29 réponses à ce sujet

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

*Alert: Some Spoilers*

 

I enjoyed Dragon Age: Inquisition. I am happy with my purchase.

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition looks great. This is certainly the game that most effectively animates a player-generated character that BioWare has done (although... the John Wayne walking animation for female Quizzies during the cut-scenes is a bit jarring. Maybe get two different mo-cap performers for those scenes next time?)

 

The characters are a likable, well-written bunch. Each one is interesting in its own way. While I'm always compelled to work my way through every character's story and dialogue as a completionist, this is one of those rare games where I really wanted to do so with all of the companions and advisors for their own sake. This was a truly excellent cast.

 

I generally have mixed feelings about bringing characters back when a new setting and story is being told. But, I was satisfied with how the returning characters were handled, with a particular nod to Cullen, who I had previously been indifferent to, but felt was very compelling this time around. I will say that I felt Morrigan's role in "The Game" in Orlais was very out of character, and I wish she had been re-introduced in a way that was more consistent with who we knew her to be in DA:O. But as the game progressed, I felt that the Morrigan we knew came through much better, once we were back in Skyhold (Hawke should not have appeared in the game, because there was no way to handle that character correctly.)

 

The environment looks good, and most of the assets were well used.

 

I can see how gameplay is a mixed bag for many people. It was not a significant concern to me during my first playthrough, but if I decide to go back for a second in the future, I could see myself wishing for a way to cut down on the grinding, and add value to the game's higher-tier items against enemies other than the most difficult dragons.

 

I think the game's biggest issue is pacing, and that's where I'm going to focus my suggestions.

 

1. Pacing in Gameplay

 

I understand the Random Number Generation model for loot, as far as it applies to ME 3 and DA:I multiplayer. I'm not a fan of it (I don't think any players really are) but it is one of those elements of gaming that I accept, because it forms a part of how the profit model for MP works. I would much rather deal with random loot than having paid DLC split the player base.

 

Where I shift from acceptance to criticism is when the model is applied to the single player campaign. Random loot is terrible for game balance.

 

I realize that placing loot in DA:O was likely a painstaking procedure. The areas could be visited in any order, and that made it difficult to place items carefully without breaking balance. This was done by mixing the high level items up so that no one class would find them all in one area. You might get one of the best daggers in one area, but you wouldn't get two. High level swords and armour were spread around, so that it wasn't possible to end up with an over-geared party from simply visiting one section of Fereldan's map.

 

I believe that works much better. I know that as a completionist player, I much prefer knowing that I can, through meticulous searching, ensure that I haven't missed out on any items. That opportunity is lost with RNG.

 

While I'm pretty sure top-end items are mostly fixed to specific locations in DA:I, and higher level items don't usually show up until the player is at least increasing their party's level somewhat, there's no question that with a bit of extra running around I was able to become a vastly over-geared party simply by exploiting certain elements of RNG. While the solution could be argued to be, "then don't exploit RNG," it's not only hard for me to do that when it is an instinctive playstyle for many RPG fans, but it is also counter-intuitive for someone who wants to explore everything. If I thoroughly search all areas, and I am selective when I purchase items, it is through sheer luck that I can either become underpowered or overpowered, in terms of gear. This is less satisfying than a sense of progress, as one has with the DA:O system of having seven tiers for items, and fixed loot locations.

 

2. Pacing in Storytelling

 

I realize that the Journey Myth, or "Hero's Journey," can feel like a limiting model, once someone becomes aware of it as they write a story. Balancing the storytelling process with a sense of freedom for creativity is one of the biggest challenges that writers face. In DA:I, the push to tell the story outside the Journey Myth model worked against the pacing of the story.

 

In Origins, the Hero's Journey is followed pretty closely. For the most part, the protagonists have humble origins, and are forced to rise to their destiny through adversity. They meet their mentor, and are given their path according to the "journey myth" model. Their mentor dies as part of the character's path to growth.

 

From there, they must learn to lead a small band of outliers, meet a series of challenges to become recognized as a hero, and eventually, through hard work, earn the trust and support of allies in their quest to save the world.

