633 réponses à ce sujet

[NoForgiveness]

Just below the elbow, actually. I don't know why it would put off new players at all.

Didn't put me off of mgsv. Actually it's the only thing I like about snake...

[Dancing_Dolphin]

I don't understand why people keep thinking the missing hand would be so off-putting to players? The assumption is starting to annoy me.

[Phoenix_Also_Rises]

(EDIT: haha, post 222. I feel like I should get a cookie or something. Do I get a cookie? OH NO MORE ROTTEN EGGS AAAAAGH FORGET I SAID ANYTHING)

Thank you. Mother will be so proud. *wipes off tear*

[Abyss108]

 This thread is a clone of the other one with the name "New protagonist every game don't work with current game foundation" and with almost the same people (not too many), begging for a comeback of the inquisitor as the protagonist for a possible new DA game. The whole idea of a protagonist with one arm (missing almost an entire arm) is not only weird but it will put off too many potential players. I'm sure that if there will be a new game, there will be new adventures, new plots, hopefully better quests, new villains, new companions to choose from and new locations. If they have to go back to finish Solas arc, they can definitevely make it as subplot  and be done with it. There is so much more than the freaking Solas plot that the writers can create for a new game.

 

On top of it, the Inquisitor has been the most boring, bland, uninteresting protagonist out of the three DA games. Now he doesn't have his green glowing hand trick and one of his arms is gone. Time for retirement with a lot of free time to play hide & seek with Schizo-Sera or for a more advisory type of role.

 

Enter the new protagonist.

 

Do you really believe Solas trying to destroy the entire world is only going to be a subplot? Thats absurb.

 

Why would people be wierded out by a one armed protagonist? Sounds awesome to me. Lots of other people have posted the same.

 

If the Inquisitor was going to retire, she wouldn't have said she was going to stop Solas. Whether she is the protagonist or not, retirement contradicts what she said in game, numerous times.

 

If the Inquisitor was bland, you made them bland. There were plenty of opportunities to play an interesting character. And how is a one armed protagonist who was betrayed by the villain blander than any other character they have given us?

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

My point is that most arguments I've seen pro Inquisitor PC is the personal connection they have with Solas, and that is all the justification needed for them to continue into DA4. No matter that they are too conspicuous to be effective in hunting him down, no matter that he might not be the central focus of the next game, and what role would they have in a Tevinter-Qunari war that couldn't be just as well served by a new PC. 

1. The Inquisitor doesn't have to be conspicuous. There isn't television in Thedas. Most people have no idea what the Inquisitor looks like. Her own men after Haven didn't recognize her when she sat down in front of them. And if you think the arm will be a dead giveaway: prosthesis. 

 

2. Writers have stated Solas' arc will carry over into the next game, I believe they even said "conclude in the next game", though I can't find the tweet for it at the moment. He doesn't have to be present every scene. or be the only thing you deal with in the next game, but every event is likely to lead towards him in some respect or another. And you *will* be dealing with him eventually and the only one who *should* ultimately deal with him is his lover/best friend/nemesis from a narrative standpoint.

 

3. Well, first, the Inquisitor was the main target of the opening salvo of the possible new war with the Qunari. So there's that. Secondly, why do they have to have a special role to play in the Tevinter/Qunari conflict right out of the gate? The Inquisitor can find reasons to get involved once they're up there and events occur. This is assuming we'd even have anything to do with deciding the outcome of that conflict. Heck, its assuming that conflict is even going to advance one way or the other at all in DA4. They've had a cold war going for hundreds of years at this point, after all. 

[vbibbi]

I'm cross posting from one of the other debate threads on this issue...

 

 

Financially, it would be safest to have a new PC. The percentage of people who played Trespasser is going to be tiny compared to the audience Bioware hopes will purchase DA4. In order to play Trespasser, a player has to finish the entire base game, which a lot of players don't, have played on current gen systems, and purchased an additional DLC to get this new information.

