503 réponses à ce sujet

[vbibbi]

Corypheus and the Inquisitor -- both alone and together. Unfortunately, neither of them is given any chance to be an actual character, nevermind the supposed antagonist and protagonist. With such complete disregard for the two most crucial characters of a story, you don't have a story, especially when that disregard also extends to the themes the story pretends to be about.

 

The problems with Inquisition's story and characterization were annoying enough before Trespasser pretty much revealed them to be deliberate.

 

 

I fully agree about it undermining Inquisition, which is why I disagree about it finally feeling as if anything I do has any bearings on anything. On the contrary. It throws everything about my character under the bus, destroys everything she thought she had accomplished, and is a complete kick in the teeth. It embodies my biggest longstanding problems with Bioware's writing almost to a T.

 

 

I hadn't even considered that aspect when I wrote my post, but yes, absolutely. It'd extremely lazy and arrogant to assume that players either have bought or should buy all the books and comics on top of an already expensive game plus its expensive DLCs if we want to get the "real, full story". Various arcs and characters in the game are diminished or fall flat entirely because of this, and while it's one thing when it's done with a throwaway side character, doing it with a main story arc like WE&WH should be considered a cardinal sin of writing.

I don't follow the Drinkquisition but there needs to be something added to it whenever someone says "I was fine leaving behind my Inquisitor until Trespasser. Now they have to be PC in DA4!"

 

If one's entire reason for wanting a character to return is a DLC less than one tenth of the base game's length and content, then that's poor management of story, characters, and player expectations.

[Beerfish]

I was happy my female elf Inquizzy treated pompous Solas like dirt all through my last play through just when you thought he may not be who you thought.....nope....he is indeed a pompous arrogant self serving jerk.

[midnight tea]

I don't follow the Drinkquisition but there needs to be something added to it whenever someone says "I was fine leaving behind my Inquisitor until Trespasser. Now they have to be PC in DA4!"

 

If one's entire reason for wanting a character to return is a DLC less than one tenth of the base game's length and content, then that's poor management of story, characters, and player expectations.

 

There were quite w few threads from the beginning of '15 hoping for or predicting Inky's potential return, so it's short-sighted to claim that it was just Trespasser that made people want protagonist of DAI to return. 

 

However, I hardly see any reason to dismiss the story as poorly written if new information brings about more of an appreciation for a given character - or are you going to claim that it is also "poor management" or "poor storytelling" that people shift their understanding and appreciation of, say, Flemeth (and Morrigan) only after a relatively short scene featuring her in DAI, where she's revealed to be Mythal?

 

Because this is exactly what happened - and I've seen quite a few people change their stance on her character - a character introduced first 6 years ago. So why can't they gain new appreciation of character of Inquisitor (or Solas) after Trespasser??

 

Trespasser changed a lot with how we understand Inky's role in the story not because it has added much of new content - it didn't add anything that wasn't at least hinted at in the base game - the most it did is introduce a new conflict and reveal Solas as not being just a mysterious, Flemeth'y entity that perhaps would be there, somewhere, in future DA as an occasional ally, foe or outside force, but the major obstacle on our way, as well as one of the most pivotal characters in the franchise (since he's the actual creator of the Veil).

 

That in itself helped us re-contextualize all the events of Inquisition - just like appearance of Flemeth in DAI helped us re-contextualize at least some of her actions, or post-epilogue scene helped us re-contextualize Solas character from that of a smartass fade nerd into immortal ancient near-god. This is hardly poor management - this is, in fact, a pretty smart way to help us see the story in new light (plus, add to the replayability of the past title/s).

 

As I mentioned before in context of scattering information across different media or chapters, on meta level DA appears to be strongly about how our perspective changes based on what we know or find out about the story. And the post-epilogue stinger and Trespasser did just that - it made us gain new perspective, as well as understand the role of both Solas and Inquisitor than what we suspected they were before.

 

I hardly see a fault in such approach to the story, in fact I find it very much to my liking - to end the main story on a high note, thinking that it's mostly smooth sailing for our hero, with merely the vaguest hints of upcoming troubles... only to make us realize in the interlude to the new chapter that what we discovered and accomplished so far is a proverbial tip of an iceberg and there's new, grander adventure to be had - only now it's not just with a fresh, new hero, but also a veteran leader hardened through experience.

 

What's wrong with that, exactly?

 

Add to that the fact that unlike DAO, DAI's DLC epilogue is very clear that it doesn't want to just delegate the previous hero to, at best, a role of a mere cameo, hence more people now can hope for their return.

 

In that regard Trespasser did the trick to me as well - prior to that DLC I was only kinda vaguely hoping that they may make something of a more significant appearance in next title, but didn't have much of that hope, since I knew that prior to DAI each chapter had an entirely new protagonist. After months spent in uncertainty, like many people, I've just settled to thinking that Inquisition is very much DONE. I've fully expected Trespasser to be a 'goodbye' to Inquisitor, with them either dying or "traveling to parts unknown".