 

In DA:I, the character has their destiny thrust upon them in the opening scene. They never meet their mentor, and they have their path laid out for them from the very beginning of the game. No one influential in their life is killed at a dramatic moment (this is handled as part of off-screen story, and the character in question isn't even known to the player until long after their influence has passed.)

 

This creates a strange sense of pacing. There doesn't feel like a "rise to power." In the opening scenes of the game, Cassandra is telling the player that they are in charge, and they make the decisions for what is to become the Inquisition. With no reason to trust the player's leadership, they are given that role in Haven by the advisors, who proceed to turn to the Inquisitor to make all of their military and leadership decisions, quite literally within an hour or two of starting the game for the first time.

 

Within a few hours, the player is leading the most powerful army in the world, but spending the bulk of their time running errands, with only a handful of those sidequests having any direct relationship to growing the Inquisition's power, or acquiring allies. This isn't the pace of a hero's quest.

 

3. Pacing in Storytelling Part 2 - The Villain Coramphous, Corymphous, Cariphimus... (I love Sera...)

 

Never underestimate the importance of a villain to your story.

 

In great Journey Myths, like Dragon Age: Origins, and Star Wars, we meet the villain in the first act.

 

Remember the opening scenes to Star Wars? Before we ever even meet our protagonist, Darth Vader is filling the screen with his menace.

 

In Origins, Loghain is integral the Hero's Journey, and the seeds of both sympathy and antipathy are sown in the player's early encounters with him.

 

In DA:I, we don't meet Corypheus until the second act, and he is introduced at literally the exact same time as his lieutenant (this may not be true with the mage storyline, as I can only speak for the Templar storyline from my single playthrough.)

 

In the Journey Myth, the lieutenant (Darth Vader, technically, is the lieutenant in Star Wars) is always dealt with first, in order to create the necessary pacing for the story to work. Introducing both villains in DA:I simultaneously, and then having the player confront, and defeat, the main villain before ever even dealing with the lieutenant, creates a very broken sense of pacing.

 

By the time the player works to confront Corypheus a second time, the player has experienced no adversity in facing them before. He was defeated at Haven, his plans have been foiled at every turn throughout the story, and he no longer presents any real menace to the player.

 

To say that defeating him in the final mission is a formality is almost an understatement. The player is never given an opportunity to fear Corypheus. Or to be angry with him. To wish for revenge. To feel any real emotions about him, at all.

 

Loghain killed The Hero of Ferelden's mentor... the man who saved them from whatever corner they were backed into by the circumstances of their origin. The man who saw their potential, and set them on their journey, is betrayed, and destroyed by the usurper king.

 

When the player confronts Loghain at The Meet, however they feel about him, they feel something. He is not a peg on a chessboard being removed as a matter of necessity - he is a mythical figure, who, in his own way, shaped the hero as part of their journey.

 

Conclusion

 

I do not mean to diminish this game's accomplishments. I did truly enjoy it, and I feel it is a worthy game for BioWare, with much for its creators to be proud of.

 

But I also feel that there is room, within the business model of creating AAA games, to retain the storytelling style of BioWare's past. I think that creativity doesn't require leaving the storytelling techniques of earlier games behind. Using "the great stories" as a guide doesn't need to be a series of chains holding writers back, it should be seen as a guidebook for fulfilling the audience's emotional connection to the story that has proven effective for thousands of years.

 

These templates are still wide open, to be filled with BioWare's great characters. I would love to see the next Dragon Age return to the use of the Hero's Journey, and fill those roles with BioWare's funny, dramatic, frustrating, and compelling characters, much as it has built its audience by doing in the past.

[ruggly]

B+

[GreyLycanTrope]

There actually might be a point or two where what Cory represents might strike a cord with the player on a personal level. Particularly the questline revolving around the Grey Warders, (for those with strong attachments to the order) and the Mage recruitment story which gives you a very clear indication of what the world faces if the big bad wins. He largely becomes Team Rocket after that though and can't seem to regain credibility or the threat level he once possessed.

