527 réponses à ce sujet

[CardButton]

I would like them to reach the end of The Dragon Age by the end of the DLC's for the next game. I'm pretty sure this won't happen though ...

It might be possible ... it depends on how long of campaigns they want for those DLCs.  Kal-Sharok and the Anderfels (Weisshaupt) will probably end up in the same bit of content considering they are so close together.  Whether that content is a new game or a DA:A style DLC, I don't know, but there may be a bit too much meat on them bones to handle in a simple DLC.  I would be surprised if we're dealing with Solas in DA:4 that we wouldn't go into the Arlathan Forest at some point, considering it's strong connections to both the Tevinter Imperium and the Ancient Elvhen.  Since both the Anderfels (plus Kal-Sharok) and Arlathan Forest are located very close to Tevinter I suppose it is feasible that we could end up dealing with them both by the end of the DLC's of DA4 (and DA4 itself).

 

That would really only leave the Qun-lands I think in terms of really interesting areas to deal with before the end of the "Dragon" Age.  I mean they are again strongly related to Tevinter ... I just don't know how feasible it is to create a DLC around such a MASSIVE organization and culture like the Qun (even if they themselves are relatively simple).

[Ieldra]

I think we can take this to mean that they're currently thinking of the next DA game as having a new protagonist (source):

 

"This is our final piece of content for the Inquisition chapter of the Dragon Age world, so it puts it in a unique space. We’re making a commitment that this is an ending, not a DLC slotted somewhere in the story. This is how it finishes. Of course, with Dragon Age, we’ve always been committed to providing an experience that has chapters, with new protagonists and news stories being told, because we see it as a series about a time and a place rather than an individual character."

 

(1) Each new chapter has a new protagonist.

(2) Trespasser ends the Inquisition chapter.

 

it follows, then, that the next game will start a new chapter, thus featuring a new protagonist. Of course, Trespasser's ending didn't quite work as intended. Every ending that doesn't have the protagonist in a stable state is also a possible beginning, and in this case the beginning aspect came across too strongly. Nonetheless, I think they should stick to their planned structure. Fiddling with the big picture just because an aspect of an earlier chapter didn't work as intended can only result in a greater mess.

[CardButton]

I think we can take this to mean that they're currently thinking of the next DA game as having a new protagonist (source):

 

"This is our final piece of content for the Inquisition chapter of the Dragon Age world, so it puts it in a unique space. We’re making a commitment that this is an ending, not a DLC slotted somewhere in the story. This is how it finishes. Of course, with Dragon Age, we’ve always been committed to providing an experience that has chapters, with new protagonists and news stories being told, because we see it as a series about a time and a place rather than an individual character."

 

(1) Each new chapter has a new protagonist.

(2) Trespasser ends the Inquisition chapter.

 

it follows, then, that the next game will start a new chapter, thus featuring a new protagonist. Of course, Trespasser's ending didn't quite work as intended. Every ending that doesn't have the protagonist in a stable state is also a possible beginning, and in this case the beginning aspect came across too strongly. Nonetheless, I think they should stick to their planned structure. Fiddling with the big picture just because an aspect of an earlier chapter didn't work as intended can only result in a greater mess.

Your right, Bioware did a cataclysmally awful job "ending" their story by getting the character more involved in Solas and making them the only person in the world that he admits his plan of ending the world to.  Great way of ending a character Bioware by getting dragging them more into future events to come, condemning them and everyone they care about to death if they do not continue to act, and simultaneously showing that very few people consider the threat Solas represents seriously by having Orlais and Fereldon (the very countries the Inquisition helped) still care more about their Political Machinations than the potential end of the world (when they still forced the vote of leashing or disbanding the Inquisition).

 

I really am starting to hate this point because it precludes that a returning PC in the same era could not work for the setting of Thedas.  If the Setting of Thedas is the primary focus of the Dragon Age game's then I'm going to just throw this out there. 

 

If the focus of DA is the Thedas, then that means that Thedas is our protagonist and our PC's are merely their Companions helping them conquer events.  That means that like any good Protagonist they are expected to grow, expected to change, expected to have a Beginning, Middle and End (a new Age of Thedas would mark the end of the previous PC Thedas and the start of the Next).  If this is the case that Bioware wants to argue then I argue this in retort.  If Thedas truly is our protagonist (not the hero) then you are expected to do what is best for the story of Thedas as a Setting and as a PC.  If that means a Hero PC returns for 2 games, you do it.  If that means more limited PC race variety in a setting where that would make more sense to have (which I personally believe applies to Tevinter the most Human-Centric society in the world), you do it.  If that means sacrificing game-play elements for the sake of the story, you do it!  If, at any moment, Bioware's adherence to "One PC per Game" or even "Multiple Choices of Races" actually detracts from the setting and stories of Thedas, then they are full of **** because they are sacrificing what might be best for Thedas, for Game-Play; and that very rule is simply an excuse.

