304 réponses à ce sujet

[SlottsMachine]

New Protagonist. While the Inquisitor vs. Solas could be quite interesting, BioWare has proven that they don't handle continuity well so I'd prefer they give themselves a clean slate. 

[Xilizhra]

 

Here's a hint: take a chart of archetypal personality types, and use them as the basis for your characters.

For instance my Warden was an unapologetic Commander (motto: "I'm the strongest person in the room so either you do as I say or you get crushed, literally"), my Hawke a very unlucky Defender (motto: "I'll fight to the death to protect my loved ones! I'll fail half the time... but I'll fight!"), and my Inquisitor's a one armed Consul (motto: "In the name of Andraste... Could you all please refrain from burning the world down? That counts double for you, Solas"). Since the sequel bait involve Tevinter, chances are that my next PC will be a classical Protagonist type.

 

The thing that bugs me is that it's virtually impossible to play an Architect; in fact, that very fact puts a name to the irritating dissonance that I feel a lot of the time in these RPGs.

[midnight tea]

Did we ever tie up loose ends with the warden or  with Hawke? We got a cameo appearance, but we'll never really play again with either of those characters. Is the Inquisitor somehow entitled to an extra game when they are not? 

 

There were too many technical difficulties when it comes to HOF. Also, David Gaider himself revealed in one of interviews that at the time they were creating DAO, they didn't know if they'd be able to create even DAII, much less more installments of the series.

 

Hawke on the other hand apparently was groomed to be Inquisitor in DAI. Not only there are things people have dug out and connected the dots, it's confirmed in-story - Cassandra interrogates Varric to find out where Hawke is and then states verbatim in DAI that she was tasked to seek Hawke out to offer them title of Inquisitor back when Justinia still lived.

 

Things went their own way after DAII was rushed and not that well-received, hence we get a new character, though with Hawke still being instrumental in setting the stage for next game (by releasing Cory).

 

But with DAI, which was not only well-received by critics and gamers, there's a theme I see occurring in quite a few dev interviews, about DAI being the game they've wanted to do from the beginning and that it should be a game that has 'set thing straight', in terms of what series is about.

 

Spoiler

From: http://www.pcgamer.c...the-open-world/

 

Mark Darrah: In a lot of ways Inquisition has been the game that we've really wanted to make from the beginning. From a systemic perspective Dragon Age 2 is actually very similar to Dragon Age: Origins. Its bones are the same, but we've put a very different outfit on top of it, for a lack of a better term.

[...]

Because of Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age: Inquisition is having to be a lot more ambitious, to address those concerns and really try to get back much more to the roots of the franchise. Much more about tactical combat and a higher level of deliberate difficulty. More clear overall story, with the moral choices still in there, but much more in vein of Dragon Age: Origins style storytelling. You're right to ask. The goal wasn't to revolutionize the series every single time, but Dragon Age 2 forced our hand to a certain degree.

 

From: http://www.eurogamer...s-of-dragon-age

 

Mike Laidlaw: "We wanted Inquisition to be the one which people would point to and say, 'they've found their feet. They've finally nailed down what this series is about.' Not that this locks us down or shackles us in any way, it just makes a clear statement on the priorities."

 

In other words, DAI is something of a soft reset for the series. So it can now go in either directions - there's no "it has to be this!" or "it has to be that!", especially that when you really think about it, the franchise indeed didn't have much of a set identity up until DAI.

 

 

No. Every game that features the inquisitor as the protagonist after this game makes the series more about him/her, and less about the time period. Just like Mass Effect is Shepard's story, that turns Dragon Age into the Inquisitor's story. It weakens the other game's stories retroactively, as well as future protagonists. 

 

You may not like this, but it's true. Even one game upsets the balance. (Especially when there are only 3 games out currently) Passing the torch is the right thing to do here.

 

Like I've already said in a previous comment - DA is already Inquisitor's story. Like, on a number of levels. And whether there will be a new protagonist, the scope of both DAI and the task ahead of Inquisitor (they have to save the world - again. They've said it themselves at the end of Trespasser) carries a heavy risk of overshadowing any story new protagonist has realistic capability of carrying (especially throughout just one game).

 

Even with the loss of hand and Anchor Inquisitor is now a demigod - either in terms of reputation, or gathering of power independent from the Anchor. What's more: the one once perceived as god (one who once banished super-powerful immortal mage-kings and creator of the frikking Veil) sees them either as his nemesis or redeemer.

