359 réponses à ce sujet

[BabyPuncher]

I am inclined to suspect that Dragon Age: Inquisition was built from the ground up on some notion along the lines of "The world is such a mean, hurtful place. We need to give players a fantasy where they don't have to be hurt anymore" The abysmal writing is too systematic for me to conclude this happened without some sort of overhead guiding ideology enforcing it. And that sounds like exactly the sort of thing the DA heads, particularly John Epler would say. Who knows, maybe it's partly a subconscious or even conscious response to the very significant criticism BioWare received for the previous two games.

 

Suffice it to say, this is at best a staggeringly incompetent grasp of the ideals the writers have pretended to be enunciating, and at worst an actively contemptuous outlook towards them.

[BSpud]

Lol, David.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Some of its uninformed, but it makes a good point about the shift in Inquisition's tone compared to the rest of the franchise..

 

The tonal shift is a minor one if you ask me. Origins was never a super grimdark game. The Broodmother section was very creepy, but apart from that it's nothing too different from Inquisition. 

 

Dragon Age 2 is probably the darkest game of the series in fact. As many would attest, this is not a guarantee of story quality.

[Heimdall]

The tonal shift is a minor one if you ask me. Origins was never a super grimdark game. The Broodmother section was very creepy, but apart from that it's nothing too different from Inquisition. 

 

Dragon Age 2 is probably the darkest game of the series in fact. As many would attest, this is not a guarantee of story quality.

I'm a fan of DA2's story, but that's not what I mean.

 

For a game with such a grim setup (Demons are falling from the sky, templars and mages are sowing chaos in the countryside, the local superpower has collapsed into Civil War), the picture DAI presents of its world and the people within it is remarkably bright.  In Origins, there were people who would take advantage of the Blight for personal gain like the bandits in Lothering or even Bodhan!  Instead in Inquisition we saw most common people eager to band together and make things better, with a generally more uplifting message of teamwork to improve the situation.  And often its not that it has done away with social issues from the first two games, but that those issues suffer from a major case of telling rather than showing.  We hear about oppressed elves, but we hardly ever see it except for that racist yapping in the Skyhold courtyard.  Even much of the suffering from the actions of Corypheus' minions is told rather than shone, with the Inquisitor arriving after the fact.  I don't disapprove of Krem, but the way his character was treated made him feel less like a character to me and more like a transparent attempt by the devs to plug their stance on transgenderism.  That's great and all, but it contributed to the sense of Thedas being pushed in a more bright and politically correct direction.  There are some exceptions, but the overall tone of Inquisition felt very different to me.

[jdgjordan]

The thing that makes me mad is not that i lost my arm i thought that was a great plot devise to end the Inques adventuring days no what makes me mad is i must have either water down peace making Inquisition under divines orders or no Inquisition at all. I wanted to keep my Inquisition as big and as strong as it was and if that meant going to war with both orlais and ferelden then so be it but give me that choice but no cant give the player that much power.

[Dai Grepher]

Some of its uninformed, but it makes a good point about the shift in Inquisition's tone compared to the rest of the franchise..

 

I didn't see any shift on racial issues. There was never skin color prejudice in DA:O, and there were differently colored characters everywhere.

 

But he's semi right about the series going from dark medieval legend to bright high-fantasy fairytale. Only he didn't word it as accurately as I did, because again, words and his pitiful grasp of them.
 

[Mr.House]

Lol, David.

His posts are so precious.

[Realmzmaster]

I do not understand why some posters think that a war with Orlais or Ferelden should be a choice? The army that the Inquisitor commands is made up of people from those countries. The Inquisitor leads an army of the faithful outfitted by the coin of the nobility. So you will have Fereldens and Orlaisians fighting Fereldens and Orlaisians. So you can have brothers and sisters fighting brothers and sisters.

 

Those faithful will only stay that way if the Inquisition is not seen in direct conflict with the Divine. If the Inquisitor opposes the will of the Divine most of the Inquisition's army may leave. The fact that the Divine is one of your companions or a former adviser is a non-issue. The Divine would not be able to side with the Inquisition. The money coming into the Inquisition will only continue if the Inquisition is not seen in direct conflict with the nobles.The Inquisition's authority derives from those allies.

 

The only practical options are to reduce in size or disband. If the Inquisitor is allowed to wage war, then a quick Your journey ends should appear.

[squirrely1]

thing with bad endings and "ha ! surprise everyone is dead!" plots is I lose the will to play it again. so if in the past I could easily play a kotor \ JE \ ME1 2-3 times at least before I shelved them now I play a game like inquisition and not only I can't find the strength to finish it I actually don't desire to play it again after I'll finish it.

 

Games like BG or NWN had very nice campaigns and the huge variety of builds insured that each run will be unique and fun in it's own right.

