367 réponses à ce sujet

[Lyrandori]

Perhaps I will get a lot of hate for this but the Inquisitor really is just a normal guy at the end of the day. Whatever your origin, (right now playing male tal vashoth mage), you were a normal person just trying to get by. The mark changed that. It was what made you necessary for the plotline and was what (ironically) kept you alive because they likely would have executed you otherwise. Whatever Cassandra might claim, the reason you became Inquisitor is because of the mark. Ignoring time spent with companions and as leader, post amputation, you are essentially just a political figurehead. The inquisitor even says, his adventuring days are over. The fact is, without the anchor, you are just another dude/dudette. This is why I personally do not want to play the Inquisitor again next game. Your trump card has been used up and is gone. As an NPC I think it would be cool but for me with the amputation the story is over. The anchor was what made you special.

 

I completely agree.

 

But... I think that BioWare essentially cutting the Inquisitor's half forearm to remove the Anchor was more than a mere "subtle" message on their part. Taking the Anchor away was - to me, at least - a very clear BioWare-written (quite literally) message about how the next DA game WILL have a new protagonist. Removing the Anchor from the Inquisitor was as significant of a change as it would have been removing "The Force" from Luke Skywalker, or having Duncan NOT "recruiting" (vibe of a "chosen one" type story) the Warden in Origins (and therefor not becoming one to start with). Find the analogy that fits best, but the ultimate message there was that BioWare not only offered closure to the events of Inquisiton but giving themselves ample room for the creation of a completely new "special" protagonist.

[ESTAQ99]

DA4 is still eons away, so they might change their minds if people are loud enough about wanting the inquisitor to return.

 

 

I don't think Bioware is so dumb that it won't realize that most of this clamoring about getting the inquisitor as the protagonist for the next DA instalment comes from girls who played as an elf and went the way of romancing Baldy. I'm not even trying to do an statistic research and I can easily figure it out from the avatars, past posts and arguments that all the loud "I want my inqui back" comes from shattered fan girls fiction. The arguments used to explain why the inquisitor should be kept as a protagonist for a possible next DA game are weak, at best and all them rotate around Baldy is so important for Inqui, like if that was the general opinion when for many (just check hundreds of posts on these threads), the inquisitor was rather a bland and boring protagonist who certainly suffer from lack of personality. Having taken half arm from the guy/girl along with the only thing that made him/her special doesn't help to improve his/her appealing as a prospective protagonist. Just let him/her go and be happy with a possible secondary role (or supportive role)  if any in the next DA game.

[robertthebard]

DA4 is still eons away, so they might change their minds if people are loud enough about wanting the inquisitor to return.

Hmm, let's test this theory: How many, off the top of your head, threads do you suppose there are claiming that, just as people in here are with the Inquisitor, the Warden should be the protagonist of DA I? How many of those threads, off the top of your head, would say dropped for DA II before it released? 500? A thousand? More? There are a lot, not to mention all the off topic posts about how they should be in unrelated or nearly unrelated threads. It hasn't worked yet.

As an aside, I'd bet you could find a few posts suggesting the Warden be the protag of the next game too...

[BansheeOwnage]

Because if they had, the waiting in the wings for something to complain about crowd would have screamed "Reused resources"?

That argument is bad in so many different ways.

 

Yeah, but the Inquisitor is handicap now, and it's wishful thinking to believe that the Inqusitor will be the next player controlled character, I mean, you should really play Mass Effect if you want a single player controlled Character, this is Dragon Age, not Mass Effect. Well, they have a horrible fate of death, Shepard. And yeah, I was thinking of the past player controlled character endings and they ain't so good (The Warden could loss his/her soul to the Archdemon or go use the DA to live, Shepard dies a horrible death, Hawke could be killed by the Nightmare) And my Inquisitor is a Mage! How the crap is she suppose to use her staff with one arm/ Red Jenny arm replacement thingy. I don't think so, nor does my Warrior Trevelyan think so (a sword and shield tanker, so he can't use a shield anymore) so it's not realistic, and I think people need to let the Inqusitor go, she'll be around (possibly working in the background, or be as the next player contorted character boss, I also like the idea of DA4 being a War Table quest from the agents point of view). So yeah, I'm not saying I'm against it, I'm just saying, dis ain't Mass Effect (where you get to play as one progansits, I get the feeling that people want DA to be Medieval-styled Mass Effect, I'm seriously gonna not play the next game if the Inquistor is the next player controlled character, I don't believe it'll be as amazing as people as want to be, the Inquisitor will probaly suffer a Shepard fate, and sheesh, I really don't want that) and nor am I saying that my Inquisitor will sit down and do nothing, but I disbanded the Inquisiton as my Mage, so yeah, we'll asee.