 

So there is no way that Bioware is going to design the PC in the next game with so much history and baggage from the previous game. That will alienate a large percentage of players.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

I'm cross posting from one of the other debate threads on this issue...

 

 

Financially, it would be safest to have a new PC. The percentage of people who played Trespasser is going to be tiny compared to the audience Bioware hopes will purchase DA4. In order to play Trespasser, a player has to finish the entire base game, which a lot of players don't, have played on current gen systems, and purchased an additional DLC to get this new information.

 

So there is no way that Bioware is going to design the PC in the next game with so much history and baggage from the previous game. That will alienate a large percentage of players.

 

Its been their biggest financial success and biggest release to date. I mean, yeah they want TONS more people to buy the next one, but its not like only 5 people bought Inquisition.

 

And the history/baggage of the previous game, for new people, can easily be compensated for in the narrative. This is like saying Shepard or Geralt couldn't be the protags in their respective sequels cus no one would understand the events of the first game in their series if they didn't play them. A good game tells/shows you what you need to know within the game itself, making it unnecessary (though still fun and extra enlightening) to have played the previous installment. 

[Regan_Cousland]

I don't understand why people keep thinking the missing hand would be so off putting to players? The assumption is starting to annoy me.

 

Agreed. I don't find it off-putting at all. It presents an opportunity to make the inquisitor unique in a whole new way -- through the acquisition of a magical or technological prosthesis, or simply by making the inquisitor more of an underdog -- and thus more relatable -- than she's been before. 

Early in the game, you might even get to choose how you deal with your handicap. For example:

Choice 1. Your inquisitor consults Dagna or a new dwarven companion, who constructs for her an arm made out of the same living stone used in golems. She receives a unique skill-tree called "Hand of the Unbowed", which boasts a selection cool strength-based attacks.

Choice 2. Your inquisitor consults Dorian or a new mage companion, who conjures for her an arm made out of powerful spirit energy. She receives a unique skill-tree called "Hand of the Eternal", which boasts a selection of cool magical attacks.

 

Choice 3. Your inquisitor decides to continue using the basic, mechanical prosthesis that she's been wearing for the past few months. It provides no unique advantages beyond allowing her to wield her weapons as before. But any inquisitor who chooses this option receives two bonus ability points to spend in the standard skill trees, representing her growing familiarity with the device and the progress she's made in training.

 

Choice 4. (And I realize this one is a huge stretch, but it's fun to speculate about). In a subdued, emotional moment, your inquisitor decides to fully embrace her new life and removes her mechanical prosthesis. With this momentous decision, she can no longer be a two-handed warrior, a dual-wielding rogue, an archer, or any standard class of fighter. Instead, she adopts one of three unique skill-trees called "Solitary Blade", "Living Conduit" and "True Survivor".

The Solitary Blade class becomes the primary class of any warrior, who must now learn to fight with a single, one-handed weapon, but no shield.

The Living Conduit class becomes the primary class of any mage, who now channels magical energy without the aid of a staff.

The True Survivor class becomes the primary class of any rogue, who now wields either a single dagger or a small, custom-made, one-handed crossbow that can be upgraded continuously throughout the game and given a unique name, just like "Bianca". lol

A player who chooses to remain disabled can still pick abilities and passives from the regular skill trees -- but all abilities that require two hands cannot be used. She also receives a bonus ability point and a +10 bonus to willpower, representing her incredible strength of character. 
 

[vbibbi]

Its been their biggest financial success and biggest release to date. I mean, yeah they want TONS more people to buy the next one, but its not like only 5 people bought Inquisition.

 

And the history/baggage of the previous game, for new people, can easily be compensated for in the narrative. This is like saying Shepard or Geralt couldn't be the protags in their respective sequels cus no one would understand the events of the first game in their series if they didn't play them. A good game tells/shows you what you need to know within the game itself, making it unnecessary (though still fun and extra enlightening) to have played the previous installment. 

I referred to Trespasser, not DAI base game. As I said, the percentage of people who purchased and completed Trespasser is going to be a small portion of the people who purchased the base game.

