1659 réponses à ce sujet

[Cute Nug]

They will kill the Quizzy at the peace talks with a bomb made from our old anchor arm which is why Solas petrified it at the end of Trespasser. Hire the first one you find in merc armor that didn't die in the blast to lead everyone and boom you have your new protagonist for DA4.

[BansheeOwnage]

Also your average casual fan won't care either way. Neither will new players.

Which is why they should focus more on what fans want instead of a potential audience of newcomers - they don't care. And I don't mean catering to the fans' every whim, I mean things like hand-holding, dumbing-down, and adding a new protagonist just for the sake of new players. That's not a good idea, and new players have never been stopped from playing/watching/reading something just because a previous installment had the same protagonist. If anything, they'll be interested and buy the previous installments.

[Dai Grepher]

And while I agree that bringing more people together to convince Solas to change his plan is probably what will happen, it still remains Quizzy's job to bring all those people together. Whether someone else kills or redeems him, eventually Quizzes will take credit, simply by the virtue of being ones who instilled either doubt and hope in Solas, and back in the time when we were allowed to know and relate to him in a way no other person will likely be able to (seeing how Inquisitor's story and their role in universe in many respects resembles that of Solas as well).

Therefore I don't see how it's possible to write a story of redeeming/ending Solas without them, simply from a way the story is shaped now.

 

Also - neither Warden nor Hawke got an epilogue or keep choices that suggest that this time the protagonist sill has a pretty active role in future story. Heck, Warden can die (and mostly did) at the very end of DAO, which in itself cements their fate as heroes who do not return (and the devs keep repeating that he won't be back, which is something they're yet to do with Quizzy).

 

In fact, whether they can die, or leave to parts unknown is actually a pretty good indicator of a hero returning later - we know that Warden won't now, and Hawke can die in DAI, which indicates that the won't be back at any larger role in future installments.

Quizzy on the other hand? They don't die. They don't travel to parts unknown. Each Inquisitor, no matter how good or bad at their job, or being friends with others all and up in pretty much the same spot - alive, with no hand, but remaining resources and important people, secretly conspiring what to do to stop Solas and planning to visit Tevinter in one way or another.

 

That in itself speaks volumes of their possible future involvement.

 

 

I agree that the Inquisitor will be one who works behind the scenes to bring the right people together. The Inquisitor may even play the role of Duncan in DA4, where the Inquisitor's choice follows the player's origin pick, and had it not been for the Inquisitor the origin character would have died.

 

It's a given that the Inquisitor is involved. But I think by the same token the Hero and Champion are involved as well. The Inquisitor is looking for people Solas doesn't know. The Hero and Champion are two great picks, as both are unknown to Solas, and both have a high level of skill and resources necessary to foil Solas' plans. Now, Solas is aware of the Champion, and may have even worked with the Champion in those two main quests, but that doesn't mean Solas knows the Champion's full abilities or connections beyond Varric.

The epilogue for Origins says that the Hero will be heard from again, or that the Hero's tale is far from over, or something like that. And Trespasser's epilogue states that the Champion is helping Varric. So, Inquisitor -> Varric -> Champion. Also, the Inquisitor has an estate in Kirkwall thanks to Varric. Also, Inquisitor -> Leliana/Morrigan/Orzammar/Dalish/Wardens -> Hero. Yeah, the connection with the Hero is a little tougher to nail down, but it's possible in every case.

 

If their possible deaths disqualify them, then so would the Inquisitor's choices. Such as being enemies with Dorian, or the Divine, or the rulers of Orlais and Ferelden. There were a lot of bridges that could be burned in Inquisition, and if they were then the Inquisitor will have very few allies, if any. Thus such Inquisitors will be powerless to oppose Solas.

[Super Drone]

Which is why they should focus more on what fans want instead of a potential audience of newcomers - they don't care. And I don't mean catering to the fans' every whim, I mean things like hand-holding, dumbing-down, and adding a new protagonist just for the sake of new players. That's not a good idea, and new players have never been stopped from playing/watching/reading something just because a previous installment had the same protagonist. If anything, they'll be interested and buy the previous installments.