 

Here in Inquisition I can use all possible builds (mostly) with my companions and respeccing them, abuse evil builds with crafting anf I can transfer schems and collectibles using the golden nug.

There is not much incentive to replay the game considering the plot and the ending

This is a great point.  While I liked Trespasser DLC and was ok with the losing of the hand and the ending pretty much, I am now trying to play the ending with a second character I created and everytime I add power points to the inquisition I'm metagaming and thinking in my head.....oh why do I bother to draft this agent or that agent, or why do I bother to gather these resources when I know it will end up biting me in the arse in the end?  Because "the Inquisition is just too large and needs to be cut back or disbanded...blah...blah...blah"  I think once they put such a punctuation mark on a DLC such as this it really does tend to have an impact on the game's replay-ability IMO.

 

However, with that said... I do think there was no way the Inquisitor with that mark could've ever retired quietly into the mountains or whatever.   The mark had to be dealt with. It would've been nice if there was a choice on that aspect of the game play though.  

 

As for the very ending whether you disband or not, my main beef with it was that it seemed more of a to be continued....which we know it will be, however, we know it will probably be with a new protag.  And to me I worry that it will not be satisfying enough that your Inquisitor won't get to do the honors of tracking down and stopping Solas.  I think the way they set up the ending....the Inquisitor should be the one to do that.  So that is going to have to be some tricky writing to pull that off with a new protag and new set of characters IMO.

[Giantdeathrobot]

I'm a fan of DA2's story, but that's not what I mean.

 

For a game with such a grim setup (Demons are falling from the sky, templars and mages are sowing chaos in the countryside, the local superpower has collapsed into Civil War), the picture DAI presents of its world and the people within it is remarkably bright.  In Origins, there were people who would take advantage of the Blight for personal gain like the bandits in Lothering or even Bodhan!  Instead in Inquisition we saw most common people eager to band together and make things better, with a generally more uplifting message of teamwork to improve the situation.  And often its not that it has done away with social issues from the first two games, but that those issues suffer from a major case of telling rather than showing.  We hear about oppressed elves, but we hardly ever see it except for that racist yapping in the Skyhold courtyard.  Even much of the suffering from the actions of Corypheus' minions is told rather than shone, with the Inquisitor arriving after the fact.  I don't disapprove of Krem, but the way his character was treated made him feel less like a character to me and more like a transparent attempt by the devs to plug their stance on transgenderism.  That's great and all, but it contributed to the sense of Thedas being pushed in a more bright and politically correct direction.  There are some exceptions, but the overall tone of Inquisition felt very different to me.

 

Inquisition has bandits taking advantage of the situation, the Venatori using the opportunity provided to ''help'' Fiona's mages, the Tranquils being murdered to power a magical easter egg hunt, Samson not caring what atrocities his Red Templars do so long as he gets back at the Chantry, and other such behaviors of people abusing the situation. Also the various Chantry members who abuse the power vacuum for personal gains. Or groups like the Freemen of the Dales using the war as their playground, basically. Or the nobles in Sera's personal quest who use peasants to wage wars without a second thought. Or Lucius trying to use the chaos to put his plans to fruition. So on and so forth. 

 

You got the Wardens killing each other in blood magic rituals, including terrified new recruits.

 

You also have people like the mayor of Crestwood or that woman in Emprise who deceive and lie to their fellows to hide their shady activities. 

 

Trespasser also has a fairly realistic political situation, and clear consequences for the player's previous actions biting them in the ass in major ways.

 

So no, I still don't think there is a major difference.

[Almostfaceman]

I am inclined to suspect that Dragon Age: Inquisition was built from the ground up on some notion along the lines of "The world is such a mean, hurtful place. We need to give players a fantasy where they don't have to be hurt anymore" The abysmal writing is too systematic for me to conclude this happened without some sort of overhead guiding ideology enforcing it. And that sounds like exactly the sort of thing the DA heads, particularly John Epler would say. Who knows, maybe it's partly a subconscious or even conscious response to the very significant criticism BioWare received for the previous two games.

 

Suffice it to say, this is at best a staggeringly incompetent grasp of the ideals the writers have pretended to be enunciating, and at worst an actively contemptuous outlook towards them.

[Precursor Meta]

I didnt really get a sense of defeat at the end of the DLC. I mean, I didn't die or anything. I'm still alive and running the inquisition through different circumstances.

 

And lets all be honest, Bioware needed to handicap our inquisitor in order to justify putting us in the shoes of a new protagonist for the next game.

[Almostfaceman]

And lets all be honest, Bioware needed to handicap our inquisitor in order to justify putting us in the shoes of a new protagonist for the next game.

 

No, they didn't *have* to, that's kinda the point the OP made. Golly gee wiz!