 

So in the prologue, we have to get involved in the plot and setting, meet characters (most likely companions like Cassandra/Varric/Solas), get used to the game interface using the specialized mechanics accounting for one arm or a prosthesis and the mechanics for our companions who will use the standard combat gameplay, and catch new players up to how the Inquisitor has this personal history with the antagonist which took up the entirety of the previous game to describe. Or are we going to have flashes of our relationship with Solas throughout the game as we uncover his plot?

 

I haven't played the Witcher so I don't know how it handles protagonist transition between games, but in ME, I will say that the beginning to ME3 was very abrupt and if I were a new player to that game I wouldn't have known what was going on. Granted, it's the last game of a trilogy so new players shouldn't be surprised that there's a lot of backstory to catch up on. And the antagonist in ME1 is really Saren until he reveals the Reapers. After that, Shepard does not have a personal vendetta against Sovereign or Harbinger, s/he has the overarching goal of stopping unrelatable cosmic horrors from destroying the galaxy. That is different than our Inquisitor who journeyed with Solas, potentially romanced him, feels betrayed by him. A lot more variables, a lot more personal.

[vbibbi]

Agreed. I don't find it off-putting at all. It presents an opportunity to make the inquisitor unique in a whole new way -- through the acquisition of a magical or technological prosthesis, or simply by making the inquisitor more of an underdog -- and thus more relatable -- than she's been before. 

Early in the game, you might even get to choose how you deal with your handicap. For example:

Choice 1. Your inquisitor consults Dagna or a new dwarven companion, who constructs for her an arm made out of the same living stone used in golems. She receives a unique skill-tree called "Hand of the Unbowed", which boasts a selection cool strength-based attacks.

Choice 2. Your inquisitor consults Dorian or a new mage companion, who conjures for her an arm made out of powerful spirit energy. She receives a unique skill-tree called "Hand of the Eternal", which boasts a selection of cool magical attacks.

 

Choice 3. Your inquisitor decides to continue using the basic, mechanical prosthesis that she's been wearing for the past few months. It provides no unique advantages beyond allowing her to wield her weapons as before. But any inquisitor who chooses this option receives two bonus ability points to spend in the standard skill trees, representing her growing familiarity with the device and the progress she's made in training.

 

Choice 4. (And I realize this one is a huge stretch, but it's fun to speculate about). In a subdued, emotional moment, your inquisitor decides to fully embrace her new life and removes her mechanical prosthesis. With this momentous decision, she can no longer be a two-handed warrior, a dual-wielding rogue, an archer, or any standard class of fighter. Instead, she adopts one of three unique skill-trees called "Solitary Blade", "Living Conduit" or "True Survivor".

The Solitary Blade class becomes the primary class of any warrior, who must now learn to fight with a single, one-handed weapon, but no shield.

The Living Conduit class becomes the primary class of any mage, who now channels magical energy without the aid of a staff.

The True Survivor class becomes the primary class of any rogue, who now wields either a single dagger or a small, custom-made, one-handed crossbow that can be upgraded continuously throughout the game and given a unique name, just like "Bianca". lol

A player who chooses to remain disabled can still pick abilities and passives from the regular skill trees -- but all abilities that require two hands cannot be used. She also receives a bonus ability point and a +10 bonus to willpower, representing her incredible strength of character. 
 

an arm made out of the same living stone used in golems

So we will need someone's soul sacrificed to infuse into a stone hand? Golems were made by infusing stone bodies with dwarven souls, or else encasing the dwarf's body in stone and lyrium. The stone used in normal stone.

 

one of three unique skill-trees called "Solitary Blade", "Living Conduit" or "True Survivor".

But these are all weakened versions of the existing combat mechanics. One handed warrior lacks defensibility of a shield and the power of a two handed weapon. Rogues with one dagger have half of the damage. It's unrealistic to have a one-handed crossbow, as you need to reload somehow. Mage is more feasible. But all of this requires a separate skill tree just for the Inquisitor and eliminates the other basic skill trees for their use. It would be creating a secondary combat mechanic while the NPCs use the existing one, which seems like a lot of resources.

