367 réponses à ce sujet

[midnight tea]

No, that's completely wrong and utterly easy to prove. There are protagonists in video games who are failures. No matter how good the player, no matter how hard the player 'works' at it, they are unsuccessful and that's all there is to it.

 

What you say makes no sense in the context of what people are trying to tell you - and it does nothing to negate what has been said about the shaping of DAI protagonist.

 

In fact, the scenario you provide strictly denies any player agency or input, because no matter what we do, the PC is doomed to fail.

 

Where's the fun in that? It's nothing more than strictly linear, non-interactive storytelling we have in spades in movies or books. 

 

At least in DAI I can play a good hero or a failure, or get surprised with good results or a failure depending on variety of my choices. You also can't say that after Trespasser there are no consequences to being Inquisitor, no matter how pristine, awesome and badass they are - they all get knocked down a peg when it comes to their position on Thedas's power landscape, all of them lose the arm and the Anchor with it AND they are all put before a prospect of being eventually killed by one of their previous companions, together with their friends, loved ones and everything they ever stood for, unless they do something about it.

[BabyPuncher]

You say "no matter what we do" as if it ever matters. As if, because of what you did, this certain video game character is successful. Because of 'you.' Because of how hard 'you' worked, you person sitting behind the screen. And that is just nonsense. You know what you did? You pushed buttons on a plastic controller or keyboard. That's what you did. That's what all of us did.  And that's a reality way too many players seem incredibly upset about having to accept for some reason.

[Iakus]

No, that's completely wrong and utterly easy to prove. There are protagonists in video games who are failures. No matter how good the player, no matter how hard the player 'works' at it, they are unsuccessful and that's all there is to it.

 

Then I should be more specific:  All player characters have the same range of possibilities.  What possibilities are unlocked are dependent on player choice

 

Eh, Hawke always fails no matter what tho.

 

True.  But the details of Hawke's failure can change.  WHich friends stand by Hawke and which abandon him/her.  Does the sibling live or die, 

 

But yes the lack of reactivity to Hawke's choices was a prime complaint about the game.  

[BabyPuncher]

Then I should be more specific:  All player characters have the same range of possibilities.  What possibilities are unlocked are dependent on player choice

 

Do you even understand what they hell you're saying? No, they obviously don't. There are player characters who can end the story in a variety of ways. There are player characters who always end the story dead.This is an indisputable, objective fact.

[BansheeOwnage]

Just for reference - with tiles for Dragon Age Keep released, I think we can put many doubts to rest. I mean, I have no idea how it isn't obvious from the DLC itself, but in the Keep we've just gained a very strong proof that BW is indeed not yet done with Quizzies.

 

(from the Keep)

 

What Was The Final Fate Of The Inquisition?

 

a.) The Inquisitor preserved the Inquisition as a peacekeeping force reporting directly to the Divine Victoria. This leaves future efforts against Solas stronger thanks to Inquisition resources, but runs the risk of Solas's spies infiltrating the organization.

 

b.) the Inquisitor formally disbanded the Inquisition, leaving future efforts against Solas weaker for lack of resources, but more secure due to no chance of Solas's spies infiltrating the organization.

 

And then there's this:

What was the Inquisitor's final goal regarding Solas?

a.) the Inquisitor considers Solas beyond redemption and commits to stopping him at all costs.

 

b.) the Inquisitor believes that Solas is making a tragic mistake and intends to redeem Solas, if possible.

 

If that is not saying us something about the future involvement of Inquisitor, I don't know what else will (well, aside from DLC itself). We're yet to find out in what capacity they'd be involved, but it's rather obvious that their story has not yet ended..

Whoa! This gives me confidence. Looking forward to DA4, because this confirms what we already took from Trespasser, and it all seems pretty compelling (though I have never claimed, and will not claim that the Inquisitor returning is 100% guaranteed).

[robertthebard]

Do you even understand what they hell you're saying? No, they obviously don't. There are player characters who can end the story in a variety of ways. There are player characters who always end the story dead.This is an indisputable, objective fact.