[Heimdall]

@Cardbutton

Just because the Inquisitor won't by the protagonist, though I still hold out hope for a non-combat dual protagonist role, doesn't mean they won't continue to be in the story and be involved with taking down Solas. Dorian's sending stone all but confirms they will be, I believe.

[darkway1]

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).

 

I am aware of how development works,I'm not asking for Bioware to reveal any story content etc..........I just feel that large amounts of people have the impression that the next game will continue the Inquisitor's story,due to the final scene's in the Trespasser DLC,this is an issue created by Bioware,which has given some fans a false impression.

Again,I see no harm in simply addressing this issue and telling fans that the Inquisitors story (as main character) is done or not?.At least everyone will be on the same page and fans can speculate on valid aspects of future DA games.

[CardButton]

@Cardbutton

Just because the Inquisitor won't by the protagonist, though I still hold out hope for a non-combat dual protagonist role, doesn't mean they won't continue to be in the story and be involved with taking down Solas. Dorian's sending stone all but confirms they will be, I believe.

Right   And I do apologize with the apparent angst of my previous post, but I was using it to prove a point rather than argue for the return of the Inquisitor PC (As much as I would like it). 

 

The reason I seem to argue with Pro-New PC advocates more than I do with those that are Pro-Inquisitor is that it is simply easier (I do see a lot of merit in a New PC as well, after all).  The thing is (in general), Pro-Inquisitor advocates tend to center their opinions on to why they personally would like to see the Inquisitor to return as a PC and then try to build a scenario where the Inquisitor could feasibly return.  Their ultimate goal being that they show the Inquisitor's return as a PC might have some merit narritatively to the story of Thedas   Now again this is a generalization, but in regards to Pro-New PC people I see them using apparent "logic" or "facts" (like the Inquisitor is missing an arm, or Bioware said "One PC per Game") a lot more when it comes to arguing against the return of the Inquisitor, rather then them trying to show the merits of a new PC and how they would be serve a better job in a narrative sense than a returning Inquisitor (in a situation where we could only have one).  Some Pro-New PC advocates on these threads have done a remarkable job with showing the merits of a new PC and have managed to change my mind extensively (when I first started posting here and similar threads I was a strong Sole Inquisitor PC person). 

 

My chief concern for DA4 is ultimately the creation of the best story, since it is an RPG and that's what I play it for.  If that means a sole new PC, I'm on board.  If that means a returning Inquisitor PC, great!  If we get a Dual PC system (of various types and methods), fantastic!  Simply getting a new PC so we can have a "clean slate" does nothing to tempt me into wanting them.  As selfish as this is for me to write I would prefer that Pro-New PC players focus on what could be possible (and what they want to see) in a sole New PC setting, rather than using what are ultimately silly excuses in order to argue against the Inquisitor PC's return (and yes, the missing arm argument, the budgetary argument and the "One PC a Game" argument are silly excuses).  

 

Sharing your visions for DA 4 (and the good narrative points that come with those visions) simply holds more impact than trying argue for the sake of something, by arguing against something else (arguing for the sake of a New PC by arguing against a returning Inquisitor PC, for example). 

[Heimdall]

*snip*

I get it, though I've been known to throw out the arm loss argument at times.  Not because I think it makes the Inquisitor an invalid, but because I think it was a very calculated move on Bioware's part to excuse the Inquisitor not being on the front line in the future.

 

It's hard to speculate about a new PC DA4 because we don't have much information aside from a location, that Dorian is probably involved, Solas will play a role and the Qunari are attacking.  That might seem like a lot, but the fun of a new character is partly in a new perspective.  They can't just be chasing after Solas the whole time.  So...  It's hard.  I wrote a speculative prologue thread that's fallen off the front page for some of my ideas.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I get it, though I've been known to throw out the arm loss argument at times.  Not because I think it makes the Inquisitor an invalid, but because I think it was a very calculated move on Bioware's part to excuse the Inquisitor not being on the front line in the future.