 

I will say, your ideas are awesome and well thought out, so I don't want to be really harsh. I think your ideas would work in another setting, or a Dragon Age set 50 years down the road. But as it stands now, it's too much work and explanation to implement to be worth the effort and risk of alienating some players.

[Regan_Cousland]

an arm made out of the same living stone used in golems

So we will need someone's soul sacrificed to infuse into a stone hand? Golems were made by infusing stone bodies with dwarven souls, or else encasing the dwarf's body in stone and lyrium. The stone used in normal stone.

 

C'mon, that's just knit-picking. It doesn't really matter how the stone arm is made. Thedas is full of magical weirdness to justify its existence.

And I did say that Choice 4 was a big stretch. But don't get too hung up on "realism". Having a self-reloading crossbow isn't nearly as unrealistic as Blackwall (a normal guy) being able to conjure ghost versions of himself to keep enemies at bay, or Varric dropping a lantern so that he can somehow teleport to a safe location. And how do characters wielding regular swords and arrows create so many neon explosions? Sera's leaping shot looks and sounds like a missile barrage from a fighter jet! lol

Many of the little things you might call "unrealistic" can simply be overlooked because it's a game. 

And there's supposed to be an inherent disadvantage to being a one-armed fighter. Anyone who chooses to be one would do so partly for roleplaying reasons. Because they're made of tougher stuff.

[vbibbi]

C'mon, that's just knit-picking. It doesn't really matter how the stone arm is made. Thedas is full of magical weirdness to justify its existence.

And I did say that Choice 4 was a big stretch. But don't get too hung up on "realism". Having a self-reloading crossbow isn't nearly as unrealistic as Blackwall (a normal guy) being able to conjure ghost versions of himself to keep enemies at bay, or Varric dropping a lantern so that he can somehow teleport to a safe location. And how do characters wielding regular swords and arrows create so many neon explosions? lol

Haha true enough. That has been a complaint of DAI's combat, where rogue and warrior abilities seem too much like magic. That plays into the feeling of it being a quasi MMO, in my opinion, and continuing this trend with a unique prosthesis increases that feeling.

 

And yes, there is enough magic to justify these proposed prostheses, and you have thought them out well. I just think adding that into the game is going to change the tone of the game from an RPG to a hybrid shooter-RPG. It sounds more like some sci fi action game where you can upgrade your mechanical arm with different types of energy, etc. It's getting away from the tone and setting of the DA world, and detracts from the narrative to benefit combat mechanics.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

So in the prologue, we have to get involved in the plot and setting, meet characters (most likely companions like Cassandra/Varric/Solas), get used to the game interface using the specialized mechanics accounting for one arm or a prosthesis and the mechanics for our companions who will use the standard combat gameplay, and catch new players up to how the Inquisitor has this personal history with the antagonist which took up the entirety of the previous game to describe. 

 

Yes.

 

The bolded section is what new players to any game have to experience: taking in the game's setting, interface, and gameplay mechanics. So its not some monumental feat to accomplish. Its also not ALL accomplished in the prologue. DAI (among other games) had several tooltips that popped up after the prologue as you engaged in their respective actions. And the entirety of the game's combat mechanics aren't all thrown at you at once, but are instead gained as you level.

 

And the last bit about the protagonist's history with Solas doesn't have to be one giant info dump either, but integrated into the story. The characters around the protag who are in the know can treat it as a matter of fact, mentioning it in dialogue, leaving the new player thinking, "who is that?" in a manner that leaves them curious to know more. And then the new player plays and interacts and listens and gets the gist of the story as the prologue and first chapter or two of the game play out and the protag interacts with more people. I imagine Dorian in particular could come in handy for this since he'll know the ins and outs of it all.

[ottffsse]

No way any inquisitor let's agents make such an important decision as to find the right ally to confront Solas. A meeting is unavoidable.