The fans are not in agreement on what they want. I don't want the Inquisitor back.

[leaguer of one]

Which is why they should focus more on what fans want instead of a potential audience of newcomers - they don't care. And I don't mean catering to the fans' every whim, I mean things like hand-holding, dumbing-down, and adding a new protagonist just for the sake of new players. That's not a good idea, and new players have never been stopped from playing/watching/reading something just because a previous installment had the same protagonist. If anything, they'll be interested and buy the previous installments.

That's not how media works. they have to cater to current fan and gain future fans.That's how they get more money. Any product that services only as a niche only servives by ether upping the cost or uping the amount of content. And they always lose fans over time.

[Nefla]

Which is why they should focus more on what fans want instead of a potential audience of newcomers - they don't care. And I don't mean catering to the fans' every whim, I mean things like hand-holding, dumbing-down, and adding a new protagonist just for the sake of new players. That's not a good idea, and new players have never been stopped from playing/watching/reading something just because a previous installment had the same protagonist. If anything, they'll be interested and buy the previous installments.

The fans seem to be split down the middle on DA:I though. What you and I see as dumbing down and doing something just for the sake of doing it, other fans like the changes and don't want the inquisitor back.

[leaguer of one]

The fans seem to be split down the middle on DA:I though. What you and I see as dumbing down and doing something just for the sake of doing it, other fans like the changes and don't want the inquisitor back.

I would not say anything in dai was dumbing down. More like they were too late in upping the challenge.

[Eelectrica]

Next game if our inquisitor shows up, which I'm pretty sure he/she will in some form of advisory role or something, I'd like to at least control the dialogue so as not to have a repeat of the farcical Hawke blood mage rant.

 

The Geralt/Ciri mechanic worked well in Witcher 3, something similar could work for the next DA game as well I would think. Also best of both worlds I suppose. I prefer the new hero approach that DA series has used so far though.

[leaguer of one]

 

 

The Geralt/Ciri mechanic worked well in Witcher 3, something similar could work for the next DA game as well I would think.

No.

[midnight tea]

The epilogue for Origins says that the Hero will be heard from again, or that the Hero's tale is far from over, or something like that. And Trespasser's epilogue states that the Champion is helping Varric. So, Inquisitor -> Varric -> Champion. Also, the Inquisitor has an estate in Kirkwall thanks to Varric. Also, Inquisitor -> Leliana/Morrigan/Orzammar/Dalish/Wardens -> Hero. Yeah, the connection with the Hero is a little tougher to nail down, but it's possible in every case.

 

If their possible deaths disqualify them, then so would the Inquisitor's choices. Such as being enemies with Dorian, or the Divine, or the rulers of Orlais and Ferelden. There were a lot of bridges that could be burned in Inquisition, and if they were then the Inquisitor will have very few allies, if any. Thus such Inquisitors will be powerless to oppose Solas.

 

Technically they're heard about... when they live. Hard to be heard about when they're buried together with Archdemon or lost in the Fade though, nor we have slides suggesting that they live. My point therefore stands.

 

Also - you can't really compare something as permanent as death, to making enemies with possibly vital NPCs, especially in the wake of yet another huge crisis on the horizon. Neither of our companions were friends with one another when they allied against Corypheus, so I don't see how they can't ally against the Dread Wolf.

 

And we already see that no matter what Leliana or Cassandra think of Inquisitor, they end up working with them in secrecy to try and unravel Solas's plans. And Dorian returns South and - like Vivienne - can still be taken as a companion through eluvians, to help Inquisitors no matter how much they dislike them.

 

In short, Trespasser already addresses your point.

[Abyss108]

Getting a new protagonist for the next game is spending 150 hours building up a story between two characters and then dropping it before the finale to focus on starting another new story.

 

It's the mage/templar war all over again, and it shouldn't be encouraged. 

 

End the story you started, THEN move on to a new story/character.

 

And you don't end a story with the final battle going to someone you didn't introduce until the last chapter, and you don't end it with the final battle going to someone who died two games ago, who has no relation to the plot. That's just wanting to see your special favourite character again.

[Eivuwan]

Getting a new protagonist for the next game is spending 150 hours building up a story between two characters and then dropping it before the finale to focus on starting another new story.

