527 réponses à ce sujet

[Former_Fiend]

they can always up and move to a new area with just passing mentions!

 

More seriously, I think this is might be the end of Tevinter.  For one it'd be a little simplistic if we just go to Tevinter and they can put out people capable of taking on an ancient elven deity, there's not a lot of dramatic tension in that sort of story, so there will have to be some upping of the stakes, either through the fall of Minrathous or the works of Solas and his followers.

 

I'm personally of the opinion that the Qunari need to get the better of the conflict. I just think that from a story telling stand point the Qunari are starting to look like a paper tiger; they need some wins to build them back up.

[Ariella]

I'm personally of the opinion that the Qunari need to get the better of the conflict. I just think that from a story telling stand point the Qunari are starting to look like a paper tiger; they need some wins to build them back up.

It'd be nice to come in with the Qun occupying at least a part of the mainland. Some of Tevinter and maybe Rivain.

[CardButton]

I'm personally of the opinion that the Qunari need to get the better of the conflict. I just think that from a story telling stand point the Qunari are starting to look like a paper tiger; they need some wins to build them back up.

Agreed!  My thoughts were if there is also an Social Reform/Slave Rebellion Arc in DA4 it be partially the cause of the War.  Historically Social Reform (especially Bottom-Up) which the new PC should be utilizing to make sure they are not clone/proxy Dorian (who is using Top-Down) creates temporary weaknesses (economically and politically) in the country they are taking place, but allow for far greater changes than the method Dorian is probably using.  The bigger the attempted changes (Freeing the Slaves/Making the rule of the Country Not Mage Only, for example) the bigger the temporary weakness.  If this weakness isn't enough temptation or an advantage for the Qunari to try to finish the war, I don't know what would be.

 

Plus it would be kind of interesting to have the attempts of Dorian and the New PC to "fix" Tevinter actually put the country in a greater state of risk (again temporarily) than it has been since Andraste's day.  At best a socially/economically/politically weakened Tevinter might be able to push the Qun back to another stand still (I doubt that such a long standing conflict would end in DA4), but the Qunari could certainly do a serious amount of damage, take a ton of land and indoctrinate a lot of people before that happened.

[Aren]

I'm personally of the opinion that the Qunari need to get the better of the conflict. I just think that from a story telling stand point the Qunari are starting to look like a paper tiger; they need some wins to build them back up.

.In DAO,in the codex,they were painted as this powerful warmongers,a skin lika steal,the dragon blood and also a better technology,they put thedas in danger,now they just lose badly  since DAII.

[Silcron]

I just thought of a (rather obvious if you've been in this forms long enough) reason for the IQ not to return for DA4: Romances. As we all know they have become a major selling point for Bioware games and they're not going to have IQ cheat on past LIs or just bring all possible LIs as companions for 4.

I don't think they'll even do dual protagonist tbh, maybe one mission in which you control him (like we did with Joker in ME2.) but that's just my opinion.

[darkway1]

I just thought of a (rather obvious if you've been in this forms long enough) reason for the IQ not to return for DA4: Romances. As we all know they have become a major selling point for Bioware games and they're not going to have IQ cheat on past LIs or just bring all possible LIs as companions for 4.

I don't think they'll even do dual protagonist tbh, maybe one mission in which you control him (like we did with Joker in ME2.) but that's just my opinion.

 

I just thought of a (rather obvious if you've been in this forms long enough) reason for the IQ not to return for DA4: Romances. As we all know they have become a major selling point for Bioware games and they're not going to have IQ cheat on past LIs or just bring all possible LIs as companions for 4.

I don't think they'll even do dual protagonist tbh, maybe one mission in which you control him (like we did with Joker in ME2.) but that's just my opinion.

 

A few people here have already pointed out a list of reasons why continuing the Inquisitors story is problematic........it's exact why DAO wasn't continued,diversity and game choice makes story continuity impossible.