Can someone else handle this...? I'm so drained from replying in full today. Here's the short version:

 

You're basically saying the Inquisitor can't use a prosthetic arm because "it's not realistic", despite the dozens of great posts explaining, in great detail and eloquence, why it is.

 

You're saying we shouldn't have a returning protagonist because "dis ain't Mass Effect". Do I have to list all of the other games that have recurring protagonists? It's not like it's uncommon, and for good reason. Conversely, why would Dragon Age somehow become something else just because it had the same protagonist for 2 games?

 

You're basically saying things can't happen because you personally don't think they should.

[Nefla]

I don't think Bioware is so dumb that it won't realize that most of this clamoring about getting the inquisitor as the protagonist for the next DA instalment comes from girls who played as an elf and went the way of romancing Baldy. I'm not even trying to do an statistic research and I can easily figure it out from the avatars, past posts and arguments that all the loud "I want my inqui back" comes from shattered fan girls fiction. The arguments used to explain why the inquisitor should be kept as a protagonist for a possible next DA game are weak, at best and all them rotate around Baldy is so important for Inqui, like if that was the general opinion when for many (just check hundreds of posts on these threads), the inquisitor was rather a bland and boring protagonist who certainly suffer from lack of personality. Having taken half arm from the guy/girl along with the only thing that made him/her special doesn't help to improve his/her appealing as a prospective protagonist. Just let him/her go and be happy with a possible secondary role (or supportive role)  if any in the next DA game.

I don't care about Solas' romance with some inquisitors and I agree that the inquisitor was too neutral in personality (which can be fixed with more dialogue options in DA4). Before Trespasser came out, I would have said "I want a new character for DA4" but after, there's no one but the inquisitor I want to see as the protagonist of DA4. The inquisitor has an extremely personal connection with Solas either through love/friendship or hate and no matter what, betrayal. Solas saved the inquisitor's life in the beginning of DA:I, kept him alive, guided and advised him, found skyhold, revealed the orb as the cause of the explosion at the conclave and you find out later that he was manipulating and using the inquisitor the whole time, he had spies in the inquisition and was playing them for fools. Solas saves the inquisitor's life again but also maims him and pretty much issues a personal challenge to stop him. I don't know about you, but I'd want some serious revenge, people who had befriended him or romanced him might want answers or to save him from himself but most of us can agree that he needs to be stopped and that it's personal.

 

How would some random unrelated Tevinter be even a tiny bit as compelling as the inquisitor who has that kind of bond and history? Some random person just saving the world from Solas because the world needs to be saved and if the inquisitor is in it at all it's as a minor advisory role. It takes away the intrigue, the emotion, the drama, and the revenge in favor of the generic and bland.

 

You clearly have some kind of problem with (specifically)women who like the romance content and seem to be letting your bias against them blind you to the real groundwork that BioWare has laid for a confrontation, a war between these two characters.

[Red Panda]

There's a lot of good discussion here about the inquisitor being irrelevant. Come on everybody, can't we all agree that the inquisitor could just use a hand in getting back up to snuff?

[ESTAQ99]

I don't care about Solas' romance with some inquisitors and I agree that the inquisitor was too neutral in personality (which can be fixed with more dialogue options in DA4). Before Trespasser came out, I would have said "I want a new character for DA4" but after, there's no one but the inquisitor I want to see as the protagonist of DA4. The inquisitor has an extremely personal connection with Solas either through love/friendship or hate and no matter what, betrayal. Solas saved the inquisitor's life in the beginning of DA:I, kept him alive, guided and advised him, found skyhold, revealed the orb as the cause of the explosion at the conclave and you find out later that he was manipulating and using the inquisitor the whole time, he had spies in the inquisition and was playing them for fools. Solas saves the inquisitor's life again but also maims him and pretty much issues a personal challenge to stop him. I don't know about you, but I'd want some serious revenge, people who had befriended him or romanced him might want answers or to save him from himself but most of us can agree that he needs to be stopped and that it's personal.