If that's why they did it, that's disgusting. 

[Nefla]

@Cardbutton

Just because the Inquisitor won't by the protagonist, though I still hold out hope for a non-combat dual protagonist role, doesn't mean they won't continue to be in the story and be involved with taking down Solas. Dorian's sending stone all but confirms they will be, I believe.

That would be the second worst possible outcome for me (the worst being the inquisitor returns as a Hawke/Revan-esque NPC). I would rather have the inquisitor die of an infected boo-boo on twitter before DA4 is released than have her back as a crippled advisor.

 

If that's why they did it, that's disgusting. 

I agree, but I also think that was exactly their reasoning.

[AresKeith]

If that's why they did it, that's disgusting. 

 

Except for the fact that militaries have done this, and prosthetic limbs doesn't seem to have been discovered in the DA universe yet

[Ieldra]

If that's why they did it, that's disgusting. 

Why? It's a perfectly valid way to take the Inquisitor out of the picture as a frontline combatant. Nobody would even talk about it if there wasn't a conflicting message sent by the encounter with Solas.

[Wulfram]

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.

That is true.

But lots of people know the Inquisitor, they're a public figure. It doesn't make Solas special. Whereas rather few people know Solas, so even the limited insight the Inquisitor possesses makes them special.

[AresKeith]

Why? It's a perfectly valid way to take the Inquisitor out of the picture as a frontline combatant. Nobody would even talk about it if there wasn't a conflicting message sent by the encounter with Solas.

 

And considering how people didn't like the PC disappearing or a forced death, this was a much better route 

[Ariella]

That is true.

But lots of people know the Inquisitor, they're a public figure. It doesn't make Solas special. Whereas rather few people know Solas, so even the limited insight the Inquisitor possesses makes them special.

But we're not talking public knowledge. We're talking about a person who was by your side the entire time, knows how you think and how you'll react to any given situation.

For all intents and purposes, Solas shaped the IQ. Whatever special insight she might have on him is countered by the fact he as more on her. However, having someone he can't predict alters things. It changes the game.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Except for the fact that militaries have done this, and prosthetic limbs doesn't seem to have been discovered in the DA universe yet

What modern day militaries on Earth do is irrelevant since Dragon Age is not set on modern day Earth. And on Earth in medieval times as long as you could still fight the militaries didn't care if you had a missing limb and/or a prosthetic. 

And there is no evidence that Thedas hasn't discovered prosthetics yet, while there is evidence for them having it both ingame(the contraption you have if you become a Red Jenny) and metagame(The Iron Bull being planned to have one and writers saying anything is possible when asked on the subject). 

 

Why? It's a perfectly valid way to take the Inquisitor out of the picture as a frontline combatant. Nobody would even talk about it if there wasn't a conflicting message sent by the encounter with Solas.

Because saying that a person can't be a hero because they are handicapped is a terrible thing to say. Especially from a company that's all about being progressive. I guess they are only progressive when it comes to dealing with things involving what's between someone's legs. 

 

And considering how people didn't like the PC disappearing or a forced death, this was a much better route 

I'd have taken either of those over what they did in a heartbeat. 

[AresKeith]

 

What modern day militaries on Earth do is irrelevant since Dragon Age is not set on modern day Earth. And on Earth in medieval times as long as you could still fight the militaries didn't care if you had a missing limb and/or a prosthetic. 

And there is no evidence that Thedas hasn't discovered prosthetics yet, while there is evidence for them having it both ingame(the contraption you have if you become a Red Jenny) and metagame(The Iron Bull being planned to have one and writers saying anything is possible when asked on the subject). 

 

Which we don't know the time frame of and the Iron Bull one was cut 

 

Because saying that a person can't be a hero because they are handicapped is a terrible thing to say. Especially from a company that's all about being progressive. I guess they are only progressive when it comes to dealing with things involving what's between someone's legs. 

 

That's quite a leap of logic based on nothing

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Which we don't know the time frame of and the Iron Bull one was cut 

We know it's before Solas puts his plan into action, since the Epilogue slides just have Solas gathering allies rather than ripping the Veil asunder. 

And even if it was cut, it shows Bioware is considering such technology in the DA universe. 

 

Now give me your solid evidence that Thedas has not and will not develop prosthetics. 

 

That's quite a leap of logic based on nothing

How so, when according to you and the others their reasoning will be "The Inquisitor can't continue being the hero because they are handicapped."?