[Ieldra]

I am inclined to suspect that Dragon Age: Inquisition was built from the ground up on some notion along the lines of "The world is such a mean, hurtful place. We need to give players a fantasy where they don't have to be hurt anymore" The abysmal writing is too systematic for me to conclude this happened without some sort of overhead guiding ideology enforcing it.

I think it's rather simple: the DA team's inclusiveness agenda ran roughshod over the lore and the mood established by the previous two games in the saga. I'm all for inclusiveness, but they went too far. For instance, that Thedas a world with no prejudice about gender and sexual orientation, I'm perfectly fine with that, since that could be - and was - grounded in the lore with no problem, but in addition to that they relegated everything that can't be made gender-neutral and possibly make some ultra-sensitive weenies uncomfortable to offscreen, which is jarring since in so many other aspects, Thedas qualifies as a crapsack world. Another example: Thedas always had people of different skin colors, and I recall little racism about that. Perfectly fine, I don't need that kind of racism and Thedas has enough racism along different lines. Now suddenly, the dark-skinned people look exactly like real-world black people, which wasn't the case before. Regardless of how desirable inclusiveness is, this really hits you in the face with the impression that real-world social issues trump storytelling and world integrity, with the message "We don't care about established lore if it gets in the way of our PC agenda". Again, I'm all for inclusiveness, but I hate anvilicious messages about it (and about morality in general, while we're at it), especially if that comes at the expense of lore and mood.

 

(Note that I exclude Krem from this criticism because it was rather subtly done - the message could be completely ignored - and in addition, could be read to illustrate how the Qun runs on insane troll logic)

 

And now I've posted enough OT stuff in my own thread.

[Ieldra]

I didnt really get a sense of defeat at the end of the DLC. I mean, I didn't die or anything. I'm still alive and running the inquisition through different circumstances.

 

And lets all be honest, Bioware needed to handicap our inquisitor in order to justify putting us in the shoes of a new protagonist for the next game.

It didn't come across as a defeat only because it was the writers who contrived the circumstances that de-powered the Inquisitor, rather than an in-game agent. The result isn't any less unpleasant for it. 

 

Also, I disagree that the Inquisitor had to be depowered.

[Drasanil]

(Note that I exclude Krem from this criticism because it was rather subtly done - the message could be completely ignored - and in addition, could be read to illustrate how the Qun runs on insane troll logic)

 

That's a problem in and of itself. Before the whole Aqun-Athlok nonsense, the Qun didn't run on insane troll logic, it was relatively thoughtful and consistent. Yes it was totally reprehensible to most people, but also rather coherent, conformist and logical as well. Bioware threw all that out in their quest to pander and diminished the Qun as a result.

 

Why would a regime with strict gender roles and a penchant for re-educating anything remotely non-conformist ever even come up with the notion that something as relatively rare [and so very antithetical the regime's own nature] as transgendrism  was just fine instead of re-educating that person until they conformed like they do for everything else? The basic premise just doesn't stand up to even casual scrutiny, it was in essence a pure pander move.

 

The new and improved CuddlyQun was decried for good reason. That some are willing to pull off the tortured mental gymnastics to justify it, after the fact, doesn't change that. Heck even the Insane Troll Logic defence is basically a capitulation that amounts to "so what if the Qun doesn't make sense, it never needed to!" Not exactly great position to be in if part of the draw you were going for was a grittier more down to earth setting. 

[Ieldra]

I'm inclined to concede your point, Drasanil, but I've taken further discussion of this to PM in order to avoid derailing this thread any further.

[Dieb]

Late to the party, as I had just finished the DLC yesterday; yet I will say that it is a win for me.

 

The Inquisition served its purpose, and it was fulfilled to the fullest extent. For what they're up against now, it would not be the best environment to take action in, and there was no way of knowing this beforehandedly.

 

It only would be a shame if the Inquisitor ended up in fact not being a playable character in the next game - an option I was actually not very keen about myself, until I played Tresspasser. For I think losing this organization (the mere concept of which I have never been a fan of) was an expression of his/her gain in insight and experience; whilst having succeeded in what they attempted up until this point.

 

edit:

 

Thedas always had people of different skin colors, and I recall little racism about that. Perfectly fine, I don't need that kind of racism and Thedas has enough racism along different lines. Now suddenly, the dark-skinned people look exactly like real-world black people, which wasn't the case before. Regardless of how desirable inclusiveness is, this really hits you in the face with the impression that real-world social issues trump storytelling and world integrity, with the message "We don't care about established lore if it gets in the way of our PC agenda". Again, I'm all for inclusiveness, but I hate anvilicious messages about it (and about morality in general, while we're at it), especially if that comes at the expense of lore and mood.

 

I didn't know this about you. Consider me out.

 

And sorry for inconveniecing your immersion.