But the best story plot structure would be quizzy journeys to tevinter and goes missing (for whatever reason probably hiding). Former inquisition agents contact Dorian and Co and they recruite a new protagonist to find the inquisitor.

You play that character and each step of the way as you retrace the steps of the inquisitor you have active flashbacks where actually play the inquisitor in those flashbacks. You go deeper into tevinter qunari conflict along the way and in the are on the verge of finding quizzy and confronting Solas.

In the critical meeting between the new protagonist and quizzy it is revealed this was all an elaborate recruitment test. Or something of that kind.

From there the new protagonists feelings toward the inquisitor and the inquusitors actions at various stages of the game (the flashbacks) can determine the final outcome of the confrontation with Solas and secondary issues like tevinter Vs qun patriotism etc. It would make for an interesting dynamic and game if bioware designed two very different protagonists in that way. But it also means the new protagonist would be much more defined like Hawke and not a blank slate like the quizzy.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

No way any inquisitor let's agents make such an important decision as to find the right ally to confront Solas. A meeting is unavoidable.

But the best story plot structure would be quizzy journeys to tevinter and goes missing (for whatever reason probably hiding). Former inquisition agents contact Dorian and Co and they recruite a new protagonist to find the inquisitor.

You play that character and each step of the way as you retrace the steps of the inquisitor you have active flashbacks where actually play the inquisitor in those flashbacks. You go deeper into tevinter qunari conflict along the way and in the are on the verge of finding quizzy and confronting Solas.

I think this method above^ would be a very good way to do a dual protagonist scenario.

[vbibbi]

Yes.

 

The bolded section is what new players to any game have to experience: taking in the game's setting, interface, and gameplay mechanics. So its not some monumental feat to accomplish. Its also not ALL accomplished in the prologue. DAI (among other games) had several tooltips that popped up after the prologue as you engaged in their respective actions. And the entirety of the game's combat mechanics aren't all thrown at you at once, but are instead gained as you level.

 

And the last bit about the protagonist's history with Solas doesn't have to be one giant info dump either, but integrated into the story. The characters around the protag who are in the know can treat it as a matter of fact, mentioning it in dialogue, leaving the new player thinking, "who is that?" in a manner that leaves them curious to know more. And then the new player plays and interacts and listens and gets the gist of the story as the prologue and first chapter or two of the game play out and the protag interacts with more people. I imagine Dorian in particular could come in handy for this since he'll know the ins and outs of it all.

 

Yes, but if I were personally a new player and the character I'm controlling had a lot more background information on the game's antagonist I would be frustrated. There needs to be an element of the PC knowing more about the game world than they player, since the PC grew up in that world and has basic knowledge. But having a very detailed understanding of plot critical knowledge that the player only gets periodically throughout the game is not a good way to involve the player.

 

Fact is, Bioware is putting DA4 in a new location and this gives them a lot more leeway to "start fresh" with the setting and characters. This helps cut down on the diverging plots they have created which complicates sticking to a narrative that could have multiple branches. They aren't going to throw this fresh start away by having to bring all of that baggage along and dump it on the player in the tutorial.

 

No way any inquisitor let's agents make such an important decision as to find the right ally to confront Solas. A meeting is unavoidable.

But the best story plot structure would be quizzy journeys to tevinter and goes missing (for whatever reason probably hiding). Former inquisition agents contact Dorian and Co and they recruite a new protagonist to find the inquisitor.

You play that character and each step of the way as you retrace the steps of the inquisitor you have active flashbacks where actually play the inquisitor in those flashbacks. You go deeper into tevinter qunari conflict along the way and in the are on the verge of finding quizzy and confronting Solas.

In the critical meeting between the new protagonist and quizzy it is revealed this was all an elaborate recruitment test. Or something of that kind.