One thing is blatantly clear, you don't understand what's going on in some video games. This isn't WoW, or CoD, there actually is a story, and some parts of that story have branching arcs that you can affect by "mashing buttons". Evidently this goes over your head, quite a bit.

Does the story have a predetermined outcome? Surely. Let's use Origins for this example. No matter what you do, the end goal is to stop the Blight. In the end, you do. However, there are a multitude of ways that this can play out:

US ending, Warden's dead. This is, of course, a way oversimplified version, since there are a lot of variables that can be applied here as well, but you play to your audience.
Alistair takes the killing blow. Again, way oversimplified, since there are a couple of ways this can come about, depending on what buttons you mashed during the game, but hey, playing to the audience.
Loghain takes the killing blow. Yes, still playing to the audience.
Warden takes the DR, and everyone that can be alive at that point is, and yes, still playing to the audience.

There are about 50 variations on a theme that can occur in that, but since it's more complicated than "BOOM, HEADSHOT", I figured I'd leave that out. All of them, however, cannot happen at the same time, and depend on what buttons you decided to mash, and all the consequences vary wildly depending on which you chose, or in one case, had chosen for you.

[Mr.House]

Whoa! This gives me confidence. Looking forward to DA4, because this confirms what we already took from Trespasser, and it all seems pretty compelling (though I have never claimed, and will not claim that the Inquisitor returning is 100% guaranteed).

I do wonder how they'll handle her commander tho. Since only Cullenmancers have him as their commander  after Trespasser.

[DeusGoddess5010]

Just for reference - with tiles for Dragon Age Keep released, I think we can put many doubts to rest. I mean, I have no idea how it isn't obvious from the DLC itself, but in the Keep we've just gained a very strong proof that BW is indeed not yet done with Quizzies.

 

(from the Keep)

 

What Was The Final Fate Of The Inquisition?

 

a.) The Inquisitor preserved the Inquisition as a peacekeeping force reporting directly to the Divine Victoria. This leaves future efforts against Solas stronger thanks to Inquisition resources, but runs the risk of Solas's spies infiltrating the organization.

 

b.) the Inquisitor formally disbanded the Inquisition, leaving future efforts against Solas weaker for lack of resources, but more secure due to no chance of Solas's spies infiltrating the organization.

 

And then there's this:

What was the Inquisitor's final goal regarding Solas?

a.) the Inquisitor considers Solas beyond redemption and commits to stopping him at all costs.

 

b.) the Inquisitor believes that Solas is making a tragic mistake and intends to redeem Solas, if possible.

 

If that is not saying us something about the future involvement of Inquisitor, I don't know what else will (well, aside from DLC itself). We're yet to find out in what capacity they'd be involved, but it's rather obvious that their story has not yet ended..

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

 

Please bioware let me play as the inqusitor again

[Iakus]

Do you even understand what they hell you're saying? No, they obviously don't. There are player characters who can end the story in a variety of ways. There are player characters who always end the story dead.This is an indisputable, objective fact.

I've been civil to you, I'll thank you to return the favor.

 

As to the matter at hand, any player character has access to any ending.  Any Warden can die, if they make the choices that lead to it.  Just as any Warden can live.

 

By extention, any Inquisitor has the potential to save Celene, or get her killed.  Any Inquisitor can side with the mages or the Templars.  Any Inquisitor can save or abandon Hawke.  Or make COle more spirit or more human

 

ALl of this is based on player choice.  None of it would happen without someone playing the game making all this happen.  Not because the Iniquisitor's hand lights up from time to time.

[loyallyroyal]

I do wonder how they'll handle her commander tho. Since only Cullenmancers have him as their commander  after Trespasser.

 

Since he can potentially be dead, and I don't see them using a character for 4 games in a row, I imagine if romanced we will get letters. I'm sure they can come up with some reason he couldn't leave for Tevinter.

 

The only person I can see returning is Dorian, the rest have too many variables.