 

Calling the end more of a formality does feel appropriate, given that you don't use that Inquisition for much of anything with regards to the villain. The inquisition might as well exist for sake of the main characters prestige alone. I don't really dislike Cory as he is but he certainly could stand some improvement, he exit in particular should have been grander given the stakes and build up.

 

Speaking of good villains though, Jere you need to finish Jade Empire already.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

There actually might be a point or two where what Cory represents might strike a cord with the player on a personal level. Particularly the questline revolving around the Grey Warders, (for those with strong attachments to the order) and the Mage recruitment story 

 

I didn't pick that one, so I won't find out that side of it unless I do a second playthrough.

 

Speaking of good villains though, Jere you need to finish Jade Empire already.

 

I'm... very... slowly... working on it.

[Lady Artifice]

 

By the time the player works to confront Corypheus a second time, the player has experienced no adversity in facing them before. He was defeated at Haven, his plans have been foiled at every turn throughout the story, and he no longer presents any real menace to the player.

 

To say that defeating him in the final mission is a formality is almost an understatement. The player is never given an opportunity to fear Corypheus. Or to be angry with him. To wish for revenge. To feel any real emotions about him, at all.

 

Absolutely, very definitely this. 

[Sifr]

 

To say that defeating him in the final mission is a formality is almost an understatement. The player is never given an opportunity to fear Corypheus. Or to be angry with him. To wish for revenge. To feel any real emotions about him, at all.

 

The further problem is that unless we're meant to assume that he was not at full-power in Legacy, then we already have seen him easily defeated by Hawke in that game, so we have to wonder what kind of challenge he's supposed to present to us? Since he's reliant on the Orb to enact his plans and seems to be siphoning power from it whenever he does anything remotely impressive in terms of power, only to become utterly useless whenever he doesn't use it, it makes him seem all the less threatening?

 

On the other hand, it makes him a perfect applicant for a Marvel movie, since he's a centuries old generic bad guy with barely fleshed out motivations, a somewhat vague plan about ending the world, using an even vaguely defined uber-macguffin of unlimited power and who's nemesis takes the power into themselves to beat him in a less than thrilling finale?

 

Yeah, Corypheus, Malekith and Ronan should probably start a book club or something?

[Rawgrim]

He never felt like a threat. I think his strengths, if I can call it that, is that he ties in very well with the lore.

 

It is starting to feel abit weird, though. Every mystery in the world. Even the religious bits, gets explained and revealed in the same age.

[Ieldra]

@OP:

The monomyth is not the holy grail of storytelling, and to my utter delight, I'm finding that DAI turns some aspects of it upside down, for instance when the phrase "truth lies in the next world" is uttered by a villain, and while we do find knowledge and helpful spirits in the other world as the monomyth would suggest, it is not a place where we would like to linger, and there is never any kind of temptation not to return.

 

There is also no suggestion in the monomyth about pacing at all, other than that certain symbolic events have to happen in a certain order. The hero does not need to hail from any specific background, it is only implied that she crosses the threshold from the normal world into the world of adventure, in DAI represented by the acquisition of the Mark.

 

You might also notice that the middle and third chapter of the sequence is full of reactionary preconceptions I would hate to see implemented without serious reinterpretations. Personally for instance, I find that DAI handles the supernatural with much more cultural awareness than anything suggested by Campbell's original text. 

 

So, while yes, DAI has pacing issues, closer adherence to the structure of the monomyth would not automatically result in an improvement. DAI's pacing issues would be contained in one phase of the monomyth anyway.

 

With that out of the way, I think the problem with Corypheus as an antagonist whose presence you feel could've been resolved by one change: he needed to take something significant from us in the Arbor Wilds mission. it would've been best had we failed there in some way, so that there would've been an immediate need to go after him *right now* to prevent his ultimate success. We might have gotten the Well but not the eluvian, and then he might've gone into the Fade and we would've had to face him there. A battle in the Fade against a would-be god one step away from succeeding, that would've been awesome. I don't think the final mission would've even needed to be different, since its landscape is already Fade-ish.