 

There's really not much space left, scope-wise, to go from here, unless we enter into territory of clashes between literal gods - which I just don't see happening. What's more - all if this is very much intentional. Bioware is too smart and seems to know where to go with the series too damn well to be anything like "whoops! We don't know where to go from now on with this!". Therefore whether there will be a new protagonist, and they'll have crucial decisions to make, I just don't see how realistically can be AS important to the overarching story as the Inquisitor.

 

There's also no realistic way to make Inquisitor realistically "pass the torch", especially that in Trespasser they're not sent on retirement, but given a new arc and purpose - what's more, unless we'd be introduced to a new faction, this purpose is highly unlikely to be accomplished by anyone else but Inquisitor and his/her lot, even if the organization itself is absorbed into Chantry or disbanded.

 

We've just spent an entire game building something major (what's more, it's a faction that isn't just dedicated to one task - like Wardens are to fighting Blights and darkspawn) - it would be pointless to do something like it again or try and introduce something like it again, just "because new protagonist!", or "because world, not characters!". That's just... too simplistic way to look at what is being built here, IMO.

[Former_Fiend]

 

 

While I understand your point, keep in mind you do control your character's personality, to an extent. I've had zero problem distinguishing 3 of my Inquisitors from each other, even with the significantly diminished freedom of choice compared to, say, DAO (or even DA2). So there's nothing stopping you from, in the event of dual protagonists, just making your new DA4 protagonist different from your Inquisitor.
 

 

 

See, that's exactly the problem, in my opinion. 

 

I am very much capable of making them different and contrast. But that isn't something that should be optional in the case of two protagonists sharing the same game because if they aren't opposites or at least very different, then there is no point in having two of them. And that shouldn't be on us, it should be an inherently enforced part of the game.

 

The problem with that in a Bioware structure is that you can't enforce that without the players feeling limited in their options, and that's a bad thing when options and choices are, ostensibly, what the games are built around.

[Xilizhra]

Like I've already said in a previous comment - DA is already Inquisitor's story. Like, on a number of levels. And whether there will be a new protagonist, the scope of both DAI and the task ahead of Inquisitor (they have to save the world - again. They've said it themselves at the end of Trespasser) carries a heavy risk of overshadowing any story new protagonist has realistic capability of carrying (especially throughout just one game).

If Inquisition was my story, I'd have been able to see my clan.

If Inquisition was my story, I could have responded to the Temple of Mythal as something more than a blank drone.

If Inquisition was my story, I could have spoken about my faith.

If Inquisition was my story, I wouldn't have been totally divorced from my background, with who I am as an individual mattering nothing to the game whatsoever, only having any importance due to Justinia tossing me the Anchor.

 

Inquisition is not my ****** story.

[Nixou]

Did we ever tie up loose ends with the warden or  with Hawke? 

 

 

Yes we did. It's especially noticeable with the Warden:

 

Which are his/her loose ends?

 

• The internecine conflict brewing between southern and northern Wardens
• The nature of the taint and possibility to cure it
• Whatever the Architect is doing right now.

 

All these loose ends are the result of story developments that came after the Warden's story was tied up in Witch Hunt: back then the first Warden was happy that the Order had a nice foothold in Ferelden, Avernus was either dead of working on his taint-weaponizing theories, and the Architect was either dead or well-behaved and content to have a truce with the Fereldan Commander of the Grey.

 

Wardens fighting among themselves wasn't mentioned until the end of Inquisition, the Warden's disappearance wasn't mentioned until the end of DA2 and the reason behind it not revealed until Inquisition's final third, and the fact that the Architect wasn't a singular Darkspawn but possibly one of the original Magisters and capable of body-jumping (and therefore being around even if slain by the Warden in Awakening) wasn't hinted until Corypheus' reveal in Legacy.

 

Sure, there's something to be said about Weekes' style

"The Warden's tale is done and finished, the character has no reason to be brought back" -> go back to write new plot threads where the Warden is involved

But the fact remains that all loose ends from the original story had been tied up.

[midnight tea]

If Inquisition was my story, I'd have been able to see my clan.

If Inquisition was my story, I could have responded to the Temple of Mythal as something more than a blank drone.

If Inquisition was my story, I could have spoken about my faith.