From there the new protagonists feelings toward the inquisitor and the inquusitors actions at various stages of the game (the flashbacks) can determine the final outcome of the confrontation with Solas and secondary issues like tevinter Vs qun patriotism etc. It would make for an interesting dynamic and game if bioware designed two very different protagonists in that way. But it also means the new protagonist would be much more defined like Hawke and not a blank slate like the quizzy.

Interesting idea. A good way to keep the Inquisitor involved and relevant without having them be the prime PC.

[Regan_Cousland]

I admit that I do quite like the idea of dual protagonists that some people have suggested. 

If we simply must have a new main character, and if Solas simply must be the Big Bad Villain -- (Big Bad Wolf? lol) -- then I suppose we could alternate between controlling a new hero based in Tevinter and the inquisitor in Southern Thedas.

The two storylines would be interdependent, with the inquistor using her remaining resources to gather information on Solas and provide support to our hero in the north, while he battles the qunari, investigates a larger mystery that involves Solas, and sends his findings back to the inquisitor. Quid pro quo.

This approach would:

1. Give us a new hero and a new romance. 

2. Allow us to retain complete control over the actions and personality of our inquisitor.

 

3. Allow the inquisitor to be the one who ultimately confronts Solas, while the Tevinter-based hero brings down his own nemesis in the north.

 

[vbibbi]

If we simply must have a new main character, and if Solas simply must be the Big Bad Villain -- (Big Bad Wolf? lol)
 

Ha!

 

I am not opposed to dual PCs if done well. I think it would be very tricky in an open world CRPG like DAI. It seems easier to implement in pure narrative stories like the Telltale games. But if Bioware is able to pull it off it would be interesting.

 

I'm not that confident in Bioware's abilities to hold my breath.

[Regan_Cousland]

I am not opposed to dual PCs if done well. I think it would be very tricky in an open world CRPG like DAI. It seems easier to implement in pure narrative stories like the Telltale games. But if Bioware is able to pull it off it would be interesting.

 

I'm not that confident in Bioware's abilities to hold my breath.

 

I agree. Dual protagonists wouldn't be my first choice here, but I'm searching for a compromise that satisfies both parties, and, if handled well, I think the one that I described above could serve. I'm also a fan of Telltale games (still waiting on that final Games of Thrones episode!) and they at least prove that you can play as multiple characters in a single game and feel a strong attachment to each of them.

[vbibbi]

I agree. Dual protagonists wouldn't be my first choice here, but I'm searching for a compromise that satisfies both parties, and, if handled well, I think the one that I described above could serve. I'm also a fan of Telltale games (still waiting on that final Games of Thrones episode!) and they at least prove that you can play as multiple characters in a single game and feel a strong attachment to each of them.

Yeah I'm enjoying the GoT game and frustrated at the Nov 17th release date.

 

I just think that level of close narration will be hard to implement with the open world format Bioware seems to be keeping for DA4. I guess it could work if, using DAI as an example, we play as PC #1 through Haven, then switch to PC #2 from Skyhold to Temple of Mythal, and then either switch back to PC #1 or have both PCs together for the end game. That would severely limit the player's ability to roleplay as the same character throughout the game, though, and would break up the open world Bioware wants to advertise into "pockets of open world divided into narrative segments."

[CardButton]

I'm cross posting from one of the other debate threads on this issue...

 

 

Financially, it would be safest to have a new PC. The percentage of people who played Trespasser is going to be tiny compared to the audience Bioware hopes will purchase DA4. In order to play Trespasser, a player has to finish the entire base game, which a lot of players don't, have played on current gen systems, and purchased an additional DLC to get this new information.

 

So there is no way that Bioware is going to design the PC in the next game with so much history and baggage from the previous game. That will alienate a large percentage of players.

Man vbibbi while I actually adore most of your posts in support of the "New" Protagonist as they allow me to see the same subject from different angles (which is why my ideal has been able to shift to Dual-Protagonist system even though I'm still pro-Inquisitor PC), please stop using budgetary excuses for Bioware to make lesser games.  Also abandoning old fans in pursuit of new ones should never be an excuse, especially when we'll already be four games into an "Anthology" with DA4.