 

In any other respect, we do feel his presence in the plots at Halamshiral and Adamant even while we don't see him. If that comes across as less than it should, it has to do with the long stretches of non-main-story content between these events.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

The further problem is that unless we're meant to assume that he was not at full-power in Legacy, then we already have seen him easily defeated by Hawke in that game, so we have to wonder what kind of challenge he's supposed to present to us? Since he's reliant on the Orb to enact his plans and seems to be siphoning power from it whenever he does anything remotely impressive in terms of power, only to become utterly useless whenever he doesn't use it, it makes him seem all the less threatening?

 

I debated whether to touch on the DLC issue, but decided to remain focused on the general theme of pacing.

 

Mass Effect 3 and DA:I both rely on the player having purchased DLC to really follow parts of the story. I had not purchased any DLC for ME 2, and had no idea why Shephard was suddenly in lockup at the beginning of the next game.

 

I only played DA 2 once, and returned it shortly thereafter, never playing any of the DLC. I had no idea who Corypheus was when I played this game.

 

I would certainly like it if BioWare did not rely on paid DLC to form part of continuity in sequels.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

@OP:

The monomyth is not the holy grail of storytelling, and to my utter delight, I'm finding that DAI turns some aspects of it upside down, for instance when the phrase "truth lies in the next world" is uttered by a villain, and while we do find knowledge and helpful spirits in the other world as the monomyth would suggest, it is not a place where we would like to linger, and there is never any kind of temptation not to return.

 

I wasn't really recommending a strict adherence to the journey myth, but rather, pointing out why following it with Dragon Age: Origins provided advantages in pacing and emotional connection over the choice to forgo using it in DA:I.

 

If the pacing had been well done, the hero had an arc that challenged them with adversity, and the villain had had more of a presence and a sense of menace, I wouldn't have offered the suggestion as a template to resolve those issues.

 

It wasn't so much about how the Journey Myth is the holy grail of storytelling, more that it was one example of how several of the issues with pacing could have been improved.

 

So, while yes, DAI has pacing issues, closer adherence to the structure of the monomyth would not automatically result in an improvement. DAI's pacing issues would be contained in one phase of the monomyth anyway.

 

The Journey Myth was only an example, and I only applied it to some of my points to illustrate where pacing issues were most significant. I wasn't saying that no one should write stories that don't follow it. Even so, I do believe that it would have served as a better structure than the one they used with DA:I.

 

 

There is also no suggestion in the monomyth about pacing at all, other than that certain symbolic events have to happen in a certain order.

 

The symbolic events occurring in that order help create an arc for a protagonist, pacing their growth. I used the example because in DA:I the protagonist doesn't have an arc, or experience growth. There are no events that impact or shape the protagonist's growth into their role as a hero, other than the events in the opening scene, which is why I criticized the pacing in that way.

 

 

With that out of the way, I think the problem with Corypheus as an antagonist whose presence you feel could've been resolved by one change: he needed to take something significant from us in the Arbor Wilds mission. it would've been best had we failed there in some way, so that there would've been an immediate need to go after him *right now* to prevent his ultimate success. We might have gotten the Well but not the eluvian, and then he might've gone into the Fade and we would've had to face him there. A battle in the Fade against a would-be god one step away from succeeding, that would've been awesome. I don't think the final mission would've even needed to be different, since its landscape is already Fade-ish.

 

In any other respect, we do feel his presence in the plots at Halamshiral and Adamant even while we don't see him. If that comes across as less than it should, it has to do with the long stretches of non-main-story content between these events.

 

I don't believe that would resolve the issue. Addressing Corypheus' lack of presence or menace in the Arbor Wilds is far too late in the story to be dealing with an issue like that. It is the second-to-last mission in the game. If the audience does not feel adversity from the villain by then, it's going to be very difficult to inject it at such a late stage without feeling like a contrived last minute melodrama.

 

I think Corypheus needed to have his presence felt from the beginning of the story. He needed to have a political impact on the land. Most importantly, he needed to have a significant impact on the protagonist's life in some way.

 

I think the game should have started with an origin story, and had the player experience Corypheus' machinations as part of that origin. I believe that would go a long way to addressing the pacing, the hero's lack of growth, and the lack of the villain's impact. Regardless of how one approached the overall story structure, the villain needs to have some kind of ability to create emotion and drama.

