You're right. Once you've failed at something, you should never try to succeed by making more attempts.
Except I don't think Bioware thinks they failed at that. SO we'd get exactly the same thing.
Me, I don't care to have Josephine accuse my qunquisitor of running off to join the Qun For Teh Drama!
And all this would have been decided before they even released Inquisition. I just wish they'd give us a hint to keep us going!
This is true, but so was a DA2 expansion, and we never got that.
As I've said in other posts, I'd like to see my Inquisitor again, but I just don't like people to get their hopes up because things can and do change, and for reasons that are often beyond the devs' control.
I know fans of Cullen would hate me for writing it, but it would be interesting to see how a divorce looks like in Thedas xd !
There is probably not a "divorce" process. If you are married in the church (the Chantry), you may be able to get an annulment or something along those lines. However, I bet there are many couples throughout Thedas who are co-habitating without official marriage entering the picture. I doubt that there is civil marriage of any kind. I also doubt that most noble couples would choose annulment altogether, since most marriages among that class are for purposes other than love. The modern institution of marriage is just that, modern. And while it is true that DA is a fantasy world and not 100% analogous to our own, many of its societal constructs are.
The above aside, I do wonder how it would work out re: property if there were a marriage break up, since men and women have (more or less) equal standing in Thedosian society.
Except I don't think Bioware thinks they failed at that. SO we'd get exactly the same thing.
Me, I don't care to have Josephine accuse my qunquisitor of running off to join the Qun For Teh Drama!
I'm sure they're aware their games aren't perfect. I can tell they've been improving since Mass Effect 1. Heck, it's one of the things people complain about on these boards, that Bioware "overreacts" to fan input.
My point stands. 
To those who absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return as the protagonist of DA4 and think a new protagonist would be the better choice, would you be willing to explain what potential you see there? What kind of story do you envision that would be better with a new and unrelated character? (because personally I don't see it at all)
To those that just hate the inquisitor as a character and find them boring, do you think that having a new character will suddenly mean that varied roleplaying options will be brought back? You don't think a new protagonist will be just as restricted?
To those that just hate the inquisitor as a character and find them boring...
Just from my forum observations on the subject, it seems these folks outweigh the others. Some people state that they thought the Inquisitor was boring because they lacked the personality traits that Hawke had based on the nice, sarcastic, aggressive tone scale that was used in DA2. And that was in stark contrast to the completely silent protagonist of DAO where you had to inject everything in your own mind, so it's not as "boring" to some because it can take on any form they wish. So along comes DAI where they tried for some sort of a balance between the two, the result being that some people thought the character was flat. This combines with the voice acting, which is also subjective.
This doesn't apply to everyone, of course.
It's all extremely subjective and preference based. I prefer DAI's method over the other two. I've played DAO numerous times, but don't much care for the silent protagonist. Hawke was fine normally unless you wanted to pick an option that was against type, particularly if you picked a more aggressive or direct option if you were of the nice or sarcastic personality.
Just from my forum observations on the subject, it seems these folks outweigh the others. Some people state that they thought the Inquisitor was boring because they lacked the personality traits that Hawke had based on the nice, sarcastic, aggressive tone scale that was used in DA2. And that was in stark contrast to the completely silent protagonist of DAO where you had to inject everything in your own mind, so it's not as "boring" to some because it can take on any form they wish. So along comes DAI where they tried for some sort of a balance between the two, the result being that some people thought the character was flat. This combines with the voice acting, which is also subjective.
This doesn't apply to everyone, of course.
It's all extremely subjective and preference based. I prefer DAI's method over the other two. I've played DAO numerous times, but don't much care for the silent protagonist. Hawke was fine normally unless you wanted to pick an option that was against type, particularly if you picked a more aggressive or direct option if you were of the nice or sarcastic personality.
Personally I was one of the ones who found the inquisitor's personality boring. IMO the options were too neutral and didn't really allow for extremes (a balance between the mild inquisitor and the extreme Hawke would have been best to me). That being said, I can understand why their decorum would be limited by their position. You can't be acting like a cutpurse or a pro-elf rebel if you're trying to brown nose to all these nobles you need alliances with as well as attracting new recruits. The reason the inquisitor being (IMO) boring doesn't bother me when it comes to DA4 is as follows: If the inquisitor was restricted to being neutral and generally polite/charming on purpose and for story reasons (like those I listed above) then those reasons came to an end when the inquisition was either disbanded into a shadow organization or made into the personal fist of the Divine. The removed social restrictions, the changed role as well as the loss of the arm and the betrayal by Solas have so much potential to affect character development in interesting and engaging ways. If however the inquisitor's personality was restricted not for story reasons but because it was easier or because they couldn't think of anything more varied or whatever then that problem would be present in a new protagonist as well.
Except I don't think Bioware thinks they failed at that. SO we'd get exactly the same thing.
Me, I don't care to have Josephine accuse my qunquisitor of running off to join the Qun For Teh Drama!
A lot of people complained about that, so Bioware definitely does know people don't like how they handled it.
Also, you know the games have an entire of people writing them right? And most of the team is different for ME and DA? So it probably won't even be written by the same person.
This is true, but so was a DA2 expansion, and we never got that.
As I've said in other posts, I'd like to see my Inquisitor again, but I just don't like people to get their hopes up because things can and do change, and for reasons that are often beyond the devs' control.
I don't think the DA2 expansion is a comparable example. That was cut due to the unpopularity of DA2 and, presumably, because it wasn't considered a commercially viable option. The same can't be said of Inquisition nor its followup, otherwise EA wouldn't invest the money in further development.
You can just as equally argue that the DA2 expansion being cut is a good example of EA/Bioware changing their plans to suit the market (rightly or wrongly). If they feel it will make the game more successful to have an old protagonist back, then they will do it, despite what has been said historically.