 

How would some random unrelated Tevinter be even a tiny bit as compelling as the inquisitor who has that kind of bond and history? Some random person just saving the world from Solas because the world needs to be saved and if the inquisitor is in it at all it's as a minor advisory role. It takes away the intrigue, the emotion, the drama, and the revenge in favor of the generic and bland.

 

You clearly have some kind of problem with (specifically)women who like the romance content and seem to be letting your bias against them blind you to the real groundwork that BioWare has laid for a confrontation, a war between these two characters.

 

 

No, I don't have any kind of problem with women (or men), who like the romance content in DAI. I just stated that, from what I have read along several threads on this forum, I got the serious impression that a small but very loud group of female players have overplayed the importance of Solas to the point they not only want the inquisitor back as a protagonist (something I think is a preposterous idea) but they went even further and now they are claiming that Baldy/Inqui conflict must, should, will be the central theme of a possible next DA instalment.

 

I couldn't argue with you regarding the part of your post I have marked in bold, and I certainly wouldn't oppose to the idea of Bioware giving an inquisitor (as a secondary character, a cameo or as a part of the supporting cast), a chance to give a final blow to that sociopath in a future DA game. I just don't think it will necessary require to play inquisitor again as a protagonist. There are infinite more creative options than Bioware forcing all players to play with such a boring character as a protagonist.

[Nefla]

No, I don't have any kind of problem with women (or men), who like the romance content in DAI. I just stated that, from what I have read along several threads on this forum, I got the serious impression that a small but very loud group of female players have overplayed the importance of Solas to the point they not only want the inquisitor back as a protagonist (something I think is a preposterous idea) but they went even further and now they are claiming that Baldy/Inqui conflict will be the central theme of a possible next DA instalment.

 

I couldn't argue with you regarding the part of your post I have marked in bold, and I certainly wouldn't oppose to the idea of Bioware giving a inquisitor (as a secondary character, a cameo or as a part of the supporting cast), a chance to give a final blow to that sociopath in a future DA game. I just don't think it will necessary require to play inquisitor again as a protagonist. There are infinite more creative options than Bioware forcing all players to play with such a boring character as a protagonist.

You're making a huge assumption that "fangirls" are the ones making posts about wanting to play the inquisitor again and that they want to play the inquisitor just to continue romancing Solas. That's not the case. It's like me deciding that anyone who dislikes the DA:I combat system dislikes it because they hate combat in video games, think it's too hard, and want everything to be like candy crush. You can't decide someone's motivation based on their avatar or unrelated posts, only their posts on this subject and I haven't seen any that want to be the inquisitor just because they want him to be their husbando. Also Solas is clearly set up to be the main antagonist of DA4, that's not an "overplayed" interpretation of his importance, it's an obvious fact.

 

A cameo or advisor role for the inquisitor would feel like a slap in the face and if he just showed up at the last minute to give the final blow would be cheap, poorly done, and would take away the victory of this new character we're supposed to play and get attached to. The inquisitor was a boring character because he wasn't allowed to make evil choices, wasn't allowed to have extreme views, there were no sidequests with small, personality defining choices the way there were in BioWare's other games. If DA4 had the inquisitor again, all BioWare would have to do is allow more variety in the dialogue and roleplaying options and make real sidequests that allowed you to define your personality more (rather than collecting herbs or goats) which is something I'd hope they would bring back in the next game anyway (if they didn't, then the random Tevinter would be just as boring, moreso in fact because they lack the history and connection with Solas). That way you'd have the personality but also the history and motivation.

[BansheeOwnage]

No, I don't have any kind of problem with women (or men), who like the romance content in DAI. I just stated that, from what I have read along several threads on this forum, I got the serious impression that a small but very loud group of female players have overplayed the importance of Solas to the point they not only want the inquisitor back as a protagonist (something I think is a preposterous idea) but they went even further and now they are claiming that Baldy/Inqui conflict must, should, will be the central theme of a possible next DA instalment.

I don't know what threads you've been reading, but all of the ones I've read have many different types of people supporting the Inquisitor's return for DA4, and many kinds of people who do not support it. And that's true whether I base it on the information they have given or making guesses using their avatars. (Which you should always do with a grain of salt. If you tried to guess who I am using my current avatar, you'd probably be wrong, for instance.)

