No, DAI is about The Inquisition. The Herald of Andraste is just a title similar to "The Hero of Ferelden" and "The Champion of Kirkwall"
No it really didn't effect the world around you, it effected how you perceived it I agree but not the world itself
There is no Inquisition without you lol.
No it really did please go replay the game and see.
Wynne doesn't betray you unless you are a mage thus the characters react differently to who you are.
I think it comes down to whether you enjoy providing headcanons for your characters or not. DAI was more accessible to people who enjoyed creating headcanons because you could literally choose decide on your character's backstory ('my clan loves me' or 'I was kind of a lone wolf' or 'I was so relieved to be finally free from them') and use that as a basis for your motivations. For people like me who can't be bothered with headcanons, it was less enjoyable.
I personally hope that the next game is more like DAO, in that the character already has a backstory and already feels like a distinct character without me needing to give them life.
^This right here!
It's hard to become immersed in something in which you have to make things up and fill in the blanks.
You can get immersed in books but do you need to "headcannon" a book? No of course not because the information is given to you as it is critical to create the setting and build the world for the reader.
Games too require this info to help create the setting and build the world around you.
Relying on "headcannon" for me is just poor writing as it feels like the writer couldn't be asked to build the foundations for your world and just thinks you playing the game will distract you from what it lacks creatively.
There is no Inquisition without you lol.
No it really did please go replay the game and see.
Wynne doesn't betray you unless you are a mage thus the characters react differently to who you are.
Still doesn't change the fact that the story is about the Inquisition
If your referring to the Urn then that's a lie
^This right here!
It's hard to become immersed in something in which you have to make things up and fill in the blanks.
You can get immersed in books but do you need to "headcannon" a book? No of course not because the information is given to you as it is critical to create the setting and build the world for the reader.
Games too require this info to help create the setting and build the world around you.
Relying on "headcannon" for me is just poor writing as it feels like the writer couldn't be asked to build the foundations for your world and just thinks you playing the game will distract you from what it lacks creatively.
For me, it's hard to become immersed in a character whose character is already pretty much decided for you. Especially when the company sells them as "your character" but then the actual product is filled with assumptions they make for you.
Not a valid comparison. When reading a book, you can get immersed in it but in a way where you are merely an observer. When playing a video game, you are a participant. Those are two different experiences. To stay with the book comparison, since reading books is one of my favorite activities, playing a video game is like reading a choose your own adventure book.
Agreed, completely. It would have given the players more of a connection to the Divine and more of a sense of immediacy. Even TME didn't give her a lot of screentime. They could have made it to where the character goes around, talks to people, has some exposition on current events and listens to people talk about the Divine as a leader and maybe picks up on some of the rumors. S/he hears a scream, opens the door ("What's going on here?") and suddenly cuts to the explosion and the character picking themselves up off of the ground in the Fade. No need to explicitly show the Divine, nor any need to mention the Wardens.
This might have also allowed for a more natural and comfortable lighting in the CC. I know that the devs the current color because our characters start in the Fade, but as I've mentioned, some lore touches aren't worth it.
Still doesn't change the fact that the story is about the Inquisition
If your referring to the Urn then that's a lie
Circle of Magi quest, pretty sure I already said this lol
The story is about YOU sealing the breaches. You build the Inquisition for this purpose lol.
For me, it's hard to become immersed in a character whose character is already pretty much decided for you. Especially when the company sells them as "your character" but then the actual product is filled with assumptions they make for you.
Not a valid comparison. When reading a book, you can get immersed in it but in a way where you are merely an observer. When playing a video game, you are a participant. Those are two different experiences. To stay with the book comparison, since reading books is one of my favorite activities, playing a video game is like reading a choose your own adventure book.
But with the game the foundations are still require to which then after you can pick and choose your adventure.
But DA:I doesn't do that and any foundation you chose doesn't matter as it affects nothing in the world around you so it gives nothing to help be immersed in.
If you want to be immersed ion your own head that's fine but that is not being immersed in a game.
I have to disagree. There are huge narrative problems with DAI. But avoiding the Conclave is not one of them. An introduction, I think, has to be gripping. The Conclave would create so many problems for Bioware that touching it is just not worth it. Aside from having to balance how this would introduce new gamers to the world in a way that isn't just a deluge of exposition dialogue, they'd have to find a coherent way to effectively sneak in Corypheus.
First of all a "new gamer" starting on part 3 is the mistake right there.
Second the narrative was so poor that if you were a new gamer you would have no idea what the hell is going on and probably see the game as crap because you have even less to connect with than gamers who played the previous games lol.