 

I think it was wrong of Bioware to give the impression that the Inquisitor's story would continue when it clearly can't,either way I see no harm what so ever in Bioware simply communicating where they intend to take the next game and put an end to so much speculation.

[Heimdall]

Agreed! My thoughts were if there is also an Social Reform/Slave Rebellion Arc in DA4 it be partially the cause of the War. Historically Social Reform (especially Bottom-Up) which the new PC should be utilizing to make sure they are not clone/proxy Dorian (who is using Top-Down) creates temporary weaknesses (economically and politically) in the country they are taking place, but allow for far greater changes than the method Dorian is probably using. The bigger the attempted changes (Freeing the Slaves/Making the rule of the Country Not Mage Only, for example) the bigger the temporary weakness. If this weakness isn't enough temptation or an advantage for the Qunari to try to finish the war, I don't know what would be.

Plus it would be kind of interesting to have the attempts of Dorian and the New PC to "fix" Tevinter actually put the country in a greater state of risk (again temporarily) than it has been since Andraste's day. At best a socially/economically/politically weakened Tevinter might be able to push the Qun back to another stand still (I doubt that such a long standing conflict would end in DA4), but the Qunari could certainly do a serious amount of damage, take a ton of land and indoctrinate a lot of people before that happened.

The reason Bottom-Up social change tends to be more destructive is because it tends to be more revolution than reform, throwing the entire social order into chaos with often unpredictable results. Reform is about changing things for the better without totally upending society.

If anything, I could see us helping Dorian and Maevaris change things for the better Top-Down so that the Qun looks less appealing to slaves and poor non-mages and heading off the kind of destructive upheaval that would make it impossible for Tevinter to oppose the Qunari.

Though I would remind people that the Qun conquered most of Tevinter and besieged Minrathous in the first war. Tevinter still managed to push them back to the sea. I wouldn't underestimate the nationalism of the Tevinter citizenry

[Super Drone]

I just thought of a (rather obvious if you've been in this forms long enough) reason for the IQ not to return for DA4: Romances. As we all know they have become a major selling point for Bioware games and they're not going to have IQ cheat on past LIs or just bring all possible LIs as companions for 4.

I don't think they'll even do dual protagonist tbh, maybe one mission in which you control him (like we did with Joker in ME2.) but that's just my opinion.

 

This. 

 

Lots of people want new Romances, but continuing with the Inquisitor means they will need to break the resources for romances up between new LI and cameos or scenes with the 8 old LIs, which means even less content per romance than DAI. Add to that the awkward, jarring way they handled changing romances from game to game in Mass Effect, and it makes trying to do romances with a returning character just about the least appealing idea I can think of.

[Ariella]

A few people here have already pointed out a list of reasons why continuing the Inquisitors story is problematic........it's exact why DAO wasn't continued,diversity and game choice makes story continuity impossible.
 
I think it was wrong of Bioware to give the impression that the Inquisitor's story would continue when it clearly can't,either way I see no harm what so ever in Bioware simply communicating where they intend to take the next game and put an end to so much speculation.

They specifically said this is an epilogue piece, which means end of story. The Inquisitor's story was never about defeating Solas. It was about the Breach and Corypheus.

But at the same time, if we hadn't had that final conversation with him, people would be screaming to the high heavens that they were robbed.

[Iakus]

People wanted DA2 to be about the further adventures of the Warden

And some wanted DAI to continue Hawke's adventures

So of course, there will be calls for the next DA game to continue with the Inquisitor

 

All of this has happened before, and will happen again.

[Ariella]

People wanted DA2 to be about the further adventures of the Warden
And some wanted DAI to continue Hawke's adventures
So of course, there will be calls for the next DA game to continue with the Inquisitor
 
All of this has happened before, and will happen again.

Aha... the classics. Peter Pan.

Though most people think of it as the BSG reboot.