 

Any story told in Tevinter (regardless of the PC) will be removed enough from the events of southern Thedas so that the resources that would normally be attributed to keeping the world consistent can be placed elsewhere in the game.  The only ex-companions we may even run into (or should run into) would be Dorian, Solas and perhaps Sten, who all have very little relation to the south so we should be good there.  Plus DA:I also did remarkably well in regards to sales which means realistically Bioware should have more (how much more I cannot say) flexibility in their budget.  A returning Inquisitor PC will only realistically be dragging in two actual major plot elements from the previous game (outside of their relation to Solas and Dorian).  Whether they want to Save/Stop Solas and whether they Disbanded/Retained the Inquisition.  Either way being in Tevinter would remove them quite a bit from the latter decision.  It is also doubtful we will be dealing with an "Organization Setup" situation like we did with DA:I and I can only imagine how many resources were poured into that facet of the game.  At most the Inquisitor being playable would only change the "Letters from Home" category and since these would be unvoiced they wouldn't be that expensive or difficult to produce.

 

As for the whole "Needing to Play" thing, if Solas and Dorian are in the game (which I'm sure they will be) your going to need and enormous amount of spoken exposition on both of them for a "New Player" to know who the hell they are anyway.  My thoughts, (still banking on whole Dual protagonists angle) they make the Prologue of the game from the PC Inquisitor's perspective as they are being smuggled into Tevinter as a new slave (their cover), giving an abridged version of the essential events from Inquisition and Trespasser regarding Solas.  This would serve as a basic game mechanic tutorial, introduce Solas and Dorian (and a brief revelation on whatever relationship your Inquisitor had with them) and end with the few important clips from Trespasser (Disband/Retain and Save/Stop decisions).  Ending with a nice scenic view of Minrathous.  

 

Then the Chapter 1 begins and our perspective switches to the Origin of our new Tevinter PC.  We get a nice long amount of time setting up for who they are, what their backstory is, where they are in Tevinter and what their doing and their relation to the story (I still vouch for the new PC's central story should be the Slave Rebellion/Social Revolution of Tevinter).  Only after the new PC concludes some critical moment in Ch.1 (which could take quite a while) do we switch back to the PC Inquisitor and get to deal with what they were doing during that same period of time.

[ottffsse]

What I am not a fan of is playing again in fereldan and orlais though. It would be stronger that the quizzy is in a foreign country and need ahem a "left hand" to be more effective. The best solution to a a double protagonist story is they naturally would compensate for each other's weaknesses but also that there be some form of friction between them to heighten drama and player involvement in the story. Of course that means one of those protagonists has to be pretty defined in their personality or at least background at least to a point of being as developed as Hawke in da2 (that game btw was more narrative focused than Dai and also had a frame story structure with varric recounting to Cassandra). Also I am assuming that as any well written villain Solas involvement will be more hidden (at least he seems the type to stay and puppeteer things from the background). That means there have to be other forms of visible and apparent friction to drive the story forward and make it appear dynamic and intricate. And a mentor / pupil dynamic between the quizzy and protégé could be one of those elements. Of course this is just free speculation atm. BTW I honestly think a players perception of choice / choice of actions will seem more "livelier" at least if one plays two significant characters instead of one as actions / choices of one can complement or negate what the other is trying to accomplish and vice versa.

[vbibbi]

Man vbibbi while I actually adore most of your posts in support of the "New" Protagonist as they allow me to see the same subject from different angles (which is why my ideal has been able to shift to Dual-Protagonist system even though I'm still pro-Inquisitor PC), please stop using budgetary excuses for Bioware to make lesser games.  Also abandoning old fans in pursuit of new ones should never be an excuse, especially when we'll already be four games into an "Anthology" with DA4.

Well thank you for the comment about my posts.

 

For budgetary concerns, I'm playing devil's advocate, but it's also the realistic devil's advocate. Sure, ideally, the next came could incorporate all of the ideas in this thread. But realistically, Bioware has a budget and a deadline, and they have to work within that framework to publish a game and hope to make a profit.