I have to disagree. There are huge narrative problems with DAI. But avoiding the Conclave is not one of them. An introduction, I think, has to be gripping. The Conclave would create so many problems for Bioware that touching it is just not worth it. Aside from having to balance how this would introduce new gamers to the world in a way that isn't just a deluge of exposition dialogue, they'd have to find a coherent way to effectively sneak in Corypheus.
May I ask how it would cause so many problems?
I thought that the Origins and Ostagar was well done, and it was a great way to introduce folks into the world. The devs were the ones that kept saying before release that this game would be good for the newcomer. Also, it's not like the Origins and Ostagar was giant info dump. There was places for combat, and they could have made some room for them in a Conclave prologue.
For instance, an early quest where you have to find a small group of mages and/or templars plotting an assassination on, say, one of Fiona's representatives. Players could have used the scan system to find books in the common areas, and basic controls. By adding a small kill quest, it would have given the players a chance to practice combat as well.
Finally, that's why I did the idea where it cuts out after the scream. We don't have to hear anything like, "Run while you can, warn them!" "Prepare the sacrifice." Just the scream, the PC asking "What's going on here," and then straight to the explosion. They could have very easily kept Cory a secret that way, as well as the Divine.
Personally, it isn't something I found wrong in Inquisition. You've seen my posts were I talked about how they failed in the story personally. However, it would have been nice to see. While I'm not sure if we'll see another Origins again, I can picture us doing some sort of prologue again. I would like to play the events of prologue, the setting story. It felt like waking up in Haven (while still in chains) felt more like Act 1 than a prologue.
That hasn't hindered my enjoyment though. 
Yay, we're talking about stuff!
I dunno, I guess because I was able to connect with the cast of character despite how "empty" the world is
I was able to connect, but less than previous protagonists (for various reasons), and found that disappointing. Everyone's going to have different views here and that's fine. But I'm not trying to be a downer, I try to like my Quizzy as much as I can
Agreed, completely. It would have given the players more of a connection to the Divine and more of a sense of immediacy. Even TME didn't give her a lot of screentime. They could have made it to where the character goes around, talks to people, has some exposition on current events and listens to people talk about the Divine as a leader and maybe picks up on some of the rumors. S/he hears a scream, opens the door ("What's going on here?") and suddenly cuts to the explosion and the character picking themselves up off of the ground in the Fade. No need to explicitly show the Divine, nor any need to mention the Wardens.
This might have also allowed for a more natural and comfortable lighting in the CC. I know that the devs the current color because our characters start in the Fade, but as I've mentioned, some lore touches aren't worth it.
+1 to that idea. About the CC lighting: Yeah, it's terrible. I don't understand why they needed the CC to be in the fade at all. Why not just show the explosion, then create the character, then show them getting up in the fade? Were they afraid we'd forget about the explosion? Ha, I pretty much did anyway, but it's not like it won't remind you in 1 minute's time.
The reason for there not being a Conclave prologue is simple: It goes against the plot point of the Inquisitor not remembering what happened.
It doesn't have to contradict. Just have the Inquisitor forget the parts near the explosion, just like how we see it ingame. It doesn't say the Inquisitor doesn't remember the Conclave itself. It doesn't say how far the memory loss goes at all, but I'd argue it only affected the time around the ritual seeing as how that's the only memory we need to recover in the fade to "complete ourselves".
Circle of Magi quest, pretty sure I already said this lol
The story is about YOU sealing the breaches. You build the Inquisition for this purpose lol.
Ummm Wynne betraying you isn't mage only
By that logic Origins is about the Warden (which it really isn't)
First of all a "new gamer" starting on part 3 is the mistake right there.
Each game is a separate entry so new players can join in at any time
Circle of Magi quest, pretty sure I already said this lol
Are you referring to the cut content in which Wynne reacts to a Blood Mage Warden by informing Gregoire and Irving, thus starting something unless the Warden can talk their way out of it?
For instance, an early quest where you have to find a small group of mages and/or templars plotting an assassination on, say, one of Fiona's representatives. Players could have used the scan system to find books in the common areas, and basic controls. By adding a small kill quest, it would have given the players a chance to practice combat as well.
Personally, it isn't something I found wrong in Inquisition. You've seen my posts were I talked about how they failed in the story personally. However, it would have been nice to see. While I'm not sure if we'll see another Origins again, I can picture us doing some sort of prologue again. I would like to play the events of prologue, the setting story. It felt like waking up in Haven (while still in chains) felt more like Act 1 than a prologue.
That hasn't hindered my enjoyment though.
Haha that reminds me of killing those over-sized rats in the human origin in DA:O as a tutorial. Usually I pick up on games pretty well, but I that time I had no idea what I was doing and it was helpful. My mabari did most of the work 
Anyway, I wanted to second that this isn't an aspect of Inquisition I feel any kind of bitterness about. I think it's interesting to discuss and it may or may not have added to the game. I do think that the intro of DA:I felt like Act 1 though, so that made it feel a little weird. I don't mind games where you don't hit the ground running.