[Al Foley]

 

snip

3. Pacing in Storytelling Part 2 - The Villain Coramphous, Corymphous, Cariphimus... (I love Sera...)

 

Never underestimate the importance of a villain to your story.

 

In great Journey Myths, like Dragon Age: Origins, and Star Wars, we meet the villain in the first act.

 

Remember the opening scenes to Star Wars? Before we ever even meet our protagonist, Darth Vader is filling the screen with his menace.

 

In Origins, Loghain is integral the Hero's Journey, and the seeds of both sympathy and antipathy are sown in the player's early encounters with him.

 

In DA:I, we don't meet Corypheus until the second act, and he is introduced at literally the exact same time as his lieutenant (this may not be true with the mage storyline, as I can only speak for the Templar storyline from my single playthrough.)

 

In the Journey Myth, the lieutenant (Darth Vader, technically, is the lieutenant in Star Wars) is always dealt with first, in order to create the necessary pacing for the story to work. Introducing both villains in DA:I simultaneously, and then having the player confront, and defeat, the main villain before ever even dealing with the lieutenant, creates a very broken sense of pacing.

 

By the time the player works to confront Corypheus a second time, the player has experienced no adversity in facing them before. He was defeated at Haven, his plans have been foiled at every turn throughout the story, and he no longer presents any real menace to the player.

 

To say that defeating him in the final mission is a formality is almost an understatement. The player is never given an opportunity to fear Corypheus. Or to be angry with him. To wish for revenge. To feel any real emotions about him, at all.

 

Loghain killed The Hero of Ferelden's mentor... the man who saved them from whatever corner they were backed into by the circumstances of their origin. The man who saw their potential, and set them on their journey, is betrayed, and destroyed by the usurper king.

 

When the player confronts Loghain at The Meet, however they feel about him, they feel something. He is not a peg on a chessboard being removed as a matter of necessity - he is a mythical figure, who, in his own way, shaped the hero as part of their journey.

 

Conclusion

 

I do not mean to diminish this game's accomplishments. I did truly enjoy it, and I feel it is a worthy game for BioWare, with much for its creators to be proud of.

 

But I also feel that there is room, within the business model of creating AAA games, to retain the storytelling style of BioWare's past. I think that creativity doesn't require leaving the storytelling techniques of earlier games behind. Using "the great stories" as a guide doesn't need to be a series of chains holding writers back, it should be seen as a guidebook for fulfilling the audience's emotional connection to the story that has proven effective for thousands of years.

 

These templates are still wide open, to be filled with BioWare's great characters. I would love to see the next Dragon Age return to the use of the Hero's Journey, and fill those roles with BioWare's funny, dramatic, frustrating, and compelling characters, much as it has built its audience by doing in the past.

 

As much as I have mixed feelings about Corypheus's portryal in DA I....I really have to disagree with your anyalisis.  Granted this all comes down to personal preference, but I think that is part of the point for something like this.  

 

1.  I felt next to no symapthy (and almost no emotion) with regards to Loghain.  Really more of my emotion in Origins was invoked by Arl Rendon Howe...and how ineffectual Loghain was as a leader.  IE, kept on getting epically dissed by everyone in sight, outmanuevered at every time...and then turning into a sputtering raging lunatic.  Granted I understand some of his motivations are wrapped up in his backstory and I understand that I might be missing something.  Corypheus on the other hand, both in his DLC in DA 2, and his portrayal in Inquisition...at least at first, made me feel lots of emotion to him and really made me want to go kick him in his dangly bits.  

 

I consider IYHSB Act 1.  End of Act 1...though maybe I am just quibbiling right now.

 

2.  I felt like the Inquisition lost at Haven.  It was pure dumb luck, nay a miracle, that the Inquisitor survived to fight another day.  Corypheus appeared and wiped the floor wth us.  Destroyed our base.  Almost obliterated the Inquisition, and lefft them stranted in the wilderness.  Sure, you can say the Inquisition inflicted heavy losses upon Coryphytit's forces, and you'd be right, but that does not mean they won.  In fact Corypheus was able to continue on his plans virtually unopposed.  While the Inquisition had to rebuild.  And again it was borderline divine providence that they even moved on to find Skyhold in the first place.  