 

It's the mage/templar war all over again, and it shouldn't be encouraged. 

 

End the story you started, THEN move on to a new story/character.

 

And you don't end a story with the final battle going to someone you didn't introduce until the last chapter, and you don't end it with the final battle going to someone who died two games ago, who has no relation to the plot. That's just wanting to see your special favourite character again.

 

Exactly, I don't understand why people don't get this.

[vertigomez]

I think I just don't like the idea of the Inquisitor being shoehorned into being Solas's archnemesis even if they plainly DGAF. It's entirely possible to have a few token conversations him, gain a little approval and lose a little approval, and end up on entirely neutral ground. Making it into an ~it's personal~ face off means next to nothing if you left him in the rotunda the entire game. In my most recent playthrough, Solas is like... a bologna sandwich. He's just there.

Also, I'm spoiled by years of CRPGs where I get a shiny new protagonist each game. If I want to be the Inquisitor again, I'll play Inquisition.

[Dieb]

For that matter, what exactly was the Inquisitor's story?

 

If it ended with Trespasser, how would you recount it in a few words?

 

I think I just don't like the idea of the Inquisitor being shoehorned into being Solas's archnemesis even if they plainly DGAF. It's entirely possible to have a few token conversations him, gain a little approval and lose a little approval, and end up on entirely neutral ground. Making it into an ~it's personal~ face off means next to nothing if you left him in the rotunda the entire game. In my most recent playthrough, Solas is like... a bologna sandwich. He's just there.

Also, I'm spoiled by years of CRPGs where I get a shiny new protagonist each game. If I want to be the Inquisitor again, I'll play Inquisition.

 

However, that interpretation is not accepted by the game anymore. One way or the other, the Inquisitor does take it very personal - that's just how it is. Shepard is an Alliance soldier, and doesn't like Reapers much.

 

Furthermore, the story "ends" firmly marked with the words "Let's go and get the guy! Yay, activism and plotting; fresh & anew!" (slightly edited for dramatic effect)

 

We all know they will decide based upon fan reaction and not any presumed pre-planned plotline they had written out ahead of time. That doesn't mean I have to like it, as much as you couldn't care less about Solas on a personal level (which I don't either, btw)

[CardButton]

I think I just don't like the idea of the Inquisitor being shoehorned into being Solas's archnemesis even if they plainly DGAF. It's entirely possible to have a few token conversations him, gain a little approval and lose a little approval, and end up on entirely neutral ground. Making it into an ~it's personal~ face off means next to nothing if you left him in the rotunda the entire game. In my most recent playthrough, Solas is like... a bologna sandwich. He's just there.

Also, I'm spoiled by years of CRPGs where I get a shiny new protagonist each game. If I want to be the Inquisitor again, I'll play Inquisition.

Thats... odd.  

 

I could understand if you had an Inquisitor that was pretty neutral in how they interacted with Solas (which would probably end up with him a negative relationship on his end considering how the Approval mechanic works), but it sounds like your reasoning for not wanting a personal rivalry/friendship with Solas is that you chose to simply not interact with him at all and just left him wandering around his room the entire game.  I mean even if your Inquisitor just ignored his presence, at bear minimum Solas is still responsible for the Breach (which you had to close), leading you to Skyhold (which allowed the Inquisition to survive), taking your arm (if you have a negative affection with him the dude pretty much just yanks that sucker off) and openly admitting he plans on destroying current Thedas to bring back his own.

 

There isn't a really a way for your Inquisitor not to have some sort of negative/positive relationship with Solas, unless your Inquisitor is the most mellow, un-opinionated hero in all of fiction.  I am curious though, what was your character's reasons (not yours as a player) for straight up ignoring a companion who has been a part of the Inquisition since the beginning?

[DanAxe]

Ok ok, lets all calm down. I'll let you on a little secret:

 

All 6 games of DA will have a protagonist of its own. No way around that. The cool thing is, on DA6, your protagonist will be a forgotten evanuris who has not been mentioned in the previous games because "insert reasons", and your job will be to gather all the 5 previous protagonists, Mythal and Fen'harel, help them get their crap sorted, snatching the dead ones from the fade, and band them together as your companions to fight the ultimate evil that comes from across the sea. You will also go into the black city to make a super-mega weapon from the blight itself called The Titan Smasher. Its gonna be epic.