May I ask how it would cause so many problems?
I thought that the Origins and Ostagar was well done, and it was a great way to introduce folks into the world. The devs were the ones that kept saying before release that this game would be good for the newcomer. Also, it's not like the Origins and Ostagar was giant info dump. There was places for combat, and they could have made some room for them in a Conclave prologue.
For instance, an early quest where you have to find a small group of mages and/or templars plotting assassination. Players could have used the scan system to find books in the common areas, and basic controls. By adding a small kill quest, it would have given the players a chance to practice combat as well.
Finally, that's why I did the idea where it cuts out after the scream. We don't have to hear anything like, "Run while you can, warn them!" "Prepare the sacrifice." Just the scream, the PC asking "What's going on here," and then straight to the explosion. They could have very easily kept Cory a secret that way, as well as the Divine.
Personally, it isn't something I found wrong in Inquisition. You've seen my posts were I talked about how they failed in the story personally. However, it would have been nice to see. While I'm not sure if we'll see another Origins again, I can picture us doing some sort of prologue again. I would like to play the events of prologue, the setting story. It felt like waking up in Haven (while still in chains) felt more like Act 1 than a prologue.
That hasn't hindered my enjoyment though.
But with the game the foundations are still require to which then after you can pick and choose your adventure.
But DA:I doesn't do that and any foundation you chose doesn't matter as it affects nothing in the world around you so it gives nothing to help be immersed in.
If you want to be immersed ion your own head that's fine but that is not being immersed in a game.
The foundation is there: You are the sole survivor of a tragedy and have a unique power that can save the world.
Anything like setting up motivations like Origins did results in eliminating certain roleplaying opportunities, causing the player to potentially have a disconnect with the main character thus not be as immersed in the game.
Plus one of the themes of Dragon Age: Inquisition seems to be a person's past doesn't matter, but what they do now does. It was even one of the game's slogans: "Whatever we were before, we are now the Inquisition".
You get random background exposition on a conflict that isn't really central to the plot. You get introduced to characters that will all die. You don't see the Breach. So what does it offer you?
Just wanted to touch on this part specifically. Being introduced to those characters that die (including potential friends and family) would make the attack feel like more of a real thing and less of an explosion. It adds something personal to care about.
Ummm Wynne betraying you isn't mage only
By that logic Origins is about the Warden (which it really isn't)
Each game is a separate entry so new players can join in at any time
Yes it is. You are AGAIN mistaken and thinking about when you fight her and kill her when you first meet. THAT is not what I am talking about.
There is also the trials of andraste when going for the Urn which again changes depending on your chosen character.
And the personal quest of your character to bring closure to your intro
All these things are changed depending on who you are so yes there is focus on who you are.
DAO the goal is stopping the blight. The warden using the treaties and meetings is the tools of which he uses to get the job done just like DAI the goal is "seal the breaches" and building the Inquisition is the tool to getting the job done.
The Inquisition was not required every time I sealed a breach. The focus was on my character as I ain't running around with the entire inquisition. It's me and my selected companions.
But each game relates to the previous. DA2 possibly is the most likely for a new gamer but DAI has too much going on which isn't explained properly for a new gamer to start on.
The foundation is there: You are the sole survivor of a tragedy and have a unique power that can save the world.
Anything like setting up motivations like Origins did results in eliminating certain roleplaying opportunities, causing the player to potentially have a disconnect with the main character thus not be as immersed in the game.
Plus one of the themes of Dragon Age: Inquisition seems to be a person's past doesn't matter, but what they do now does. It was even one of the game's slogans: "Whatever we were before, we are now the Inquisition".
Sorry that just isn't for me as that isn't foundation its "setup" there is a difference.
To then brush it off with "Whatever we were before, we are now the Inquisition" is just weak because like I said the past and experiences shape who we are.
the only thing the MC forgot was the events at the conclave so there was no need to brush off the MC's past as it was not forgotten.
Yes it is. You are AGAIN mistaken and thinking about when you fight her and kill her when you first meet. THAT is not what I am talking about.
No it isn't Wynne only "betrays" you if you decide to kill all mages, the blood mage thing is cut content therefore can not be used as evidence
There is also the trials of andraste when going for the Urn which again changes depending on your chosen character.
And the personal quest of your character to bring closure to your intro
All these things are changed depending on who you are so yes there is focus on who you are.
