64 réponses à ce sujet

[Lebanese Dude]

I think that fact that he's trying to bribe you with gifts too is proof he's got no arguments left.

 

I particularly like the final "I know you are but what am I" response.

[Kurt M.]

And there are couple, but I don't know.... feel free to ignore this fact.

 

Oh, I may have missed them. Point me to them, please. Apart from the ones that open new areas that are already in the game world anyway.

[Phoe77]

So is it official that this forum is now only about the number and depth of choices in DAI, or are we still pretending like there are other things to talk about?

[ThreeF]

Oh, I may have missed them. Point me to them, please. Apart from the ones that open new areas.

Spoiler

If you make the wrong decision about  water in Western Approach and then go to the Keep you will ran into soldiers there saying how the whole attempt was a mess, that many are wounded and that a particular soldier decided to quit inquisition. This one I'm sure of because it took me by surprise as I thought I did the mission correctly

 

There is also a mission to secure water there where you have to go an actually help  a soldier to fight off some creature, but I'm not clear who gives you that particular mission, I'm under  the impression it's thru the WT.

 

If I remember correctly during Alliances missions you can go and speak  to the groom and  the bride, I never finished that mission but my impression is that you can go and witness the wedding at VR if you pursue that line of quest.

 

The only way to build the watch towers in Hinterlands is  through WT, so it does change the landscape.

 

You have to go to Storm Coast to save the Shouthland's company and your actions determinate how many member that company will have and what they will wear.

[BSpud]

OP, hopefully this info will be handily available when The Keep's Inquisition section is done.

 

Now back to your regularly scheduled, boring thread derailing...

[Kurt M.]

Spoiler

If you make the wrong decision about  water in Western Approach and then go to the Keep you will ran into soldiers there saying how the whole attempt was a mess, that many are wounded and that a particular soldier decided to quit inquisition. This one I'm sure of because it took me by surprise as I thought I did the mission correctly

 

There is also a mission to secure water there where you have to go an actually help  a soldier to fight off some creature, but I'm not clear who gives you that particular mission, I'm under  the impression it's thru the WT.

 

If I remember correctly during Alliances missions you can go and speak  to the groom and  the bride, I never finished that mission but my impression is that you can go and witness the wedding at VR if you pursue that line of quest.

 

The only way to build the watch towers in Hinterlands is  through WT, so it does change the landscape.

 

You have to go to Storm Coast to save the Shouthland's company and your actions determinate how many member that company will have and what they will wear.

 

OK, point taken. There are some results...if you do them the right way of course (I did the Sutherland' one sending him to the kitchen, and puf! It was over).

 

Still feels like a drop in the middle of the ocean, but oh well...

[Nefla]

Good thing the game already has plenty of actual content.
 
These are side-quests for the purpose of roleplaying with appropriate rewards. Dismiss them if you wish, but anyone who advocates for roleplaying uses any tool there is to play their character in a game. 
 
Considering you love DAO, one would think you'd have little issue with inferred consequence given that the majority of the consequences of your decisions aren't actually tangible.
 
Like...helping Bella out or not...they despawn or stay there. You don't figure out what happens til the epilogue. Is that not "reading"?
 
It's a little hypocritical.
 
Like I said, feel free to dismiss what's actually present. Just don't call the game empty.

It's all subjective of course. Some are satisfied with or even love the war table missions and side quests and don't feel the world is lonely or empty. I obviously don't share that opinion and I'm sorry you don't like it but I can call the game whatever I want. I don't expect earth shattering choices that change the face of Thedas, I just want to be able to define my character through flavor choices, to go out and do things, talk to people (more than just "you say your goat is missing?"). I want fleshed out NPCs that I can get attached to and feel like I'm making a difference in their life. Huge open spaces with only notes, wolves, and the occasional "NPC" that if I'm lucky will give me one line of dialogue and tell me to find his lost ring and if I'm unlucky will be just standing there unable to be interacted with...that's very lonely and very empty to me. Reading a note on the ground or reading a paragraph from the war table about something that supposedly happened somewhere but you are not a part of is just pointless to me. It's not fun or exciting or impactful in any way. I don't even get to see the face of someone I saved, there is no interaction and like I said, a book tells a much better story.

[Gothfather]

OK, point taken. There are some results...if you do them the right way of course (I did the Sutherland' one sending him to the kitchen, and puf! It was over).

 

Still feels like a drop in the middle of the ocean, but oh well...

If you do them the right way?