 

I actually don't recall seeing an influx of women who were crazy about Solas, though there were a lot of men and women who had played his romance specifically for the story aspect. I'm a woman, sure, but I haven't romanced Solas and don't plan to. That's definitely not the driving reason for people wanting the Inquisitor to return, it just adds to the existing reasons.

 

And it's not absurd to assume the next game will deal with Solas considering Patrick Weekes has said that if they make another game, it will take care of Solas' arc.

[JJDrakken]

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. 

 

Bows are tools too, guess what, I am one armed twit now, so my Bow is also useless.  By watching videos, I decided, just like Mass Effect 3 videos, I wont purchase this DLC, jus like I didn't purchase ME3.  I have no clue whats Bioware's desire to always have **** endings for their games.  Shepard dead, Inquisitor a one-armed gimp, Hawke either dead in fade or useless in the real world, The Warden either dead or being brushed aside & being pretended he doesn't exist. 

 

Annoying.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

Bows are tools too, guess what, I am one armed twit now, so my Bow is also useless.  By watching videos, I decided, just like Mass Effect 3 videos, I wont purchase this DLC, jus like I didn't purchase ME3.  I have no clue whats Bioware's desire to always have **** endings for their games.  Shepard dead, Inquisitor a one-armed gimp, Hawke either dead in fade or useless in the real world, The Warden either dead or being brushed aside & being pretended he doesn't exist. 

 

Annoying.

Why don't you show some respect and stop devaluing people because things happened to them that were out of their control? It doesn't make them helpless, either. People like you make me hope that Bioware uses the Inquisitor again just to show that.

[Elhanan]

Why don't you show some respect and stop devaluing people because things happened to them that were out of their control? It doesn't make them helpless, either. People like you make me hope that Bioware uses the Inquisitor again just to show that.

It helps to remember that our disabilities are physical; others seem to have challenges of an emotional nature....

[Korva]

No, I don't have any kind of problem with women (or men), who like the romance content in DAI. I just stated that, from what I have read along several threads on this forum, I got the serious impression that a small but very loud group of female players have overplayed the importance of Solas to the point they not only want the inquisitor back as a protagonist (something I think is a preposterous idea) but they went even further and now they are claiming that Baldy/Inqui conflict must, should, will be the central theme of a possible next DA instalment.

 

Yes, a lot of people tend to focus on their "LI" above all else -- and when that "LI" happens to be as crucial a character as Solas, that focus can turn into myopic obsession that refuses to see the game in any other way than through the lense of "SolavellanSolavellanSolavallanSolvallenSolavallan". It gets tiresome. But it's completely unfair and unfounded to treat the arguments for the Inquisitor's return, or for the importance of Solas, or for the incredible storytelling potential of the bond between these characters, as no more than fangirl obsession. I for one am asexual and aromantic. I have sub-zero interest in any "romances", and the thought of even flirting with Solas makes me gag. Hell, he isn't even my favourite character by far (that'd be Cole and Cass), and I sure as sh*t don't make any excuses for his problematic sides -- if anything, I struggle with trying to see anything redemptive in him anymore.

 

None of that stops me from being completely engrossed in what Bioware have created between Solas and the Inquisitor. That sublime storytelling brilliance is unlike anything they have ever had between hero and villain, even in Jade Empire.

 

And other folks here or in related threads, Solas-romancers or not, have also made very good points. Nobody is just crying "Solavellan!!!!!!!1111" ad infinitum et ad nauseam.

 

If you're not fascinated by this setup or as interested in the characters, that's fine and I'm the last person who'd give you crap for it, because I'm far from a "buy and love and defend everything Bioware does" player myself. But that setup is there, and folks like me have good reasons to see throwing it all away as a senseless travesty.

 

The inquisitor was a boring character because he wasn't allowed to make evil choices, wasn't allowed to have extreme views, there were no sidequests with small, personality defining choices the way there were in BioWare's other games. If DA4 had the inquisitor again, all BioWare would have to do is allow more variety in the dialogue and roleplaying options and make real sidequests that allowed you to define your personality more

 

Strongly disagree on the evil choices -- but otherwise, yes, the problem is the lack of roleplaying options, especially deeper and more nuanced ones, and the fact that neither the world or our companions care much for what we feel or what we do. Until Bioware fixes these two underlying problems and allows us to express our characters more often and better, allows NPCs to show true care and curiosity for our characters as we do for them and they for each other, until they and the world around them remember our words and deeds better and with more noticable consequences (instead of REMOVING player impact and diversity of choices in favor of as compact and simplistic a worldstate as possible, like they did in Trespasser) ... until Bioware, in short, allows our characters to truly be characters, throwing protagonist after protagonist out like last week's garbage is not going to solve a damn thing in terms of making those protagonists more satisfying to play.