If Inquisition was my story, I wouldn't have been totally divorced from my background, with who I am as an individual mattering nothing to the game whatsoever, only having any importance due to Justinia tossing me the Anchor.

 

Inquisition is not my ****** story.

 

I said that it's INQUISITOR's story, not yours. They're still OUR Inquisitors, but they're not ourselves, nor we were ever able to shape the story in any DAO title like play-doh or something. There were always limitations - and there will always be limitations in stories like DA, especially the more installments it will get and teh story itself tightens (which is also one of reason why HoF is pretty much impossible to bring back as a protag).

 

Your expectations towards what the game was supposed to provide to you seem highly unrealistic, as well as somewhat simplistic.

[The Ascendant]

New Protagonist

Human Mage Noble

Human Slave Warrior/Rogue

Elven Mage Agent of Fen'Harel

Elven Warrior/Rogue Qunari spy/Fen'Harel spy

Qunari-Tal'Vasoth or Ben-Hassrath spy

Dwarf-Ambassadoria or Carta Warrior/Rogue

[Former_Fiend]

There were too many technical difficulties when it comes to HOF. Also, David Gaider himself revealed in one of interviews that at the time they were creating DAO, they didn't know if they'd be able to create even DAII, much less more installments of the series.

 

Hawke on the other hand apparently was groomed to be Inquisitor in DAI. Not only there are things people have dug out and connected the dots, it's confirmed in-story - Cassandra interrogates Varric to find out where Hawke is and then states verbatim in DAI that she was tasked to seek Hawke out to offer them title of Inquisitor back when Justinia still lived.

 

Things went their own way after DAII was rushed and not that well-received, hence we get a new character, though with Hawke still being instrumental in setting the stage for next game (by releasing Cory).

 

But with DAI, which was not only well-received by critics and gamers, there's a theme I see occurring in quite a few dev interviews, about DAI being the game they've wanted to do from the beginning and that it should be a game that has 'set thing straight', in terms of what series is about.

 

Spoiler

From: http://www.pcgamer.c...the-open-world/

 

Mark Darrah: In a lot of ways Inquisition has been the game that we've really wanted to make from the beginning. From a systemic perspective Dragon Age 2 is actually very similar to Dragon Age: Origins. Its bones are the same, but we've put a very different outfit on top of it, for a lack of a better term.

[...]

Because of Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age: Inquisition is having to be a lot more ambitious, to address those concerns and really try to get back much more to the roots of the franchise. Much more about tactical combat and a higher level of deliberate difficulty. More clear overall story, with the moral choices still in there, but much more in vein of Dragon Age: Origins style storytelling. You're right to ask. The goal wasn't to revolutionize the series every single time, but Dragon Age 2 forced our hand to a certain degree.

 

From: http://www.eurogamer...s-of-dragon-age

 

Mike Laidlaw: "We wanted Inquisition to be the one which people would point to and say, 'they've found their feet. They've finally nailed down what this series is about.' Not that this locks us down or shackles us in any way, it just makes a clear statement on the priorities."

 

In other words, DAI is something of a soft reset for the series. So it can now go in either directions - there's no "it has to be this!" or "it has to be that!", especially that when you really think about it, the franchise indeed didn't have much of a set identity up until DAI.

 

 

 

 

Like I've already said in a previous comment - DA is already Inquisitor's story. Like, on a number of levels. And whether there will be a new protagonist, the scope of both DAI and the task ahead of Inquisitor (they have to save the world - again. They've said it themselves at the end of Trespasser) carries a heavy risk of overshadowing any story new protagonist has realistic capability of carrying (especially throughout just one game).

 

Even with the loss of hand and Anchor Inquisitor is now a demigod - either in terms of reputation, or gathering of power independent from the Anchor. What's more: the one once perceived as god (one who once banished super-powerful immortal mage-kings and creator of the frikking Veil) sees them either as his nemesis or redeemer.

 

There's really not much space left, scope-wise, to go from here, unless we enter into territory of clashes between literal gods - which I just don't see happening. What's more - all if this is very much intentional. Bioware is too smart and seems to know where to go with the series too damn well to be anything like "whoops! We don't know where to go from now on with this!". Therefore whether there will be a new protagonist, and they'll have crucial decisions to make, I just don't see how realistically can be AS important to the overarching story as the Inquisitor.