 

True story, a friend of a friend of the brother of another friend that lives in 2021 just told me this, and apparently the whole map of Thedas is open world and every sidequest leads to significant choices and consequences.

[vertigomez]

For the record, I feel like I should clarify that I like Solas. And it's not that my Inquisitor never spoke to him. She was a fairly open-minded mage who enjoyed hearing his thoughts on... spirit-y things. But there was reason enough to be not-entirely-comfortable around him, given his comments on the balcony to a qunari Inquisitor and his attitude towards Sera (who gives as good as she gets, but Inq was romancing her so...bias). It was a mix of just enough positive and negative so that that relationship didn't really go anywhere (not to mention big decisions like allying with the mages and not ousting the Grey Wardens).

So... I dunno. It's a personal perception and only really valid for that particular playthrough. Obviously my Lavellan who romanced him would feel differently! I guess I get that the narrative is pushing either COME BACK TO THE LIGHT AND BE REDEEMED, FRIEND or OH GOD I'M SO MAD I HATE YOU TIME TO DIE, but I'm just not feeling it. *shrug*

[Blooddrunk1004]

I think I just don't like the idea of the Inquisitor being shoehorned into being Solas's archnemesis even if they plainly DGAF. It's entirely possible to have a few token conversations him, gain a little approval and lose a little approval, and end up on entirely neutral ground. Making it into an ~it's personal~ face off means next to nothing if you left him in the rotunda the entire game. In my most recent playthrough, Solas is like... a bologna sandwich. He's just there.

Also, I'm spoiled by years of CRPGs where I get a shiny new protagonist each game. If I want to be the Inquisitor again, I'll play Inquisition.

It doesn't matter how much you used Solas, whether you romanced him, punched him or never talked to him. He was with Inquisition from beggining till the end, he is the one who led you to Skyhold, responsible for Corypheus and he is also the one who tells you that he will bring apocalypse onto Thedas. The whole point of Trespasser was that it established that Solas made this personal between him and Inquisitor.

 

That reason alone is justified why people want Inquisitor back because there is connection between protagonist and antagonist. It's something that Bioware hasn't done since Jade Empire in my opinion. I couldn't imagine anyone else but Spirit Monk stopping Master Li after he betrays you and that's exactly how i felt when Solas revealed his true purpose.

 

Inquisitor wouldn't feel shoehorned if Solas will be main antagonist in next Dragon Age, you know who would feel shoehorned?.... new protagonist.

[Abyss108]

Who feels "meh" towards a man who blows up a building they are in, manipulates them for a year, and then disintegrates one of their limbs, and then runs off to murder them and everyone they have ever known?

 

I can understand characters not really caring about him during the main game, but after trespasser?   And if they were, wouldn't they also not care about stopping Cory?

[Former_Fiend]

Who feels "meh" towards a man who blows up a building they are in, manipulates them for a year, and then disintegrates one of their limbs, and then runs off to murder them and everyone they have ever known?

 

I can understand characters not really caring about him during the main game, but after trespasser?   And if they were, wouldn't they also not care about stopping Cory?

 

Corypheus blew up the building. Solas gave him the bomb, but Corypheus set it off.

 

And again, this is a guy that you can have had a grand total of two mandatory conversations with. If that's what passes for 150 hours of building up a personal feud these days, then maybe the haters have some points about the whole, Bioware's slipping thing. If you were dedicated to a relationship with Solas, this is good build up. If not, this is the equivalent to finding out that the butler did it.

 

Now, I'm not saying that the Inquisitor should throw their hand up and declare "Not my problem!"; Solas is a threat to the world and needs to be stopped. But there's a difference between recognizing someone is a threat that needs to be stopped and having a personal feeling of betrayal, and feeling a personal responsibility to stop them.

Modifié par Former_Fiend, 09 octobre 2015 - 06:27 .