 

[Boobasaurus]

I don't think Bioware is so dumb that it won't realize that most of this clamoring about getting the inquisitor as the protagonist for the next DA instalment comes from girls who played as an elf and went the way of romancing Baldy. I'm not even trying to do an statistic research and I can easily figure it out from the avatars, past posts and arguments that all the loud "I want my inqui back" comes from shattered fan girls fiction. The arguments used to explain why the inquisitor should be kept as a protagonist for a possible next DA game are weak, at best and all them rotate around Baldy is so important for Inqui, like if that was the general opinion when for many (just check hundreds of posts on these threads), the inquisitor was rather a bland and boring protagonist who certainly suffer from lack of personality. Having taken half arm from the guy/girl along with the only thing that made him/her special doesn't help to improve his/her appealing as a prospective protagonist. Just let him/her go and be happy with a possible secondary role (or supportive role)  if any in the next DA game.

 

I haven't visited the forum enough lately to know if this is actually the case, but I've seen other people claiming that they finally felt connected to their inquisitor after playing Trespasser. In any case, I suspect that this is why some people actually do want to see the inquisitor again next game. I am honestly cool with him/her playing a supportive role in the next game.

 

Hmm, let's test this theory: How many, off the top of your head, threads do you suppose there are claiming that, just as people in here are with the Inquisitor, the Warden should be the protagonist of DA I? How many of those threads, off the top of your head, would say dropped for DA II before it released? 500? A thousand? More? There are a lot, not to mention all the off topic posts about how they should be in unrelated or nearly unrelated threads. It hasn't worked yet.

As an aside, I'd bet you could find a few posts suggesting the Warden be the protag of the next game too...

 

I don't think you truly got the meaning of my post as I did not imply that the amount of posts/threads is going to shape future games. I said they might do it, but it is also possible that they are not going to either way.  

[PnXMarcin1PL]

The warden in Origins has been marked by the joining ritual by drinking darkspawn blood that gave the necessary power & binding to the taint, that allowed to kill the archdemon.

 

Hawke in DA2 did not had any mark, only became a legend for the treasure in deep roads and became a champion (practically from zero to hero) after saving rhe kirkwall from qunari. Not much of marking here, just actions that have built up a legend around Hawke.

[robertthebard]

That argument is bad in so many different ways.

...and yet, I'm sure we both know that it's true. We have people trying to convince us that watching a Warden get his throat cut to summon a demon is "implied darkness". Do you really think people that think that way wouldn't be all over a reused cutscene?
 

Can someone else handle this...? I'm so drained from replying in full today. Here's the short version:
 
You're basically saying the Inquisitor can't use a prosthetic arm because "it's not realistic", despite the dozens of great posts explaining, in great detail and eloquence, why it is.
 
You're saying we shouldn't have a returning protagonist because "dis ain't Mass Effect". Do I have to list all of the other games that have recurring protagonists? It's not like it's uncommon, and for good reason. Conversely, why would Dragon Age somehow become something else just because it had the same protagonist for 2 games?
 
You're basically saying things can't happen because you personally don't think they should.

How is that not a valid argument? After all, the counter boils down to "It should happen because I think it should". At the end of the day, that's all any of these topics boils down to; what we think. None of us are writing the game, or doing the write ups for the next one. None of us are producing for the next game. All of us are, you guessed it, speculating about what could happen, or what should happen based on how we feel about it. In true BSN fashion, some of us are pulling lines out of context to try to make a point, completely disregarding anything contrary to what we want to believe happened, or was meant by the dialog. Some have gone so far as to fish through our own history to support "the Inquisitor is going to be the next PC", or, and this is even better, "but I romanced Solas, and so I have to be there to redeem/kill him".