 

There's also no realistic way to make Inquisitor realistically "pass the torch", especially that in Trespasser they're not sent on retirement, but given a new arc and purpose - what's more, unless we'd be introduced to a new faction, this purpose is highly unlikely to be accomplished by anyone else but Inquisitor and his/her lot, even if the organization itself is absorbed into Chantry or disbanded.

 

We've just spent an entire game building something major (what's more, it's a faction that isn't just dedicated to one task - like Wardens are to fighting Blights and darkspawn) - it would be pointless to do something like it again or try and introduce something like it again, just "because new protagonist!", or "because world, not characters!". That's just... too simplistic way to look at what is being built here, IMO.

 

I like how the first half of your post is capped off with "there's no reason it has to be this or it has to be that" and then the second half of the post is a very long tirade about how it has to be a continuation of the Inquisitor's story.

 

To address a few specific points; the fact that the Inquisitor has been built up to such heights is a large part of the reason I never want to play as them again.

 

And I physically could not care less that Solas views the Inquisitor as his arch rival or redeemer. I physically could not care less if, by whatever railroading, the writers have the Inquisitor feel the same. Like I said a few pages ago; the fact that he wants it is all the reason in the world that I need not to give it to him.

[actionhero112]

 

 

We've just spent an entire game building something major (what's more, it's a faction that isn't just dedicated to one task - like Wardens are to fighting Blights and darkspawn) - it would be pointless to do something like it again or try and introduce something like it again, just "because new protagonist!", or "because world, not characters!". That's just... too simplistic way to look at what is being built here, IMO.

 

The person that confronts Solas does not need to be the inquisitor. The great thing about a threat going to destroy the world, is that it affects a wide variety of people, like everyone in the world. 

 

 Oh yeah. How did the mage templar war that was built up through DA2 pan out in inquisition? A couple skirmishes in the hinterlands and then you and cory conscripted either side? People act like the entirety of DA4 will be dealing with Solas, just like they pretended that the entirety of DA3 would be the mage templar war. I've been around these forums for a long time, and have seen people be wrong on so many levels in regards to the story. Your theory about what the next game will contain is just that, a theory. 

 

Point is that you're saying the entirety of DA4 will be concerning Solas, when it could just as easily not be. And even if it was concerning Solas, the inquisitor doesn't have to be the one to confront him. Just like Hawke didn't need to be the hero to confront Cory. 

 

So don't say the writers will do anything. Because you don't know. What you think is being built could be completely wrong, just like people were wrong about the mage templar war. 

There were too many technical difficulties when it comes to HOF. Also, David Gaider himself revealed in one of interviews that at the time they were creating DAO, they didn't know if they'd be able to create even DAII, much less more installments of the series.

 

 

 

Not the point. That sentence is referencing the need to bring back the inquisitor to tie up loose ends. As if the entire world isn't full of loose ends at this point. Bringing back the Inquisitor to solely tie up loose ends ignores the loose ends introduced by previous games and characters. They deserve closure on those plot points just as much as the inquisitor does. 

 

 

 

There's also no realistic way to make Inquisitor realistically "pass the torch", especially that in Trespasser they're not sent on retirement, but given a new arc and purpose - what's more, unless we'd be introduced to a new faction, this purpose is highly unlikely to be accomplished by anyone else but Inquisitor and his/her lot, even if the organization itself is absorbed into Chantry or disbanded.

 

 

 

Pass the Torch means let someone else complete the work that you started. E.g. let someone else confront Solas. So realistically, it could easily happen.

 

 

 The inquisition doesn't even need to be in the next game. It could simply be a background organization, like the tens of others in Thedas, sparsely mentioned through the story. 

 

 

 

 

 

Like I've already said in a previous comment - DA is already Inquisitor's story. 

 

 

No. It's not. It's the story of Thedas during the Dragon Age. 

[Xilizhra]

I said that it's INQUISITOR's story, not yours. They're still OUR Inquisitors, but they're not ourselves, nor we were ever able to shape the story in any DAO title like play-doh or something. There were always limitations - and there will always be limitations in stories like DA, especially the more installments it will get and teh story itself tightens (which is also one of reason why HoF is pretty much impossible to bring back as a protag).

 

Your expectations towards what the game was supposed to provide to you seem highly unrealistic, as well as somewhat simplistic.

It wasn't my Inquisitor's story either. The story had nothing at all to do with my Inquisitor. It was about the Inquisition and whomever happened to stumble into the Anchor; who they were was completely irrelevant, because the public symbol of the Herald of Andraste was far more important to the story than the person the Inquisitor was.