 

You sending Sutherland Sends him to the kitchen and keep him safe. That is a CHOICE that impacts the world. There is no "RIGHT" way to do it. You are trying to diminish the facts because they don't fit your narrative. There are choices in DA:I that impact the world but they are often delayed in impact. You don't see all the choices right away because they are branching and the consequences of some choice are also delayed. In DA:O most choices where immediate as in you got choice a or b and you saw the results or were told the results immediately. In DA:I some choices don't appear until further into the story or further down mission trees.

 

Gamers in the gaming industry has often asked for choices that have consequences that are delayed or not readily apparent for decades but now that they got them many gamers are up in arms because you really have to dig down into the game to make connections for some consequence with some choices. Which is the exact thing people have asked for.  Note the word 'Some' i am not claiming all choices are this way, just to be clear.

 

I am still experiencing content that I hadn't before based on choices. I had no idea you could sit in judgement of a box in the game because of my choices earlier in the game. One because I delayed my judgement seat quest doing side quests and two because it was tied to a choice i had not picked in previous runs.

 

I do not want to suggest that all content has deep branching routes or that all choices matter. I am just saying the difference in Origins to inquisition with regards to player choice is not really there. They are very similar, because of the nature of the open world design there are longer time intervals between said choices and because of the open world you have to deliberately go out of your way to do side quest no just doing them on the way to main quests. But the content of the quest s the mechanics of the quests and the choices within the quest are very much the same. The main difference is that some choices have delayed consequences and not all choices are apparent at the start they only become available as you progress through the chain. i don't think these are bad things at all myself.

[Kurt M.]

If you do them the right way?

 

You sending Sutherland Sends him to the kitchen and keep him safe. That is a CHOICE that impacts the world. There is no "RIGHT" way to do it. You are trying to diminish the facts because they don't fit your narrative.

 

Well, then if somebody has had the bad luck of picking all the "short" choices (like I seemingly did in my 1st playthought), and didn't followed the few drops in the ocean that leads to a longer narrative path because of their roleplaying, don't come crying to someone who complains about their decisions being seemingly pointless, because something may do fail in the system.

 

But of course you won't admit that, because it won't fit your narrative. Oh, the hipocrisy...

 

I agree that it's not like there aren't meaningful choices at all. But the War Table still feels to me like a big game of pretend at large.

[durengo]

Alright no more derailing.

To answer the OP's question, while there isn't what you're asking for, talking to Blackwall about the Inquisition will let you know which adviser have you been using the most. 

thanks for the information....the discussion here goes a little bit off topic .. but it is very interesting.

[Gothfather]

Well, then if somebody has had the bad luck of picking all the "short" choices (like I seemingly did in my 1st playthought), and didn't followed the few drops in the ocean that leads to a longer narrative path because of their roleplaying, don't come crying to someone who complains about their decisions being seemingly pointless, because something may do fail in the system.

 

But of course you won't admit that, because it won't fit your narrative. Oh, the hipocrisy...

 

I agree that it's not like there aren't meaningful choices at all. But the War Table still feels to me like a big game of pretend at large.

If someone has "bad luck" in a game that is by DESIGN meant to be played multiple times to observe all the content then they complain that their choices don't matter it is NOT hypocrisy to point out that one run isn't enough to observe the differences in content. It actually requires that you play the game not only more than once but actually make different choices to observe the contrast in content it is by observing the contrast that you actually have a far easier time noticing not only how your choices change things but that your choice actually do change things.

 

When people make a DEFINITIVE statement about choice that is EASILY pointed out as not factual, it isn't hypocrisy to correct that nor is it hypocrisy to show how biased cause said mistake. When said person simply glosses over said falsehood to maintain their narrative it isn't hypocrisy to point it out. Your errors don't mean you have to start liking the game as like and dislike are not things that appear or disappear simply because your perception of a game is shown to be incorrect. But it is not unreasonable to expect someone no longer hold on to the principle they were shown to be false. you were wrong, now you are trying to mitigate this because you WANT to be right. Because if you were right you could "defend" your hostility towards DA:I. You don't have to defend you subjective dislike for a game, it a subjective opinion. I can not "defend" my dislike for guild wars 2 by my own criteria I should like the game, by the way i talk about various features on their own I should like the game, but I don't. I can't defend that position and I don't have to I simply do not like GW2 at all. But I am perfectly secure in my subjective likes and dislikes.

 

I don't like yogurt, the fact that it uses bacteria in its production wigs me out. yet i 100% fully admit that this is an irrational dislike because i like cheese just fine and it uses bacteria as well, no problem for me here. So why can I admit this? Because my self worth and importance isn't tied to my subjective dislikes and likes. I don't need to be rational about this kind of subjective preference, i don't need other people to agree with me. I don't need to show that a game sucks that i can't stand.