Hell, I've seen the claim that Hawke was instrumental in our defeat of Cory. This is, of course, a drastic overstatement of Hawke's importance to the plot, "but it was Hawke"... Morrigan was instrumental in the defeat of Cory, whether she drinks from the Well or not, because we get the whole Arbor Wilds connection from her, not Hawke. The counter can be "but Hawke died in the Fade", and for some, that's true, but for others, the Warden died in the Fade, presumably. Presumably died, that is, the Warden was the one left in the Fade. The point being, however, that even though Cory was free due to Hawke, and Hawke's professed interest in ending him, when it was actually done, when the method to actually accomplish it was uncovered, Hawke was nowhere to be seen. So no, based on information we already have, canon information, the Inquisitor isn't required to be there, and isn't even required to be alive for the deed to be done.

[Almostfaceman]

And it's not absurd to assume the next game will deal with Solas considering Patrick Weekes has said that if they make another game, it will take care of Solas' arc.

 

Where did he say that? Not saying you're wrong, just want to know where to find it, if you can tell me. 

[Klinker1234]

If Bioware is going to bring back the Inquisitor (which i wouldn't mind at all), I can't help but think about Fenris from DA2. Dunno how the next game is gonna play out, but if the Inquisitor is going on a trip to Tevinter I think that the no-arm problem could be solved by having the Inquisitor making a new arm, potentially out of lyrium. If Tevinter can create something like Fenris (who had the touch-of-lyrium-death btw) in the modern weakend decayed Tevinter. You can only wonder what kind of secrets and powerfull stuff found in deepest depths of Minrathous, that can also be made into a prosthetic, could be recovered. Tevinter is an ancient empire, there must have been a magister/archon that made a arm prosthetic out of crazy powerfull lyrium stuff for themselves at some point, most likely several hundreds of magister over the ages have tried, some most likely succeded. This is even more true if you take in to consideration that magister duels are quite common in Minrathous, wouldn't be anything new there if a magister lost a limb or two in a crazy fire explosion and created a magic replacement arm out of lyrium or enchanted armor.

Also in any event the idea that the player character is defined in his/her/its "specialness" by the Anchor is silly. It is the actions the Inquisitor takes and the bonds the Inquisitor forms with others, along with the shapes these bonds and actions take that makes the Inquisitor special. Saying that the Inquisitor is only special when having the Anchor is like saying that King Arthur only was special because of Excalibur or Thor is only special because of Mjölnir or Jason is only special because he sails the Argo.

 

Still I get what the point was, without the Anchor the Inquisitor seems like there is nothing special about him/her/it. How if one considers the sum total of the Inquisitors life and times to be what defines their "specialness", then the things the Inquisitor has seen, learned, fought and failed to do, along with the people the Inquisitor has befriended, hated, rivalled, killed and loved is what makes the Inquisitor special. In opinion anyway. 

[BansheeOwnage]

...and yet, I'm sure we both know that it's true. We have people trying to convince us that watching a Warden get his throat cut to summon a demon is "implied darkness". Do you really think people that think that way wouldn't be all over a reused cutscene?

Okay, I was pretty drained last night, but I'll give my counter-argument now. So you think that Bioware shouldn't have used a hug animation that was well-animated, and use a poorly-animated one instead, because some idiots somewhere would complain about the animation being reused? What?

 

First of all, I have no idea how that related to Wardens slitting people's throats and implied darkness. Second, need I list examples of all the other reused animations in the game that no one complains about? Thirdly, even if one or two people complained about reusing a hug animation, do you really think Bioware would care enough that they would opt to make a new (badly done) animation just for them? Do you think Bioware would even know about those one or two people who complained? Fourthly, I don't know if you hug people much, but if you do, are your hugs very different each time? Of course not. No one in their right mind would complain about a hug looking similar to another one in a game, especially since they would change the camera angles and you probably wouldn't even notice. And I am far from thinking Bioware is flawless, but my faith in them isn't low enough that I think they would give in to those people. Of course, the fact that they opted to try to make a new hug animation that looked terrible instead of using what was already there proves they're fallible.

 

And fifth... did I just write all of that to argue that Bioware should have reused a hug animation and no one would have cared if they did? Geez I wonder why I bother sometimes.