 

Though...from there on out, things did go a little too smoothly for the Inquisition.  

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

As much as I have mixed feelings about Corypheus's portryal in DA I....I really have to disagree with your anyalisis.  Granted this all comes down to personal preference, but I think that is part of the point for something like this.  

 

1.  I felt next to no symapthy (and almost no emotion) with regards to Loghain.  Really more of my emotion in Origins was invoked by Arl Rendon Howe...and how ineffectual Loghain was as a leader.  IE, kept on getting epically dissed by everyone in sight, outmanuevered at every time...and then turning into a sputtering raging lunatic.  Granted I understand some of his motivations are wrapped up in his backstory and I understand that I might be missing something.  Corypheus on the other hand, both in his DLC in DA 2, and his portrayal in Inquisition...at least at first, made me feel lots of emotion to him and really made me want to go kick him in his dangly bits.  

 

I consider IYHSB Act 1.  End of Act 1...though maybe I am just quibbiling right now.

 

2.  I felt like the Inquisition lost at Haven.  It was pure dumb luck, nay a miracle, that the Inquisitor survived to fight another day.  Corypheus appeared and wiped the floor wth us.  Destroyed our base.  Almost obliterated the Inquisition, and lefft them stranted in the wilderness.  Sure, you can say the Inquisition inflicted heavy losses upon Coryphytit's forces, and you'd be right, but that does not mean they won.  In fact Corypheus was able to continue on his plans virtually unopposed.  While the Inquisition had to rebuild.  And again it was borderline divine providence that they even moved on to find Skyhold in the first place.  

 

Though...from there on out, things did go a little too smoothly for the Inquisition.  

 

Not everyone likes Origins as much as I do, fair enough. But in broad terms, it was one of BioWare's best received games, particularly from a storytelling point of view. It was also the best analog for comparison, and a personal favourite of mine (a bias which I'm sure comes across in my post.)

 

I think I interpreted Haven as a victory because of the David/Goliath complex. If Corypheus is an ancient immortal being, and the dragon is a blighted Old God, it seems like Haven should have been something that virtually shattered the Inquisition irreparably. If, from that point on, the advisers and the companions had retreated with Quizzy into hiding, and been forced to fight a guerrilla war to get back on their feet, I could have seen it as a loss. Instead, Corypheus and the Dragon are pretty easily dispatched and outmaneuvered, and after a brief interlude, the Inquisition is throwing its weight around as the most significant power in Thedas again.

 

But, I acknowledge that by seizing Haven, Corypheus could technically be said to have had victory that day.

 

As a not-particularly-important side request, could you go ahead and *snip* the quote of mine in your post? It's not a big deal, but it takes up a lot of space scrolling down the page, because it's kind of a monster wall of text (which is my fault, I realize.)

[Al Foley]

Not everyone likes Origins as much as I do, fair enough. But in broad terms, it was one of BioWare's best received games, particularly from a storytelling point of view. It was also the best analog for comparison, and a personal favourite of mine (a bias which I'm sure comes across in my post.)

 

I think I interpreted Haven as a victory because of the David/Goliath complex. If Corypheus is an ancient immortal being, and the dragon is a blighted Old God, it seems like Haven should have been something that virtually shattered the Inquisition irreparably. If, from that point on, the advisers and the companions had retreated with Quizzy into hiding, and been forced to fight a guerrilla war to get back on their feet, I could have seen it as a loss. Instead, Corypheus and the Dragon are pretty easily dispatched and outmaneuvered, and after a brief interlude, the Inquisition is throwing its weight around as the most significant power in Thedas again.

 

But, I acknowledge that by seizing Haven, Corypheus could technically be said to have had victory that day.

 

As a not-particularly-important side request, could you go ahead and *snip* the quote of mine in your post? It's not a big deal, but it takes up a lot of space scrolling down the page, because it's kind of a monster wall of text (which is my fault, I realize.)

Fair enough.  Might have been interesting but hard to do from a gameplay perspective...but that would have been so cool.  