[Former_Fiend]

I feel the Inquisitor just got way too big and I want to back the hell the hell away from that and go in a very different direction.

 

I hate series that go in constant escalation. I loved the fact that DA2's story was significantly smaller scale in terms of threat and stakes than DAO's.

 

And I would like to see a repeat of that pattern. DA4 doesn't need to be nearly as small as DA2 in terms of just what's at stake; you can still have Solas as the primary antagonist and the fate of the world in balance. You just don't have us as the heads of a huge organization commanding armies with a legion of followers who think we're the chosen of a god.

 

They're perfectly capable of getting a new character invested in stopping and even in redeeming Solas over the course of one game. They got me invested in defeating and sparing Loghain over the course of Origins and that was my first interaction with the character(hadn't read the novels). 

 

In fact, given that they failed to get everyone invested in the Inquisitor vs Solas story, I think trying again with a new protagonist might well be in their best interest.

[midnight tea]

I like how the first half of your post is capped off with "there's no reason it has to be this or it has to be that" and then the second half of the post is a very long tirade about how it has to be a continuation of the Inquisitor's story.

 

Then you misunderstood what I tried to say. I meant it that there's no "DA is this!" and "DA is that" claim, especially shouted by the player-base, especially in face of DAI being something of a soft reset as well as a way for the series to be set on a new, more focused course (especially compared to previous two titles, which were a bit all over the place).

 

The fact that I later back up my claim as to why think thinks are set up in this new direction for the franchise is perfectly logical, rather than a thing to be pointed out as an inconsistency.

[Nixou]

There were too many technical difficulties when it comes to HOF. Also, David Gaider himself revealed in one of interviews that at the time they were creating DAO, they didn't know if they'd be able to create even DAII, much less more installments of the series.

 

 

Well, they always intended to turn Dragon Age into a long-running franchise, as evidenced by interviews published before Origins' release (which also point that they always wanted to make the Dragon Age series single-player MMOs: Inquisition's structure wasn't improvised overnight). They weren't sure they'd succeed, but their best-case-scenario's endgame was always making the Game of Thrones of Video Games. (there's quite a lot of "game" in this sentence about a series of games...)

Which explains why Origins is what it is: a self-contained story which introduces the universe with a bang: that's what I call Martin's squirrel: hey! Look! Dragons, evil warlocks, zombie hordes and brave heroes fighting these! Okay, now that you're hooked, let me tell you the tale of feudal lords screwing the peasants in their petty conflicts that I really wanted to tell... which also creates some problem down the road, like the audience asking "Why isn't Daenerysthe Warden riding dragonsgriffins and kicking ass in WesterosThedas like you promised?"

 

Personally I don't mind their choice of formula: Dragon Age 2 is my favorite game in the series storywise, (and one of my personal top 5 RPGs from last gen) and there's no way in hell such a bleak tale would have been green-lighted without the success of Origins

[Former_Fiend]

This thread is bound and determined to suck out all love I have for this franchise.

[midnight tea]

Well, they always intended to turn Dragon Age into a long-running franchise, as evidenced by interviews published before Origins' release (which also point that they always wanted to make the Dragon Age series single-player MMOs: Inquisition's structure wasn't improvised overnight). They weren't sure they'd succeed, but their best-case-scenario's endgame was always making the Game of Thrones of Video Games. (there's quite a lot of "game" in this sentence about a series of games...)

 

Spoiler

 

Above you have a relatively recent interview with David Gaider where he states (around at 44:37) "Well... the DA epilogues existed because initially I don't know that we were certain we would get a second game".

 

(there's more in interview past of what I've quoted)

 

Well... there you have it: if epilogues in DAO survived in the final iteration of the game (and they were actually a late addition), it's relatively clear that at the time of release the fate of the franchise - even if planned as a long-running one - wasn't yet certain.

[midnight tea]

The person that confronts Solas does not need to be the inquisitor. The great thing about a threat going to destroy the world, is that it affects a wide variety of people, like everyone in the world. 

 

None will be realistically affected as personally as Inquisitor (whose Solas was a former companion of), nor any other person we know of now has any knowledge or insight to Solas and his method Inquisitor has. If there is, BW will have to spend inordinate amount of time setting a protagonist like that AGAIN, and I've already pointed out numerous problems with that. 