[Darkly Tranquil]

I think it was wrong of Bioware to give the impression that the Inquisitor's story would continue when it clearly can't,either way I see no harm what so ever in Bioware simply communicating where they intend to take the next game and put an end to so much speculation.

At this stage, they probably haven't made a final decision on exactly what they are going to do. The next game isn't even officially green lit yet, so everything is probably still up in the air. I doubt they will say anything substantive about their plans until they have a script for DA4 fully written and the game has been given the go ahead. Heck, even then they may not tell us anything until they have an alpha build developed. Most game devs are very loathe to make any kinds of definitive statements to fans about their plans for future projects because almost anything aspect of a game can undergo huge changes between initial planning and final implementation, and fans tend to react badly when the final version doesn't match the pre-release indications (just look at the situation with the Crestwood sequence from the pre-alpha build that was showed at that convention then cut from the final game).

[Iakus]

 

I think it was wrong of Bioware to give the impression that the Inquisitor's story would continue when it clearly can't,either way I see no harm what so ever in Bioware simply communicating where they intend to take the next game and put an end to so much speculation.

 

The Inquisitor's story continues via headcanon.  Nothing wrong with that, they gave us plenty of material to work with.  Lots of possibilities.

 

 It's not like he/she was left a faceless torso in the ruins of Halamshiral or something 

[Ieldra]

The Inquisitor's story continues via headcanon.  Nothing wrong with that, they gave us plenty of material to work with.  Lots of possibilities.

 

 It's not like he/she was left a faceless torso in the ruins of Halamshiral or something 

I'm fine with that....I just wish the message sent by Trespasser's ending wasn't so ambivalent. Maybe it couldn't be avoided, since after everything that happened it would make no sense for the Inquisitor to do something completely different, but it could still have looked less like a sequel hook, especially for a Lavellan.

 

They should clarify this as soon as possible.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I think it was wrong of Bioware to give the impression that the Inquisitor's story would continue when it clearly can't,either way I see no harm what so ever in Bioware simply communicating where they intend to take the next game and put an end to so much speculation.

How can the Inquisitor's story "clearly can't" continue? I've seen no irrefutable evidence that makes it clear they can't. 

[Ariella]

How can the Inquisitor's story "clearly can't" continue? I've seen no irrefutable evidence that makes it clear they can't.

Because Bioware has said it's over.

http://www.gameinfor...hSVeH9I.twitter

Question right under the trailer at the very end. Dragon Age is about a time and setting not any one character.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Because Bioware has said it's over.

http://www.gameinfor...hSVeH9I.twitter

Question right under the trailer at the very end. Dragon Age is about a time and setting not any one character.

At no point in that answer do they say that the Inquisitor's time is done. The Inquisition as the organization we saw it as in DAI yes, but not the Inquisitor. They say how they love how they can tell new stories with new protagonists, but never say the Inquisitor is done yet. Their answer also works with the current story being a duology. And as others have said before, having a returning character doesn't make the story about them rather than the world, but just seeing two parts of the world through the same character.

[Ariella]

At no point in that answer do they say that the Inquisitor's time is done. The Inquisition as the organization we saw it as in DAI yes, but not the Inquisitor. They mention they love how they can tell new stories with new protagonists, but never say the Inquisitor is done yet. And as others have said before, having a returning character doesn't make the story about them rather than the world, but just seeing two parts of the world through the same character.

Actually it states straight out what they've been saying for years. Each game is a chapter. Each chapter has a new protagonist. Trespasser is the end of DAI, which is the Inquisitor's story.

It's not about how they 'like' telling stories with new protagonists but "With Dragon Age we've always been committed to providing an experience that has chapters, with new protagonists and new stories being told, because we it as a series about a time and place rather than an individual character."
http://www.gameinfor...hSVeH9I.twitter

Reposting link as citation.

That being said, it's pretty emphatic that they're keeping with the new protagonist concept the series is based on. And it's not like this is out of the blue...