 

Origins I liked it well enough but it had a few flaws for me, most noticably how it handled its antagonists and then the combat are my two biggest complaints.  

 

besides:  

 

I think this is one of the most epic themes that a villain has gotten in a long time, how can you dislike a villain with that as his theme?

[AxholeRose]

You are definitely not alone if you expected another invasion-type of attack from Cory and his army, only to be disappointed when it didn't happen.  Once you got to Skyhold, you suddenly gain an unspecified amount of respect and prestige that prevents enemies from even thinking of attacking you again.  It felt too safe.  I understand about the magic in the walls but I doubt they could sustain a dragon attack?

 

By the mid to end game I was very surprised at how easily we were able to thwart Cory and his plans.  There were many instances in the game where I thought to myself, "hmm, if Cory came riding in with his dragon he wcould easily annihilate me".  But, he didn't.  He didn't even bother to look for me after Haven. 

[The_Last_Griffon]

I did not expect such a calm, well written, constructive post. Such are my expectations of the internet, but you sir did a great job with this post. I could not agree more about Corypheus and his importance to the story, and the fact that you took the time to write it out in such a civil but constructive way is exactly what I think everyone should do with their feedback. I agree with most of your points here. 

[The_Last_Griffon]

You are definitely not alone if you expected another invasion-type of attack from Cory and his army, only to be disappointed when it didn't happen.  Once you got to Skyhold, you suddenly gain an unspecified amount of respect and prestige that prevents enemies from even thinking of attacking you again.  It felt too safe.  I understand about the magic in the walls but I doubt they could sustain a dragon attack?

 

By the mid to end game I was very surprised at how easily we were able to thwart Cory and his plans.  There were many instances in the game where I thought to myself, "hmm, if Cory came riding in with his dragon he wcould easily annihilate me".  But, he didn't.  He didn't even bother to look for me after Haven. 

 

This is exactly what I was thinking about Skyhold and Corypheus, and how the Inquisitor suddenly gains so much respect and leadership points. It did feel too safe.

[Al Foley]

I have a whole idea of what I would do with the ending of Inquisition if it were given to me...wondering if I should post it... and yes Skyhold does get attacked.  

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I have a whole idea of what I would do with the ending of Inquisition if it were given to me...wondering if I should post it... and yes Skyhold does get attacked.  

 

I would have liked it much better if we were on the defensive, losing a lot of the time, and forced to try and hold off an invasion, just to survive.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I did not expect such a calm, well written, constructive post. Such are my expectations of the internet, but you sir did a great job with this post. I could not agree more about Corypheus and his importance to the story, and the fact that you took the time to write it out in such a civil but constructive way is exactly what I think everyone should do with their feedback. I agree with most of your points here. 

 

 

I have reached the site's "like" quota for the day, though, or you'd have had one.

[Al Foley]

I would have liked it much better if we were on the defensive, losing a lot of the time, and forced to try and hold off an invasion, just to survive.

Well basically my idea centers around what if Corypehus beats you to the Well of Sorrows and is able to enter the Fade with it?  This leaves you, the Inquisitor, in a desperate race against time since Corypheus has almost gotten his hearts desire, but is not close enough, he still has to enter the Black City, so you have to flee to Skyyhold to use Morrigan's Eluvian to enter in after him, and Corypheus knowing this sends an army of demons *via another Breach* to Skyhold.  The Castle is besieged by demons and it has to hold itself together long enough for you to win ala Awakwening.  

The only reasons I do not like my idea too much it feels like its aping Awakening too closely, and it actually requires making a few gameplay tweaks to the game throughout, you would actually have to start doing thigns...via quests and war table missions...that actually has positive gameplay upgrades to Skyhold so it can hold off the demon invasion.  

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Well basically my idea centers around what if Corypehus beats you to the Well of Sorrows and is able to enter the Fade with it?  This leaves you, the Inquisitor, in a desperate race against time since Corypheus has almost gotten his hearts desire, but is not close enough, he still has to enter the Black City, so you have to flee to Skyyhold to use Morrigan's Eluvian to enter in after him, and Corypheus knowing this sends an army of demons *via another Breach* to Skyhold.  The Castle is besieged by demons and it has to hold itself together long enough for you to win ala Awakwening.