 

I am not advocating for them to make a lesser game, I'm trying to be realistic in predicting the level of resources they can devote to this aspect of the next game, and how likely these suggestions will be. And I definitely do not advocate them dropping longtime fans in favor of new ones. Unfortunately, that seems to be their business practice in recent years. They claimed that ME3 is a good place for new players to enter the Mass Effect world. They made DAI for old and new gen to maximize profits and then dropped old gen support halfway through the release of DLC. They are expanding into multiplayer, where there are people who purchase DAI only for that aspect and have not played the single player game.

 

So I am thinking of the issue from Bioware's perspective on what makes the most business sense. And I can only hope that what they decide is good business also means they make a solid game.

[Regan_Cousland]

It would be stronger that the quizzy is in a foreign country and need ahem a "left hand" to be more effective. The best solution to a double protagonist story is they naturally would compensate for each other's weaknesses but also that there be some form of friction between them to heighten drama and player involvement in the story.

 

[Because Solas will remain mostly in the background] there have to be other forms of visible and apparent friction to drive the story forward and make it appear dynamic and intricate. And a mentor / pupil dynamic between the quizzy and protégé could be one of those elements. 

 

Whilst I'm not against having dual protagonists, I don't think having protagonists working that closely with one another would be feasible. It's a nice idea for a storybook or a movie, but, in a game, you can't really have two PCs in the same room, discussing important issues, and retain control of both them. Not only would you be talking to yourself, but you'd be having extremely dull and agreeable conversations that benefit both of your characters as much as possible. lol

And players certainly wouldn't be happy letting BioWare's writers take complete charge of one of their PCs during these encounters. 

 

BTW I honestly think a players perception of choice / choice of actions will seem more "livelier" at least if one plays two significant characters instead of one as actions / choices of one can complement or negate what the other is trying to accomplish and vice versa.

 

I like that. It could work -- if the new hero and the inquisitor aren't in the same room. 

For example, the inquisitor might be aware that an extremely dangerous spy has infiltrated her ranks, and she might know exactly who this spy is. The best and safest thing for her to do would be to arrest, and then imprison or execute, the spy.

 

But what if imprisoning or killing said spy disrupts the plans of your other hero? Maybe your other hero needs the inquisitor to wait a little bit longer before making the arrest because the spy is the only person who can provide a clue to the whereabouts of something that the new hero is searching for.

What does your inquisitor do?!

Let's say she puts the Inquisition first and has the spy arrested. The spy, a fanatic, kills himself with a deadly potion concealed in his boot-heel before being judged or interrogated.

The good news: The inquisition is safe and secure.

 

The bad news: Your other hero doesn't have the crucial intel he needs and has to spend all of the gold in his possession to convince someone to tell him where to go next. And despite spending all of that gold, the intel he receives is faulty and gets him into an otherwise avoidable confrontation with a very angry carta hitman and his pet bronto.

Now let's say that the inquisitor chooses Option B and allows the spy to wander her establishment unchecked for the time being. 

The good news: Feeling safe and secure, the spy makes a mistake, and inquisition agents uncover crucial intel which they deliver forthwith to our hero in the north. Our other hero now gets to keep all of his hard-earned sovereigns and gets to move ahead with his quest without getting into any problematic encounters.

The bad news: Realising that his cover is blown, but still on the loose, the spy makes a desperate bid to assassinate the inquistor, but, failing, settles for your kindly quartermaster instead, slitting her throat with a dagger and leaving her to bleed out into the beautiful flower-garden she loved so much.

[renfrees]

For all of you who wants the Inquisitor back - how do you think they're going to handle romances in this case? Romantic relations are the signature of Bioware's games and a large number of players chose to pursue them. What to do then with a new romantic options - infidelity, chastity or a break-up to the previous romances? Since you know, 6/8 of the Inquisitor's LI's almost surely won't be present in the next game.