How is that not a valid argument? After all, the counter boils down to "It should happen because I think it should". At the end of the day, that's all any of these topics boils down to; what we think. None of us are writing the game, or doing the write ups for the next one. None of us are producing for the next game. All of us are, you guessed it, speculating about what could happen, or what should happen based on how we feel about it. In true BSN fashion, some of us are pulling lines out of context to try to make a point, completely disregarding anything contrary to what we want to believe happened, or was meant by the dialog. Some have gone so far as to fish through our own history to support "the Inquisitor is going to be the next PC", or, and this is even better, "but I romanced Solas, and so I have to be there to redeem/kill him".

You can say that it all boils down to "it should happen because I think it should" if you want, but that's not quite true. Some of us are using arguments, either for or against, while others are literally saying "because I want/don't want it." The person I was arguing was one such person.

 

Show up, tell me why you don't think the Inquisitor should return, have a discussion, that's fine. Show up and say "It's not realistic because I say so" without providing anything to back it up, or saying "DA can't ever have the same protagonist again because it ain't Mass Effect" is useless. And that's what the person I was quoting did.

 

Where did he say that? Not saying you're wrong, just want to know where to find it, if you can tell me. 

Unfortunately I don't have a link. Hopefully someone else does.

[robertthebard]

Okay, I was pretty drained last night, but I'll give my counter-argument now. So you think that Bioware shouldn't have used a hug animation that was well-animated, and use a poorly-animated one instead, because some idiots somewhere would complain about the animation being reused? What?
 
First of all, I have no idea how that related to Wardens slitting people's throats and implied darkness. Second, need I list examples of all the other reused animations in the game that no one complains about? Thirdly, even if one or two people complained about reusing a hug animation, do you really think Bioware would care enough that they would opt to make a new (badly done) animation just for them? Do you think Bioware would even know about those one or two people who complained? Fourthly, I don't know if you hug people much, but if you do, are your hugs very different each time? Of course not. No one in their right mind would complain about a hug looking similar to another one in a game, especially since they would change the camera angles and you probably wouldn't even notice. And I am far from thinking Bioware is flawless, but my faith in them isn't low enough that I think they would give in to those people. Of course, the fact that they opted to try to make a new hug animation that looked terrible instead of using what was already there proves they're fallible.
 
And fifth... did I just write all of that to argue that Bioware should have reused a hug animation and no one would have cared if they did? Geez I wonder why I bother sometimes.
You can say that it all boils down to "it should happen because I think it should" if you want, but that's not quite true. Some of us are using arguments, either for or against, while others are literally saying "because I want/don't want it." The person I was arguing was one such person.
 
Show up, tell me why you don't think the Inquisitor should return, have a discussion, that's fine. Show up and say "It's not realistic because I say so" without providing anything to back it up, or saying "DA can't ever have the same protagonist again because it ain't Mass Effect" is useless. And that's what the person I was quoting did.
 
Unfortunately I don't have a link. Hopefully someone else does.

What are you basing your arguments for a return on, again? Because you think that your romantic involvement with Solas demands it? Isn't that "Because I want it to happen"? Hook me up here, show me some arguments that aren't "because I want it to happen", or, and since you're pointing at anyone that disagrees accusing them of "because I don't want it to", that should be easy, right?

In regard to the tongue in cheek comment I made about reusing animations, go ahead and circle the wagons. Go ahead and pretend that this isn't the BSN, and that someone here wouldn't have used that argument, that's all good, for me. Denial is a terrible thing. It's just like the "Well, if there'd been an option to kill off the Inquisitor at the end, we wouldn't be having this discussion" posts, since, as I pointed out to that poster, we've had more "Where's my Warden" threads than I can count, and the Warden could die at the end. So tell me, which one of us is deluding themselves about the nature of the BSN?

[Finis Valorum]

Show up, tell me why you don't think the Inquisitor should return, have a discussion, that's fine. Show up and say "It's not realistic because I say so" without providing anything to back it up, or saying "DA can't ever have the same protagonist again because it ain't Mass Effect" is useless. And that's what the person I was quoting did.

 

 

 

Bioware can likely satisfy both sides of this discussion quite easily....by having the Inquisitor return as the protagonist of a new game....on the Keep, like the "Last Court" that has him/her do some shadowy background stuff. The real adventuring can then by done by a new guy in DA4. They could even have whatever the Inquisitor does in that game change minor, and perhaps one major thing in DA4 but still focus DA4 primarily on the new guy and whatever is going on in Tevinter and have the Inquisitor/Solas stuff go on in the background of the game.
Both Solas and the Inquisitor still need to plan and put their pieces in the right place and that could take as long as Bioware likes, so that it could skip a game and play out in game 5. I would like to see a protagonist with a more personal story, like Hawke, again in DA4.