 

...So you can imagine my surprise when the epilogue didn't just kill off the character, but gave them a new role and conflict. That in itself was enough to jolt new appreciation for character and anything they've done. I'm pretty sure the exact same thing happened to more than just me, hence you now see more people hoping for Inquisitor's return - perhaps not as a PC, maybe even not as a secondary PC, but still a role that bears significance.

[vbibbi]

 

There were quite w few threads from the beginning of '15 hoping for or predicting Inky's potential return, so it's short-sighted to claim that it was just Trespasser that made people want protagonist of DAI to return. 

 

However, I hardly see any reason to dismiss the story as poorly written if new information brings about more of an appreciation for a given character - or are you going to claim that it is also "poor management" or "poor storytelling" that people shift their understanding and appreciation of, say, Flemeth (and Morrigan) only after a relatively short scene featuring her in DAI, where she's revealed to be Mythal?

 

Because this is exactly what happened - and I've seen quite a few people change their stance on her character - a character introduced first 6 years ago. So why can't they gain new appreciation of character of Inquisitor (or Solas) after Trespasser??

 

Trespasser changed a lot with how we understand Inky's role in the story not because it has added much of new content - it didn't add anything that wasn't at least hinted at in the base game - the most it did is introduce a new conflict and reveal Solas as not being just a mysterious, Flemeth'y entity that perhaps would be there, somewhere, in future DA as an occasional ally, foe or outside force, but the major obstacle on our way, as well as one of the most pivotal characters in the franchise (since he's the actual creator of the Veil).

 

That in itself helped us re-contextualize all the events of Inquisition - just like appearance of Flemeth in DAI helped us re-contextualize at least some of her actions, or post-epilogue scene helped us re-contextualize Solas character from that of a smartass fade nerd into immortal ancient near-god. This is hardly poor management - this is, in fact, a pretty smart way to help us see the story in new light (plus, add to the replayability of the past title/s).

 

As I mentioned before in context of scattering information across different media or chapters, on meta level DA appears to be strongly about how our perspective changes based on what we know or find out about the story. And the post-epilogue stinger and Trespasser did just that - it made us gain new perspective, as well as understand the role of both Solas and Inquisitor than what we suspected they were before.

 

I hardly see a fault in such approach to the story, in fact I find it very much to my liking - to end the main story on a high note, thinking that it's mostly smooth sailing for our hero, with merely the vaguest hints of upcoming troubles... only to make us realize in the interlude to the new chapter that what we discovered and accomplished so far is a proverbial tip of an iceberg and there's new, grander adventure to be had - only now it's not just with a fresh, new hero, but also a veteran leader hardened through experience.

 

What's wrong with that, exactly?

 

Add to that the fact that unlike DAO, DAI's DLC epilogue is very clear that it doesn't want to just delegate the previous hero to, at best, a role of a mere cameo, hence more people now can hope for their return.

 

In that regard Trespasser did the trick to me as well - prior to that DLC I was only kinda vaguely hoping that they may make something of a more significant appearance in next title, but didn't have much of that hope, since I knew that prior to DAI each chapter had an entirely new protagonist. After months spent in uncertainty, like many people, I've just settled to thinking that Inquisition is very much DONE. I've fully expected Trespasser to be a 'goodbye' to Inquisitor, with them either dying or "traveling to parts unknown".

 

...So you can imagine my surprise when the epilogue didn't just kill off the character, but gave them a new role and conflict. That in itself was enough to jolt new appreciation for character and anything they've done. I'm pretty sure the exact same thing happened to more than just me, hence you now see more people hoping for Inquisitor's return - perhaps not as a PC, maybe even not as a secondary PC, but still a role that bears significance.

 

I'm not saying that everyone who wants the Inquisitor back as a PC said "I was fine leaving behind my Inquisitor until Trespasser. Now they have to be PC in DA4!" I know there are varying reasons for this wish. I only said that this is a common theme I've seen when discussing the topic.

 

On those topics that I've read, it comes across as the poster finding the Inquisitor boring throughout the vanilla game, but then Trespasser actually made them an interesting character. And that is why the argument suggests that Bio had poor management of the story and characters. Trespasser was in part a response to a lot of the criticism of the base game, focusing on characters and tight narrative, significantly smaller maps, much more dialogue and interactions than just reading the codex. And most importantly, having the PC take an active role in the story and significantly engage with the antagonist. These were what many complained was missing in the base game, and the reason why those posters were happy not carrying the Inquisitor over into DA4.

 

This is different than having a consistent character develop over time and reveal more about their motives and background, like Flemeth. She was consistently written across three games. The Inquisitor has a significant shift of focus and characterization between DAI and Trespasser. IMO.