 

Even Hawke was brought to DAI for much less than what's between Inky and Solas now - it was more of a responsibility for releasing Corypheus, than a personal relationship with him, especially that at a time he 'killed' Cory the first time, he didn't really think of him as much more than unique darkspawn he thought he eliminated and didn't really have much to offer Quizzy other than a contact with warden in Crestwood... And you want to tell me that they've brought Hawke for as little as that, but won't bring Inky, who has way more significant information concerning the overarching threat than likely anyone else in Thedas?

 

And after everything that was set up - Solas having direct hand in everything, including the formation of Inquisition, setting things in motion by giving Cory the orb and leading them to HIS castle (Skyhold is revealed/confirmed in Trespasser to have belonged to him) and having all the hidden agenda while fighting Corypheus... you really think any other person has a motive to either kill or stop Solas?

 

Also - what's the point of an option given to players to redeem him (with high enough approval)?

 

Why would be even given that option or why would the Keep record it, if it wasn't important? Who other than Inquisitor has a reason to try and redeem him??

 

 

Oh yeah. How did the mage templar war that was built up through DA2 pan out in inquisition? A couple skirmishes in the hinterlands and then you and cory conscripted either side? People act like the entirety of DA4 will be dealing with Solas, just like they pretended that the entirety of DA3 would be the mage templar war. I've been around these forums for a long time, and have seen people be wrong on so many levels in regards to the story. Your theory about what the next game will contain is just that, a theory. 

 

Are you really serious in comparing mage/templar war to attempt to change or destroy the world by creator of the Veil itself??

 

And with all the revelations about magisters, Old Gods, Blight and Evanuris that make mage/templar wars or Orlesian civil war or even Tevinter's war with the Qunari look pitiful in comparison?

 

Also - true, my theory about the story is just a theory, but it's a theory I try and back up with logical conclusions drawn form the way the story is presented or what was said in interviews.

 

Personally I think BW will eventually have to scale the story down (they have little to no choice), but unless they want to tighten the story it's unlikely they're scaling it down entirely or present anything the like of DAII. It will have to be in some way intrinsically connected to what was already established - especially with all the suggestions that it's the Inquisition that is looking for people Solas doesn't know, specifically to stop him.

 

 

Point is that you're saying the entirety of DA4 will be concerning Solas, when it could just as easily not be. And even if it was concerning Solas, the inquisitor doesn't have to be the one to confront him. Just like Hawke didn't need to be the hero to confront Cory. 

 

So don't say the writers will do anything. Because you don't know. What you think is being built could be completely wrong, just like people were wrong about the mage templar war. 

 

I've already pointed out that Inquisitor will be looking for people in Tevinter in order to stop Solas. Even if it's not going to be the only conflict, it will be one that eventually matter the most, be it because it will be the *final* conflict or something on the route of even bigger one.

 

Also - some people have already asked the lead writer if there's at least going to be a conclusion to SolasxLavellan romance. The writer responded that he hopes that Trespasser is clear about that and that as long as they create DA4/more DA it will indeed happen. 

Considering that it would be absurd (and absurdly costly) to bring just romanced Lavellan Inquisitor for the sake of conclusion of romance, it's safe to assume other Inquisitors are coming back as well in some capacity. Needless to say, it would be also absurd if they brought Inquisitor back in a form of a codex or letter, based on what was said, as well as conclusion of Trespasser.

 

Also - I've never claimed that I KNOW what will going to happen in DA4, I'm simply pointing out what the story seems to logically lead into. Is there possibility that I am wrong? Of course there is - even if BW has a clear vision of what they want to do, they can still be thwarted by technical or financial limitations (which I hope won't happen) and that may force them to change the course, even if they didn't want to. But so far there are more reasons for return for Inquisitor in some major role and to deal with Solas personally, rather than there are reasons against it.

 

Not the point. That sentence is referencing the need to bring back the inquisitor to tie up loose ends. As if the entire world isn't full of loose ends at this point. Bringing back the Inquisitor to solely tie up loose ends ignores the loose ends introduced by previous games and characters. They deserve closure on those plot points just as much as the inquisitor does. 

 

Many things from previous games have already been tied - that has been pointed out not just by myself. Also - Inquisitor or Solas is not just "some loose end"; they've both been effectively pushed into the very core of the story.