 

I have no problem with people not liking the game. I have a problem with them attaching quality to their subjective opinion when the facts are the game isn't widely viewed as shotty,'a bug ridden mess,' or a rip off. When the industry and the public BOTH widely like the game the mature thing to do is accept that your reasonable subjective dislike has actually nothing to do with the game being crap. it simply means the game wasn't for you. You might have wanted the game to be made for you but that isn't bioware's fault as there is not fault to be had here. Sometimes a game doesn't fit our subjective criteria and we don't like it. No one is to blame, its not a bad product, there is no fault to assign. You simply don't like it. Accept this and move on, again by all means critique the actual features you don't like but do so in a factual way and remember your not liking does equal the feature being bad, plenty of other people may very well like this feature.

 

I hate the ME paragon renegade system, I will fight tooth and nail for MENext to remove it, but no one is wrong for liking the system. It is a quality system for what it does but I SUBJECTIVELY believe that it does more harm to the franchise and choices in the game than it does good.

 

If you assume that the War table does nothing that it is meaningless then you will likely NOT pay attention to the content of the missions so when you encounter a change you might not even be able to recognise it as something that directly resulted in your choices with said feature. I assumed that the War table was largely meaningless one my first playthrough until I realised my actions had a direct result on the SOME content. I was not very far into the game when i realised this so I went back and started again from an earlier save and i decided to PAY attention to the actual content.

 

Some missions have no impact on content others do. I don't find that a flaw, the fact that you can't know which missions are which means that when you discover content that ties back to said feature it feels satisfying that there is much more to the game then it appears at first glance. This WONT make someone like the game who doesn't but it does give those of us who like the DA:I experience things to look forward to with multiple runs.

[o Ventus]

 

At least those things are shown rather than just being a short blurb of text on the screen.

So the fact that they are entirely irrelevant and offer no substance whatsoever is somehow better?

 

If DAI had empty and meaningless choices like those but showed them, it would be cool and nobody would complain?

[Nefla]

So the fact that they are entirely irrelevant and offer no substance whatsoever is somehow better?

 

If DAI had empty and meaningless choices like those but showed them, it would be cool and nobody would complain?

Obviously I would prefer the DA:O (and DA2 and ME1 and ME2 and Jade Empire and KotOR and SWtOR...) style side quests with conversations, cutscenes, multiple ways to resolve and memorable NPCs over some text on a screen telling me "this cool thing totally happened, trust me" or a cardboard cutout NPC (or worse a note) giving me one line about her lost apron or whatever and my only "choice" is to either fetch the item or decline. I never asked for every little thing to have some kind of impact on the world at large, I just want a human element and the ability to shape my characters with almost every quest. The side quests and war table missions are empty, meaningless, and not shown nor do they impact your game in any way aside from occasionally clearing an obstacle so you can unlock yet another dead, empty, lonely, pointless area. Yay.

[daveliam]

There's one infallible way: pen-and-paper

 

I tried this and I completely failed at it.  I actually kept a spreadsheet open on my laptop as I was playing my 'canon' playthrough.  I picked the person who I thought made the best argument for each War Table mission and just kept an ongoing tally for each of them.  By my tally, I should have ended up with a diplomatic Inquisition since I picked Josephine about a dozen times more than either Cullen or Leliana.  But in my epilogue, I got the military force slide.  Not sure what happened.  There has to be another factor besides just the number of times that you pick them on the War Table and the number of Inquisition perks you put in each category. 

[Big I]

thanks for the information....the discussion here goes a little bit off topic .. but it is very interesting.

 

In addition to Blackwall mentioning what type of Inquisition you've got, I've come across a few other mentions.

 

Morrigan, if asked what she thinks of the Inquisition, will reference both what type it is (soldiers, spies etc) and it's level of influence (she's impressed with a high Influence Inquisition). The conversation can only happen once.

 

If you talk to Varric at Skyhold, you can talk to him about the advisors and he'll mention which ones aren't being used much (he'll recommend giving them something to do). This option is only available at certain levels of approval; if you get enough approval to ask him whether he believes you're Andraste's Herald, the ask about advisor option disappears.

 

Many NPCs (Dennit, Morris, Bonny Sims, etc) will mention how high the Influence of the Inquisition is; they're all impressed with high influence (e.g. Morris will say Skyhold is "shining like a beacon", Bonny Sims will call Skyhold a "gilded fortress).

 

The user DanaDuchy has a youtube channel with a lot of DA:I videos, including audio that has been extracted from game files. According to one of those videos (the one exploring all epilogue options) it's possible to get an Inquisition that is balanced between all three advisors. No idea how you'd get that though.