[AresKeith]

We know it's before Solas puts his plan into action, since the Epilogue slides just have Solas gathering allies rather than ripping the Veil asunder. 

And even if it was cut, it shows Bioware is considering such technology in the DA universe. 

 

Now give me your solid evidence that Thedas has not and will not develop prosthetics. 

 

I never said they won't develop prosthetics, that it hasn't been done yet. And I don't except Bioware to conveniently give the Inquisitor a prosthetic limb at this time just to make them return for DA4 

 

How so, when according to you and the others their reasoning will be "The Inquisitor can't continue being the hero because they are handicapped."?

 

Way to put words in people's mouth, you can be a hero without being on the front lines

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I never said they won't develop prosthetics, that it hasn't been done yet. And I don't except Bioware to conveniently give the Inquisitor a prosthetic limb at this time just to make them return for DA4 

And I'm still waiting for the evidence that it hasn't been done yet. 

Why not? Bioware has always given their protagonists conveniences. 

 

Way to put words in people's mouth, you can be a hero without being on the front lines

I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. You and the others are saying the Inquisitor won't be the protagonist(the hero of the story) anymore because they are handicapped.

[CardButton]

 

That's quite a leap of logic based on nothing

Not if that's why Bioware removed the arm. I mean, think about what they are implying here if they ground the Inquisitor from combat.  

 

Even in a world with magic and mystical technologies.  Even with all the resources and people at the Inquisitor's disposal.  Even with having every reason in the world to continue to fight Solas, because if they they don't the world may end.  If they are still not able continue to fight because of a missing arm than Bioware did it to remove the Inquisitor from combat ... and thus they did it under the supposition that regardless of the motivation or setting we find ourselves in DA, a disabled person is simply incapable.

[AresKeith]

And I'm still waiting for the evidence that it hasn't been done yet. 

Why not? Bioware has always given their protagonists conveniences. 

 

Where in all of Thedas have they shown signs of being that technically advanced yet? Nowhere, the only place where I can even think of people attempting it are the Dwarves 

 

Because it would make the removal of the arm pointless just to satisfy people who want the Inquisitor back

 

I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. You and the others are saying the Inquisitor won't be the protagonist(the hero of the story) anymore because they are handicapped.

 

You are putting words in people's mouths because again you can be a hero without being on the front line. We say the Inquisitor won't be the protagonist because that's how DA has always done it, OP of the thread made very good reasons for why

 

The only person playing the handicapped hero card is you

[AresKeith]

Not if that's why Bioware removed the arm. I mean, think about what they are implying here if they ground the Inquisitor from combat.  

 

Even in a world with magic and mystical technologies.  Even with all the resources and people at the Inquisitor's disposal.  Even with having every reason in the world to continue to fight Solas, because if they they don't the world may end.  If they are still not able continue to fight because of a missing arm than Bioware did it to remove the Inquisitor from combat ... and thus they did it under the supposition that regardless of the motivation or setting we find ourselves in DA, a disabled person is simply incapable.

 

I know that's why they romoved the arm and it makes more sense than their past attempts

 

But to try to make it seems like Bioware has something against handicapped people is the real disgusting thing here

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Where in all of Thedas have they shown signs of being that technically advanced yet? Nowhere, the only place where I can even think of people attempting it are the Dwarves 

 

Because it would make the removal of the arm pointless just to satisfy people who want the Inquisitor back

So you have no evidence whatsoever. Got it. 

 

How would it make the loss of the arm pointless? There are many protagonists who have lost their arms and got prosthetic ones yet the loss of the arm has a major effect on them and/or the story for a variety of reasons. 

[CDR Aedan Cousland]

This thread is a goldmine of hurt feelings and people reaching at nonexistent things to be offended by.

The Inquisitor losing an arm isn't Bioware going, "Cripples can't be heroes! Neener neener!" It's them saying, "This hero's time on the front lines is done," but there's nothing saying the Inquisitor can't operate on the sidelines in a more advisor-like role, whether in person or via letters. God, people.

Anyway, I'm one of the many who don't want the Inquisitor to return as a PC. Plus, if Bioware went ahead and did that, they'd be going against the canon dialogue choices many people made stating their adventuring days are over. Just face reality, and stop clinging desperately to things that will not be. It's embarrassing.

[AresKeith]

So you have no evidence whatsoever. Got it. 

 

Neither do you outside of a slideshow that happens In the future, and cut concept art