 

Pass the Torch means let someone else complete the work that you started. E.g. let someone else confront Solas. So realistically, it could easily happen.

 

.... I've already addressed that. I'm not sure why you're treating it as if I misunderstood you.

 

 

The inquisition doesn't even need to be in the next game. It could simply be a background organization, like the tens of others in Thedas, sparsely mentioned through the story.

 

What "tens of others"? What other organization is there that can even vaguely rival what Inquisition has accomplished (Weekes even compared that to 'building an empire' at one point), or the information they've gathered or accessed during DAI or Trespasser?

 

The Wardens were almost wiped out and the remains are now in conflict. Tevinter is torn between internal power struggle and war with the Qunari. Orlais and Ferelden are weakened by various conflicts and only just got some time to try and rebuild. The Chantry is focused on rebuilding as well (so is the Circle, Templars and Seekers, depending on world-state), while the Divine (either Cass or Leli) is shown to work in secret with Inquisitor.

 

You also seem to completely ignore my point of necessity for BW to take time in future story to introduce something that can rival the scope of Inquisition, the information its members posses or the advancement of their plans concerning Solas and whatever else there is. Why should the waste their time on that, when they can push the story further with an organization we were building through all of DAI?

 

No. It's not. It's the story of Thedas during the Dragon Age. 

 

And the story of Inqusiitor is intrinsically tied with it. There's not one without the other now, especially that at the end of the very first proper epilogue DLC in the history of DA franchise, instead of being sent on retirement, they were given a new task that dwarfs that of threat Corypheus has presented.

[Former_Fiend]

\\

 

 

And the story of Inqusiitor is intrinsically tied with it. There's not one without the other now, especially that at the end of the very first proper epilogue DLC in the history of DA franchise, instead of being sent on retirement, they were given a new task that dwarfs that of threat Corypheus has presented

 

...No it doesn't. It's the exact same threat that Corypheus presented, just coming from someone more prone to wallow in self pity.

[Xilizhra]

You know, Flemeth was being set up as a powerful and alien game-changer carrying heavy implications in DAO's last DLC, but then she didn't really reveal anything new until DAI, two games later. There's no guarantee at all that the next game even will be focusing on Solas.

 

And I really, really, really want to create a protagonist who's actually native to Tevinter, and not just be forced to use the terribly underwhelming Inquisitor again.

[Former_Fiend]

Not often me and Xilizhra agree on anything but this is one of those times.

[Nixou]

Even Hawke was brought to DAI for much less than what's between Inky and Solas now - it was more of a responsibility for releasing Corypheus, than a personal relationship with him, especially that at a time he 'killed' Cory the first time, he didn't really think of him as much more than unique darkspawn he thought he eliminated and didn't really have much to offer Quizzy other than a contact with warden in Crestwood... And you want to tell me that they've brought Hawke for as little as that, but won't bring Inky, who has way more significant information concerning the overarching threat than likely anyone else in Thedas?

 

 

I suspect that the Hawke cameo was partly an experiment: let's throw in a previous protagonist in a small role and let's see how the audience reacts: will they be happy, annoyed that the character came back (Hawke suffered for quite a lot of bad press after DA2's release after all) or will they demand more?

[Former_Fiend]

You know what annoyed me the most about Hawke's cameo? It wasn't that she was so anti-blood magic despite having a romance with Merrill. It was that she was using a sword and shield when my Hawke was a pure two handed weapon user.

[Xilizhra]

Not often me and Xilizhra agree on anything but this is one of those times.

I swear I have more comments like this relating to me than any other poster does.

 

 

You know what annoyed me the most about Hawke's cameo? It wasn't that she was so anti-blood magic despite having a romance with Merrill. It was that she was using a sword and shield when my Hawke was a pure two handed weapon user.

Wait, the crap? I was hoping to use a warrior Hawke in my next import who used two-handed weapons.

[Eivuwan]

Seems like this poll created a lot of passionate debate lol.

[Former_Fiend]

I swear I have more comments like this relating to me than any other poster does.

 

 

Wait, the crap? I was hoping to use a warrior Hawke in my next import who used two-handed weapons.

 

Yup. Warrior Hawke always gets imported with sword & board, despite the default for warrior Hawke in DA2 being two handed weapons and the image in the Keep of warrior Hawke showing them wielding a two handed sword.

 

They should have included options in the keep to specify the PC's weapon style and specializations.