 

That would have created more dramatic tension.

 

I realize that I keep referring back to it, but it also reminds me of the neat thing they did with the climax of Dragon Age: Origins, which had you select a party leader from the companions who weren't accompanying you to fight the Arch-Demon. The remaining characters fought a battle against the invading darkspawn. I always appreciated that, because it felt like taking the time to equip and build the entire party was meaningful.

[Karolis]

[...] the audience's emotional connection to the story [...]

 

Uh, not to discount the rest of your post! Which, well written. And the rest of mine is just spitballing, as I think you called it, which I think is possibly the best descriptor of not only my Internet existence, but also my entire life (no, I'm not being snide! Best description ever).

 

 

I think emotional connection is the heart of what I did and didn't like about DAI. A well-crafted story needs its audience to connect to (at least?) 1) the protagonist, 2) the important sidekicks, 3) the villain, and 4) the consequences of failure.

 

DAI did #1 and #2 for me, no question. I looove the characters, like, hearts forever, half-dragon-tooth necklaces for everybody, I love them. 

 

But I thought #4 only kind of worked. I chose In Hushed Whispers, and, yeah, that world was creepy. But the horror didn't hit me until we found the other party members. I mean, you're gonna destroy the world? Well, don't, or I'll smack you. But, you're gonna torture Leliana? I WILL END YOU, DIE NOW, YOU UGLY SICK BASTARD.

 

And as for #3, well. Nope. 

 

Corypheus is an absolutely evil, alien-looking, giant scary dude with a dragon. I (NO REALLY I SWEAR) don't have much in common with him. I still can't figure out his deal any more than 1) he saw the Black City, 2) couldn't find the gods, 3) is pissed off about Tevinter, and 4) thinks he'll go divine to fix it. Which, okay, that has potential. But! I never get to ask Cory much about the Black City, or the gods. I've never seen Tevinter. I only abstractly care about it. I don't even know what Cory means by "god", or what he plans to do when he gets there. So, in the end: evil ugly meany plus dragon.

 

Here, example, consider Cory vs Alexius:

 

Cory's a bad dude. How come he's so bad? Cause, well, he's bad, you know? Also mumble mumble Fade mumble lyrium.

 

Alexius is...doing something bad. How come? Cause he's a scared father frantically trying to save his kid. And yeah, eventually we get to mumble Fade lyrium, but it started with a person being a person and making bad person-decisions.

 

In the end, I thought Alexius was the more successful villain. YMMV, obvs, in which case I'm curious why (not being spiteful, I'm honestly just curious).

 

I don't mean to imply that villains = No Gods Allowed [or demons/dragons/etc]. For instance, I don't have a problem with the sleepy-god-has-a-freakout plotline, not at all. I loved that bit. But in that case we knew him as a person first -- and, really, his big mistake was that he panicked and threw stuff at the wrong monster-thing. Which, a person could totally do that.

 

So, yeah. Good: huge emotional connection to characters. Bad: limited emotional connection to villain, conflict, or consequences.

[Regan_Cousland]

A very interesting and well-written post.

 

I've just come to the unsettling realization that I enjoy reading about Dragon Age: Inquisition more than I enjoy playing it. lol

Well, more than I enjoy wandering around the big, empty maps, anyway. I do like the story segments and the characters.

[Vanth]

I agree with this. In my opinion, DA:I is a mixed bag. The stories and writing of the companions is rather well done, but inexplicably the story of the main quest is weak. Similarly, on a technical level the game is beautifully made, but then we have really awful design decisions like the removal of tactical options, wide open MMO-style filler, etc which really ruin the game. 

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

So, yeah. Good: huge emotional connection to characters. Bad: limited emotional connection to villain, conflict, or consequences.

 

I snipped most of your post for space, but I concur with a lot of it. Like you, I found the characters to be the most rewarding aspect of the game this time around. Populating the protagonist's world with compelling characters is one of BioWare's great strengths, to be sure.