[BabyPuncher]

This is just trite nonsense. No, nothing in the game happens 'because the player plays it' or 'because the player makes choices' any more than things in books happen because the reader turns pages or things in movies happen because a person puts a DVD in a video player.

[Andrew Lucas]

Dave, chill.

[Iakus]

This is just trite nonsense. No, nothing in the game happens 'because the player plays it' or 'because the player makes choices' any more than things in books happen because the reader turns pages or things in movies happen because a person puts a DVD in a video player.

Well, otherwise the Inquisitor just stands there like an idiot

[midnight tea]

This is just trite nonsense. No, nothing in the game happens 'because the player plays it' or 'because the player makes choices' any more than things in books happen because the player turns pages or things in movies happen because a person puts a DVD in a video player.

 

If you want to read "trite nonsense", look at what you've written. Just because player agency is restricted in some manner, doesn't mean that choice doesn't exist in games. RPGs like DA or Mass Effect fly in the face of what you're claiming like a meteorite into a jet engine.

 

Your claim only makes sense if you think in extremely black-and-white categories - either we get full freedom of what we do, or "none at all" (because a coherent story has to have some consistent narrative with a few flavors to pick from by players).

 

Well, no matter how hard your'e trying to ignore it, those flavors exist. AwesomeQuizzies and FailQuizzies and a spectrum in between exist. Different world-states and outcomes exist. All Inquisitors effectively save the world and do what plot/fate demands of them, but many details about their inter-personal relations and popularity among companions/people depends entirely on player choices.

 

I mean, there's' no point even arguing that.

[BansheeOwnage]

I do wonder how they'll handle her commander tho. Since only Cullenmancers have him as their commander  after Trespasser.

Well, the ending slides have always been "hearsay", in other words: "Just go with this until we decide what to do in the next game, and if it doesn't get changed, it's what happened."

 

A lot of the slides don't really make sense unless taken as non-canon or far into the future. Ghost!Leliana isn't going to leave while Solas is still a threat, it doesn't make sense. Likewise for Cullen, it wouldn't fit his character. So it would be pretty easy for them to either have him come back as Commander, or he could even come back as a companion. That would be awesome. If we do get to play as the Inquisitor in any capacity, I think getting letters from our romances would be pretty odd.

[tcun44]

My Inq is a boss KE who swings a magical sword- never uses the power of the Rift and destroys everyone foolish enough to get in his path. Still- I agree with sentiments of OP- Inquisitior will be relegated to a cameo in DAI 4- as he/she should be. Storytelling will be more fertile with a new character instead of plodding over similar ground.

[Lazengan]

I disagree. The Anchor was just a tool. A very important tool, but still just a tool. It was not the Anchor that saved the Mages or the Templars. It was not the Anchor that stopped the false Calling the Wardens were experiencing. It was not the Anchor that ended the Orlesian Civil War. It was not the Anchor that stopped Hakkon. And it was not the Anchor that stopped the Dragon's Breath. It was the Inquisitor. Thoughout our journey, the Inquisitor became one of the most important and special people in Thedas, having done things nobody has done before and having shaped the entire continent. 

 

ok but

 

the anchor discharges an energy beam that kills everything, and if you want to put it in canonical terms, the Inquisitor wouldn't have been able to kill all those heavyweights  without his signature ability

[Elhanan]

ok but
 
the anchor discharges an energy beam that kills everything, and if you want to put it in canonical terms, the Inquisitor wouldn't have been able to kill all those heavyweights  without his signature ability

Which heavyweights? While I utilized the Mark ability early on, my other abilities were chosen towards the end game.

I agree; a powerful tool, but does not define the Inquisitor. It reminds me of that long rifle in the film Quigley Down Under; useful, but was not the only skilled tool in the hero's inventory.

[BansheeOwnage]

ok but

 

the anchor discharges an energy beam that kills everything, and if you want to put it in canonical terms, the Inquisitor wouldn't have been able to kill all those heavyweights  without his signature ability

Which heavyweights? While I utilized the Mark ability early on, my other abilities were chosen towards the end game.

