couple of "no win" dialogues, Anders had at least one such dialogue too, I'm not entirely sure why they exist, actually, I suspect it is to tone down the concept of PC being perfect so no you can't stand toe to toe there by design but this is not exclusive to DAI. Vivienne had to be made smarter than IQ for her character to work. Perhaps you are just noticing it here more. All three games had restrictions of different kind. I can't say that DAO dialogues where particularly smooth sailing to me or that I always had the option I wanted.

I think DA2 did a better job with their rivalry/friend system. The companions had great points against a disapproving PC while at the same time a disapproving PC doesn't look like they're everybody's doormat. I also liked how you don't really change their minds, but you do get a chance to express how you feel. It made me feel like Hawke and his companions were their own people.  Of course the system needed tweaking but I honestly think they were on to something there. Forcing the PC to derp about just to make a character look smart and powerful is just poor writing and character development and it's just a disservice to both the IQ and Viv.  That scene could have been a whole lot better and even funny if they bothered to do something other than what they did.

[wolfhowwl]

Nah, they should have made another Hawke or Shepard.