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Actually it states straight out what they've been saying for years. Each game is a chapter. Each chapter has a new protagonist. Trespasser is the end of DAI, which is the Inquisitor's story.

No, DAI is the Inquisition's story. Remember, the stories aren't about the protagonist.

 

It's not about how they 'like' telling stories with new protagonists but "With Dragon Age we've always been committed to providing an experience that has chapters, with new protagonists and new stories being told, because we it as a series about a time and place rather than an individual character."
http://www.gameinfor...hSVeH9I.twitter

And as I said above, there is nothing in their statement that every chapter has only one game. Their statement supports the concept of a chapter having multiple games to tell it. They are speaking in a broader aspect than just DA4, but the DA franchise as a whole.

 

That being said, it's pretty emphatic that they're keeping with the new protagonist concept the series is based on. And it's not like this is out of the blue...

It's only emphatic to you because you think it is supporting what you want, when the reality is it is left vague and broad. If DA4 has the Inquisitor and DA5 has a new protagonist, they are still doing what they are saying. 

[ComedicSociopathy]

I'm fine with that....I just wish the message sent by Trespasser's ending wasn't so ambivalent. Maybe it couldn't be avoided, since after everything that happened it would make no sense for the Inquisitor to do something completely different, but it could still have looked less like a sequel hook, especially for a Lavellan.

 

They should clarify this as soon as possible.

 

Wait for three years. 

[AresKeith]

No, DAI is the Inquisition's story. Remember, the stories aren't about the protagonist.

 

And each protagonist is apart of that chapter 

[AresKeith]

And as I said above, there is nothing in their statement that every chapter has only one game. Their statement supports the concept of a chapter having multiple games to tell it. They are speaking in a broader aspect than just DA4, but the DA franchise as a whole.

 

That's why DLCs and expansions exist 

[Ariella]

No, DAI is the Inquisition's story. Remember, the stories aren't about the protagonist.

No, it's the Inquisitior's story. The series isn't about one character. That's the quote, not the story.

And as I said above, there is nothing in their statement that every chapter has only one game. Their statement supports the concept of a chapter having multiple games to tell it. They are speaking in a broader aspect than just DA4, but the DA franchise as a whole.

Where are you getting this? Each game is a chapter, not multiple games being a single chapter. This has pretty much been the thing since day one of Dragon Age. They have never done anything like you're suggesting. Each game is a self contained story for the PC, it has wide reaching consequences for others, but at the end the story of the pc and game is done.
 

It's only emphatic to you because you think it is supporting what you want, when the reality is it is left vague and broad. If DA4 has the Inquisitor and DA5 has a new protagonist, they are still doing what they are saying.

No, they aren't, because new protagonists each game has been a design philosophy since the beginning.

Mike refers to Trespasser as the end of the Inquisition chapter of Dragon Age. Inquisition is the story of the Inquisitor.

Not exactly vague or broad, especially considering we've been told for years that we'll get a new protag.

[ComedicSociopathy]

The main argument as to why Inky should be coming back as protag in DA 4: Wolf Hunt is because they have a previous relationship with Solas that cannot be done for a new protag. Couldn't I say the same thing for bringing back Inquisition's companions? They also have an unique relationship with Solas that new companions wouldn't have. You could even argue that there stories with Solas haven't concluded either, I'm sure Cassandra feels rather betrayed by Solas. Why shouldn't Bioware continue that story line DA4? 

 

Also, as people who know just how dangerous Solas is and can be why wouldn't they drop whatever they were doing and help the Inquisitor save the world, again? You could argue that Solas knows them to well and have counters if they were involved, but the exact same thing could be said about the Inquisitor. 

[Ariella]

You could argue that Solas knows them to well and have counters if they were involved, but the exact same thing could be said about the Inquisitor.

I wouldn't go anywhere near saying that the Inquisitor knows a being of several thousand years very well over a year friendship. Whereas Solas pretty much molded the Inquisitor.

It was never a relationship between peers.