I acknowledged these and said DAI could've did something like this (Bioware even wanted to), like the Fade sequence with the Nightmare Demon it could've referenced your past to mock you
DAO the goal is stopping the blight. The warden using the treaties and meetings is the tools of which he uses to get the job done just like DAI the goal is "seal the breaches" and building the Inquisition is the tool to getting the job done.
The Inquisition was not required every time I sealed a breach. The focus was on my character as I ain't running around with the entire inquisition. It's me and my selected companions.
Now you're arguing sematics
But each game relates to the previous. DA2 possibly is the most likely for a new gamer but DAI has too much going on which isn't explained properly for a new gamer to start on.
The only thing was the Mage/Templar war which was explained in the game
New players can jump into any game and be fine
If they randomly cut to what he had as the prologue then you have to ask what the point was of the scene. You get random background exposition on a conflict that isn't really central to the plot. You get introduced to characters that will all die. You don't see the Breach. So what does it offer you?
For the part I snipped, fair enough.
If you're asking me personally, then actually talking to some of those doomed NPCs would have given me more of a sense of personal motivation. BioWare can be excellent at making even smaller NPCs have a lot of character, so that would have been the time to break some of them out. It would have also given the player a chance to get to know what's going on in general. If they are going to start the game with the Conclave in any fashion, then I don't see how getting a feel for events is wasted.
This would have been a great time to drop little hints about the past. I mean, a lot happened in between games and it seemed like the devs had expected everyone to have read the EU. That's silly. For instance, I think that Wynne's death should have been mentioned in the game in some fashion. Leliana was a friend and you'd figure she'd brought it up. A Conclave prologue would have helped. I mean, something like this:
1) "Did you hear about the White Spire mages?"
2) "I heard Lord Seeker Lambert was murdered. No one knows who it was."
3) "I heard about a new source of lyrium in Fereldan."
4) "The templars in Kirkwall have gone mad" (This did happen, according to Vicount[ess] Hawke.)
5) "Wynne was yet another causality in this war."
Or how about little things to flesh out the character. Maybe talk to other representatives of Dalish clans for an elven PC, for instance. How about having a dwarven PC talking to one of his/her friends about just surface life in general. That would have been a great time to develop small details like whether or not a dwarf had been born a surfacer or they had come up with the rest of the Carta to the surface after the Warden cleaned house. I wouldn't mind this for all races.
This is just my opinion and I don't think BioWare did a bad job with their prologue. I'm just stating the ideas I wouldn't mind for future games. I know my idea would have added a lot more cost and development time to implement. Something like this for later would be nice though, when they aren't focusing on 5 platforms and customizing an entire engine.
No it isn't Wynne only "betrays" you if you decide to kill all mages, the blood mage thing is cut content therefore can not be used as evidence
I acknowledged these and said DAI could've did something like this (Bioware even wanted to), like the Fade sequence with the Nightmare Demon it could've referenced your past to mock you
Now you're arguing sematics
The only thing was the Mage/Templar war which was explained in the game
New players can jump into any game and be fine
1. You gonna admit there is character focus then in DAO?
2. Am I wrong? is the goal not the task at hand? (blight/breaches). Or maybe you see DAO as building back up the Grey Wardens was the focus as is building the Inquisition? i think it is obvious personally and that the warden's treaties and the inquisition are just tools for the main goal and not the actual focus of the games, inquisition even more so.
At least with DAO you had to acquire all treaties before you could progress to the end.
With Inquisition you can complete the game without fully building any Inquisition, that is how much it isn't focused on lol.
the only thing the MC forgot was the events at the conclave so there was no need to brush off the MC's past as it was not forgotten.
There was need. Bioware left the background, or at least the character's perception of that background, up to the player meaning more roleplaying opportunities. You can't do that with strongly established backstories like the origins in DAO.
We'll have to just agree to disagree. I prefer how DAI did it, though would appreciate even more freedom(like how we're stuck as being a Pro-Dalish Dalish or a hypocritical Dalish 
), while you prefer to have the character's entire backstory and drive filled in already.
There was need. Bioware left the background, or at least the character's perception of that background, up to the player meaning more roleplaying opportunities. You can't do that with strongly established backstories like the origins in DAO.
We'll have to just agree to disagree. I prefer how DAI did it, though would appreciate even more freedom(like how we're stuck as being a Pro-Dalish Dalish or a hypocritical Dalish
Just foundations needed.
Personality I build myself in relation to the foundations 
Just foundations needed.
Personality I build myself in relation to the foundations
The foundations of the backstories are there. What you want from how you're describing it is the foundations filled in.
I didn't say personality. I said drive.
The foundations of the backstories are there. What you want from how you're describing it is the foundations filled in.
I didn't say personality. I said drive.
No you changed it to drive lol.
No you changed it to drive
No, I didn't.
Retour en haut