[Ieldra]

Late to the party, as I had just finished the DLC yesterday; yet I will say that it is a win for me.

 

The Inquisition served its purpose, and it was fulfilled to the fullest extent. For what they're up against now, it would not be the best environment to take action in, and there was no way of knowing this beforehandedly.

 

It only would be a shame if the Inquisitor ended up in fact not being a playable character in the next game - an option I was actually not very keen about myself, until I played Tresspasser. For I think losing this organization (the mere concept of which I have never been a fan of) was an expression of his/her gain in insight and experience; whilst having succeeded in what they attempted up until this point.

I disagree. It could only have been an expression of insight and experience if the decision had been made freely. Instead, the only alternative is even less agreeable. Also, what exactly insight and experience means for my character should be mine to determine. Leliana made a good point when she suggested disbanding might be a valid path, and it did make you think, but depending on how you envisioned your inquisitors, you still had to choose between two disagreeable alternatives.

 

Also, no, I don't want to play the Inquisitor in the next game. I would've been ok with the forced disbanding (working for the Chantry was completely inacceptable), but losing the Mark on top of it was the last straw. If we get to play the Inquisitor again, I want another cool magical extra, and one that's - like the Mark - more than a combat ability. And this time I don't want to lose it in the end. 

[Nixou]

That's a problem in and of itself. Before the whole Aqun-Athlok nonsense, the Qun didn't run on insane troll logic, it was relatively thoughtful and consistent. Yes it was totally reprehensible to most people, but also rather coherent, conformist and logical as well.

 

 

All societies are built upon sets of rules, customs and values which are logical and internally coherent when put on paper, only to be broken and justified by insane-troll-logic excuses once applied in practice.

 

***

 

Why would a regime with strict gender roles and a penchant for re-educating anything remotely non-conformist ever even come up with the notion that something as relatively rare [and so very antithetical the regime's own nature] as transgendrism  was just fine instead of re-educating that person until they conformed like they do for everything else? 

 

 

Perhaps because they got one or two famous transgender generals who were so enormously good at their job that they just couldn't sweep their existence and deeds under the rug and decided to make an exception. Kinda like how the Court of Versailles accepted to play along Eon's wishes to be a woman rather than risk her wrath.

[Drasanil]

Perhaps because they got one or two famous transgender generals who were so enormously good at their job that they just couldn't sweep their existence and deeds under the rug and decided to make an exception. Kinda like how the Court of Versailles accepted to play along Eon's wishes to be a woman rather than risk her wrath.

 

The Qun is purpose built to nip system breaking exceptions in the bud long before they get to the level where they can make that type of change. That goes part and parcel with the entire enforced conformity thing. 

[BSpud]

 

edit:

 

 

I didn't know this about you. Consider me out.

 

And sorry for inconveniecing your immersion.

 

Yeah, this thread is such a clusterfuck. Haha, holy ****, what was that? DA BLACKS LOOK LIKE ACTUAL BLAKS NOW MUH IMMERSHUNZ

[Ieldra]

I didn't know this about you. Consider me out.

Have you now consigned me to the ranks of the reactionaries? Did you, perhaps, not understand that this was about the weight of established lore? Make a world like X, and I'll accept it like X. Make it like Y, the same. But don't change it from X to Y in the middle of the story. Put in anything for X and Y, my reaction will be the same. That this clashes with social inclusivity is completely accidental, and actually rather painful, since I value both.

But apparently such complexity, little as it is, eludes you.

I am sorry that this topic derailed this thread. I will request a closure.

[SardaukarElite]

Now suddenly, the dark-skinned people look exactly like real-world black people, which wasn't the case before.

 

It wasn't the case before because Eclipse was a little bit awful at modeling people.

[Dieb]

DA2 had a system that would adjust the Hawke family around your character's skin color. Bethany's facial structure when chosing the black pre-made face (with dreadlock ponytail) has a different facial structure, including more voluminous lips etc. It has a distinctively more cartoonish style overall, but the possibility, and more importantly, the definite intention - hence using resources to implement this mechanic for the family - is set it in stone.

 

The DAO Eclipse engine was just horrible, and a BioWare employee even mentioned this in relation to displaying people of a different ethnicity (even though as far as I am concerned, that is also not how white people should ever look like). I cannot find the interview for you, so feel free to call baloney on this one, however. My word would need to do, or not.

 

You don't have to like it, but putting "agenda" onto any obvious morally one-sided argument to turn the guilt around and cover the dirt of the notion stopped working some time three LBGT threads ago. Scrambling for facts like "video game characters don't look like real people, but those do less so" just makes it much worse.

 

I'm sorry, I don't want to carry this on. No one will budge. I can't make you care. I usually appreciated your contributions thus far otherwise and shall continue to do so.