I agree; a powerful tool, but does not define the Inquisitor. It reminds me of that long rifle in the film Quigley Down Under; useful, but was not the only skilled tool in the hero's inventory.

Yeah, exactly. Except for the parts where using the anchor is mandatory and scripted (when you first get MotR and when you turn Corypheus into a black hole), I didn't use the mark in combat at all. At least, not in any way that would mean I couldn't have beaten the fight with other means.

 

If you mean specifically in Trespasser, you also don't have to use it offensively; you could always discharge it between fights. It didn't make you win, you made you win.

[robertthebard]

Which heavyweights? While I utilized the Mark ability early on, my other abilities were chosen towards the end game.

I agree; a powerful tool, but does not define the Inquisitor. It reminds me of that long rifle in the film Quigley Down Under; useful, but was not the only skilled tool in the hero's inventory.

It absolutely defines the Inquisitor. W/out it, you wouldn't be the Inquisitor, because w/out it, you'd be dead. In fact, if not for the mark, there would be no game to play at all, because Cory succeeds, Game Over, before we ever get to the prologue.

On another note: I just noticed, there's a tile in the Keep that asks if the Warden's alive or dead, I guess that means the Warden is the Protagonist for DA 4?

[Elhanan]

Yeah, exactly. Except for the parts where using the anchor is mandatory and scripted (when you first get MotR and when you turn Corypheus into a black hole), I didn't use the mark in combat at all. At least, not in any way that would mean I couldn't have beaten the fight with other means.
 
If you mean specifically in Trespasser, you also don't have to use it offensively; you could always discharge it between fights. It didn't make you win, you made you win.

For me in Trespasser, it became a hindrance. All those bonus Focus items had to get removed, was stuck with an ability that did the same, and while being able to use certain Focus abilities and detonate was helpful, the usual methods were working quite nice, too.

The Inq is not defined by the Mark; was the will, talent, and ability of the indv to overcome the obstacles presented.

[ArianaGBSA]

For me in Trespasser, it became a hindrance. All those bonus Focus items had to get removed, was stuck with an ability that did the same, and while being able to use certain Focus abilities and detonate was helpful, the usual methods were working quite nice, too.

The Inq is not defined by the Mark; was the will, talent, and ability of the indv to overcome the obstacles presented.

Then the day has cometh that I agreed with Elhanan

[Nefla]

Then the day has cometh that I agreed with Elhanan

Same here, someone call the newspapers!

[Vol_Tang_Clan]

This is just trite nonsense. No, nothing in the game happens 'because the player plays it' or 'because the player makes choices' any more than things in books happen because the reader turns pages or things in movies happen because a person puts a DVD in a video player.

 

Welcome to interactive media, baby. Why don't you go back to punching babies or something, earth-clan?

[Eromenos]

I agree with OP.

 

Inquisitor has f all when it comes to a past and people. I really dislike how DAI kicked off thus; the players get launched into an aesthetically-displeasing "edgy" and "shocking" situation that I could not get emotionally invested in despite my love for DA2 and its events being catalyst for DAI's summit. We spend no time at all in the summit and thus have no way to experience who the Inquisitor was/is, and the campaign doesn't let us define who the Inquisitor becomes either despite its supposed retention of DA2's dialogue system. The lazy over-the-shoulder isometric convos are another black mark against immersion. The Inquisitor's choices are extremely hemmed in especially when it comes to "evil" options. DAI in general doesn't feel like "Dragon Age" and since the Inquisitor is its one constant in a story that's lacking in story the Inquisitor is the most egregious example.

 

Hawke had constant living(and/or recently deceased) connections from times prior to DA2's main story and these characters played large roles throughout the main campaign. The Warden literally had origin vignettes and these things manifested too during that game. Unlike these two the Inquisitor is just a MacGuffin with or without the Anchor, but with the Anchor our protagonist in DAI's absence of personality is even more on the nose.