[AllThatJazz]

Who feels "meh" towards a man who blows up a building they are in, manipulates them for a year, and then disintegrates one of their limbs, and then runs off to murder them and everyone they have ever known?

 

I can understand characters not really caring about him during the main game, but after trespasser?   And if they were, wouldn't they also not care about stopping Cory?

I remember people making a similar complaint about Jon Irenicus (one of the finest CRPG villains ever) during BG2. 'I didn't even like Imoen, she was annoying! Why should I care if the guy kidnapped her? Ugh, It's laaaaame that he takes my soul cos it forces me to chase after a character I really couldn't give a toss about'. In fact, players have made similar remarks about every Bioware game. 'Master Li, meh. Rendon Howe, meh. My Warden couldn't stand his parents! Revan, meh (seriously, I remember posts claiming that one of the greatest twists in video game history was 'not that special' and 'why should I care anyway'?)

 

I kinda get the reasoning, I guess, feeling manipulated or forced into giving a damn can strike a wrong chord with some players - but every game forces us to care about the thing driving the main plot (or tries to), or there is either no main plot, or a very poor one. A game has to make some assumptions as its starting point or there is no game, at least a story-driven one. What about those DAO players who didn't GAF about Duncan, couldn't care less that he was killed and weren't that bothered about the stupid Blight anyway? Tough.  What about those Shepards who really just wanted to muck around the galaxy and not get involved with Saren or the Reapers? Nope (though, there was ME2 I suppose ;p). A Geralt who just cannot be arsed to look for Ciri ('she's not even my real daughter!')? I don't think so.

 

 

I thought DAI really suffered for having Corypheus, because he didn't seem terribly well developed and gave the Inquisitor no real reason to feel very threatened. At the time I played it, I believed that he would have come across much better had Hawke been the Inquisitor (as was originally planned). It's only really since Trespasser, that I can see how clever the parallels between him and Solas are, and that he was a bit of a 'red herring' villain, which is just fantastic storytelling.

 

What I don't want to see, like you, is the Solas/Inquisitor stuff wasted purely because 'we have a tradition here folks!' The risk is that a tremendous narrative opportunity to build a truly memorable protag/antag dynamic, is thrown under the bus because 'this is how we do things around here, and that's not gonna change'. What a crying shame that would be, I think.

[Former_Fiend]

Frankly I just think the execution was poor if the entire plan was to get us involved with the idea of Solas as our arch rival. They could have made him more involved, had more conversations with him be automatic instead of player prompted.

 

And/or, they could have given us the option to take the whole thing less personally at the end. Instead of just "I'm going to kill Solas!", "I'll have to stop you.", they could have put it more like "You need to be stopped."

 

And a large part of it is just personal preference. I find the whole "I'm the only one allowed to defeat you" nonsense to be a terrible cliche, and I don't want to be forced to play it straight. 

[Abyss108]

Corypheus blew up the building. Solas gave him the bomb, but Corypheus set it off.

 

And again, this is a guy that you can have had a grand total of two mandatory conversations with. If that's what passes for 150 hours of building up a personal feud these days, then maybe the haters have some points about the whole, Bioware's slipping thing. If you were dedicated to a relationship with Solas, this is good build up. If not, this is the equivalent to finding out that the butler did it.

 

Now, I'm not saying that the Inquisitor should throw their hand up and declare "Not my problem!"; Solas is a threat to the world and needs to be stopped. But there's a difference between recognizing someone is a threat that needs to be stopped and having a personal feeling of betrayal, and feeling a personal responsibility to stop them.

 

You can maybe justify the Conclave as not being his fault, but even so he still manipulates you for a year and lies to you when it suits him. Most people get upset about that.

 

You have as much personal responsibility to stop him as you do to stop Cory - it's hard for me to imagine a character who stopped Cory being "meh" enough to decide someone else should stop Solas. 

 

I remember people making a similar complaint about Jon Irenicus (one of the finest CRPG villains ever) during BG2. 'I didn't even like Imoen, she was annoying! Why should I care if the guy kidnapped her? Ugh, It's laaaaame that he takes my soul cos it forces me to chase after a character I really couldn't give a toss about'. In fact, players have made similar remarks about every Bioware game. 'Master Li, meh. Rendon Howe, meh. My Warden couldn't stand his parents! Revan, meh (seriously, I remember posts claiming that one of the greatest twists in video game history was 'not that special' and 'why should I care anyway'?)