Keep the even numbered games for more personal stories, I say and make the odd numbered ones about really saving/profoundly changing the world.

[BansheeOwnage]

What are you basing your arguments for a return on, again? Because you think that your romantic involvement with Solas demands it? Isn't that "Because I want it to happen"? Hook me up here, show me some arguments that aren't "because I want it to happen", or, and since you're pointing at anyone that disagrees accusing them of "because I don't want it to", that should be easy, right?

I've written quite a lot on the subject, as have others. If you haven't seen the arguments, I'd be surprised. Just read this thread if you're curious. The short version is that we think it would be a waste of a perfectly good narrative and hero/villain relationship not to have the Inquisitor confront Solas, and given that, we think being able to control them (whether there is another protagonist or not) is necessary.

 

Bottom line is, we have provided arguments based on (admittedly, subjective) views on what constitutes a good narrative and good storytelling, just as our opponents have listed arguments. As I said before, the only reason I said what I did to that specific poster was because they didn't even try to make an argument. Why are you so fervently defending that?

 

What? You think I only want them to return because of my romantic involvement with Solas? You keep showing that you haven't read my posts. Here, from the last page:

 

I actually don't recall seeing an influx of women who were crazy about Solas, though there were a lot of men and women who had played his romance specifically for the story aspect. I'm a woman, sure, but I haven't romanced Solas and don't plan to. That's definitely not the driving reason for people wanting the Inquisitor to return, it just adds to the existing reasons.

Bolded some stuff for you.

 

In regard to the tongue in cheek comment I made about reusing animations, go ahead and circle the wagons. Go ahead and pretend that this isn't the BSN, and that someone here wouldn't have used that argument, that's all good, for me. Denial is a terrible thing. It's just like the "Well, if there'd been an option to kill off the Inquisitor at the end, we wouldn't be having this discussion" posts, since, as I pointed out to that poster, we've had more "Where's my Warden" threads than I can count, and the Warden could die at the end. So tell me, which one of us is deluding themselves about the nature of the BSN?

You're really bad at reading my posts. I admitted that it's possible a very small number of people could have that (absurd) viewpoint. I'm not in denial about anything. Although I will say that I haven't seen anyone make an argument similar to that. I don't see the similarity between "bring back X protagonist" threads and discussing whether Bioware should have reused a hug animation. Why are you so interested in my tangential comment about hugs anyway?

[midnight tea]

What? You think I only want them to return because of my romantic involvement with Solas? You keep showing that you haven't read my posts. Here, from the last page:

Bolded some stuff for you.

 

It's somewhat sad that some people want to dismiss the entire story and the way it's been set up, because they think they've found an easy target - even if people will tell them ad nauseam that they're not interested with romance content for Solas or have an entire list of different valid argument supporting Inquisitor's significant involvement in future installment...

 

 

Folks - while the romance became something of a highlight of the series (most people at least know of its existence) a fraction of people have romanced Solas. There's no way in hell that the devs are going to cater to just them, no matter how dedicated they are. YET the fact that they let us romance - or befriend - one of the most important characters in the entire franchise and they did not conclude the romance in Trespasser itself (and later on Twitter confirmed that if they're going to create the next game, we're going to see a conclusion) speaks volumes of possible involvement of not just romanced Quizzy, but any Quizzy.

 

They won't be making a (costly) exception for romanced fem!Lavellan to appear, especially that the option to continue the romance in the game is the same one befriended Inquisitor gets, in which they will try and redeem him - therefore the romance will stay a variant of decisions we're going to make throughout DA4.

[NRieh]

The thing is.

The last dungeon-scene is mandatory anyway. It's possible that our Inq might..need a hand  with fulfilling their plans to kill the bastard \ redeem their friend, but they're up to it nonetheless. Inq is going to be involved one way or another.  

[Elhanan]

The thing is.
The last dungeon-scene is mandatory anyway. It's possible that our Inq might..need a hand  with fulfilling their plans to kill the bastard \ redeem their friend, but they're up to it nonetheless. Inq is going to be involved one way or another.

Agreed; the last scene is quite disarming....