 

I kinda get the reasoning, I guess, feeling manipulated or forced into giving a damn can strike a wrong chord with some players - but every game forces us to care about the thing driving the main plot (or tries to), or there is either no main plot, or a very poor one. A game has to make some assumptions as its starting point or there is no game, at least a story-driven one. What about those DAO players who didn't GAF about Duncan, couldn't care less that he was killed and weren't that bothered about the stupid Blight anyway? Tough.  What about those Shepards who really just wanted to muck around the galaxy and not get involved with Saren or the Reapers? Nope (though, there was ME2 I suppose ;p). A Geralt who just cannot be arsed to look for Ciri ('she's not even my real daughter!')? I don't think so.

 

 

I thought DAI really suffered for having Corypheus, because he didn't seem terribly well developed and gave the Inquisitor no real reason to feel very threatened. At the time I played it, I believed that he would have come across much better had Hawke been the Inquisitor (as was originally planned). It's only really since Trespasser, that I can see how clever the parallels between him and Solas are, and that he was a bit of a 'red herring' villain, which is just fantastic storytelling.

 

What I don't want to see, like you, is the Solas/Inquisitor stuff wasted purely because 'we have a tradition here folks!' The risk is that a tremendous narrative opportunity to build a truly memorable protag/antag dynamic, is thrown under the bus because 'this is how we do things around here, and that's not gonna change'. What a crying shame that would be, I think.

 

I never understood the people who complained about Irenicus either. The game didn't force you to care about Imoen - he kidnapped and tortured you, and was going to track you down and do the same again.

[AllThatJazz]

Frankly I just think the execution was poor if the entire plan was to get us involved with the idea of Solas as our arch rival. They could have made him more involved, had more conversations with him be automatic instead of player prompted.

 

And/or, they could have given us the option to take the whole thing less personally at the end. Instead of just "I'm going to kill Solas!", "I'll have to stop you.", they could have put it more like "You need to be stopped."

 

And a large part of it is just personal preference. I find the whole "I'm the only one allowed to defeat you" nonsense to be a terrible cliche, and I don't want to be forced to play it straight. 

Then you'd just have had players complain that Solas was 'forced on them' during DAI even more than he's being 'forced' on players as an arch rival now. The devs are between a rock and a hard place here.

 

And as for the 'only one allowed to defeat you' - well, that's something shared by many, many a game/film/novel. It's the nature of being a special snowflake. Only the Warden can gather the treaties and confront the Archdemon; only Shepard draws the attention of the Reapers; only Harry has been marked by Voldemort. Hell, only Hawke blood can release Corypheus.

 

As an aside, that's part of why I find the idea of a disabled protag so compelling. We're used to 'special' status being conferred in a way that makes us 'better' , stronger, more powerful than everyone else. I'd be really interested in special snowflake status that disempowers us, disables us, rather than enables us.

[Former_Fiend]

You can maybe justify the Conclave as not being his fault, but even so he still manipulates you for a year and lies to you when it suits him. Most people get upset about that.

 

You have as much personal responsibility to stop him as you do to stop Cory - it's hard for me to imagine a character who stopped Cory being "meh" enough to decide someone else should stop Solas. 

 

 

I never understood the people who complained about Irenicus either. The game didn't force you to care about Imoen - he kidnapped and tortured you, and was going to track you down and do the same again.

 

Again, though. Him lying to you for a year is only a thing if you actually develop any sort of a relationship with him. If not, you have two conversations where he technically tells you the truth, and one where he's sad a ball broke, and then he leaves. 

 

And again, I'm not saying an Inquisitor should declare Solas to be someone else's problem. I'm saying that it's reasonable for an inquisitor to not be pissed or upset if someone else does deal with Solas.

 

I'm not saying "Hey, you. Go deal with the crazy bald elf." should be the story. But "Oh, you got him before I could? Thanks, saved me the trouble." should be an option.