I'm not sure anyone is getting their hopes up, more putting forward their arguments as to why we believe our Inquisitors should make a return in the next game - and from my perspective, hoping Bioware at least reads it 
Regardless of who the protagonist is, the story itself for DA4 would have been set and agreed in a general sense before Inquisition was even released. They know where they are going with the next game. I would just love to know because things still feel so unfinished 
Oh, girl. I am not forcing you or anything, but really give Mass Effect a shot. The games are awesome, but I gotta admit that the best thing about ME is that we get to celebrate #N7Day (November 7th) ! Bioware makes streams and giveaways, fans celebrate, share art, make special vids on YT .
I would love to (particularly as the Cullen mod for ME3 looks epic 
) but I tried three times with ME1 and it just weirded me out. I think watching 2001: A Space Odyssey as a kid put me off sci-fi for life! My husband ended up doing all the combat scenes for me whilst I just ran around exploring planets from the safety of the spaceship 
So I stick to DA instead (happy place).
It can happen, don't let the naysayers discourage you. Don't know if it will or not, but it can.
Dagger in the map in the last scene... I think that hints we'll see more of the Inquisitor in DA4.
I would really like to think so as you say, it can, on both counts.
I was resolute with my first few runthroughs of DA:O and DA2 that I would not romance anyone, convinced that as a person of seemingly such political importance I had to be neutral. I took the same stance with my first runthrough of DA:I as well, expecting the Inquisitor in particular to have relationships and marriage as a real political tool. I thought there would be consequences depending on who I chose to romance, not just based on what race and background my Inquisitor came from.
So when I romanced Cullen on *cough* every other runthrough afterwards, I was really surprised that there were no consequences as a result of what should have been such a big deal for the Inquisitor was literally nothing. I wasn't disappointed at all with the romance itself (Cullen's ruined me for life, to be honest ) but that it had no impact on the game itself aside from the odd mention across the War Table was a big let down.
I went back and played DA:O and DA2 then to do the romance options too and again, really was a bit gutted that more wasn't made of it. The closest I think it comes to is Alistair in DA:O if he becomes king (lots of broken-hearted Wardens from what I've read!). It was a good move on the devs' part to make it that political - it really did add to the story, albeit in a sad way. The closest it seemed to come to in Inquisition was if you romanced Bull who stayed with the Qunari. Again, a harsh outcome, but really demonstrating the impact of that decision. Shame it had to wait till the end slide to be demonstrated.
This is what gets me - the Inquisitor is in a significant position of power. If you have a new protagonist, one who is focussed on tracking down Solas, you'd surely have to be incognito more often than not. If you announce yourself to the world, then Solas will know immediately and that's the end. But from what I took of the ending, you've still got to have a need to do the political machinations, particularly somewhere like Tevinter. If you're an elf or Qunari and you're starting as a completely new character, you haven't got that reputation and gravitas (for want of a better expression) that the Inquisitor already has because of the prejudice that exists. Even a Marcher noble was sneered at in Orlais. (And, by extension, in my logic, who you are romancing would have significant impact - like the approval rating at the Winter Palace but perhaps even more extreme - it could work in your favour or against you.)
That there are limitations with what Bioware can do, I completely understand - it's a game not a Robert Jordanesque series of neverending stories. I mentioned before that the myriad of outcomes surely must be getting to the point of being unmanageable. But as technology improves and as DA gets even more popular I hope decisions like those will become far more intertwined, and that romances can become more integral to the core outcomes - over more than one game too!
To those who absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return as the protagonist of DA4 and think a new protagonist would be the better choice, would you be willing to explain what potential you see there? What kind of story do you envision that would be better with a new and unrelated character? (because personally I don't see it at all)
I'm not going to say I absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return, I just find it unlikely. I do think a new protag would be a better choice because
1) It doesn't rely on the players having played and completed the previous game (and especially the final DLC, which isn't going to be everyone who bought the base game)
2) If we're leaving the South, I want a new protag to help with this clean break from the baggage of the previous three games. A major reason, IMO, for going to Tevinter is to wipe the slate clean and not worry about many lingering plot threads. Importing an Inquisitor negates this ability.
3) The only reason for an Inquisitor to be in Tevinter is to find agents against Solas and stop his plot. While I want this story line resolved, I don't want it front and center at the beginning of the game like the Reaper invasion at the very start of ME3. I want some build up, I want to experience Tevinter as it's an interesting setting, not just because we're there to find agents. I would rather have a Tevinter-Qunari main plot for Act 1 and have Solas in Act 2 or 3.
4) I didn't like how DAI handled PC background. I would like Bioware to try again with new backgrounds for a new PC in DA4. Backgrounds which explore Tevinter culture and give us insight like the DAO origins did. I know it's highly unlikely we'll ever get actual origins again, but it's better to have some form of background relevant to the setting rather than "Inquisitor who is here on a mission unrelated to the location". Orlais was ignored as an actual nation in DAI apart from WEWH. I don't want the same to happen to Tevinter.
5) I enjoyed the companions from DAI well enough, but I don't want to be stuck with them as LIs for the next game, nor do I want my PC to break up with them in order to have a new LI in DA4.
6) Controversial, but I don't want to deal with a magical or mechanical device to replace IQ's arm. I don't mind if it happens and the Inquisitor is an NPC, but to me, having the PC have a unique and powerful arm is just replacing the special snowflake of the Anchor with another one. Let's allow the Inquisitor to be a normal person and not have a gimmick in order to be effective.
7) I think it would be really cool to have the Inquisitor as an NPC adviser type. There's no reason why they couldn't be heavily involved in the story without being the PC. Then we wouldn't need to worry about importing as much of the character's personality and actions if we're not controlling their dialogue.
To those that just hate the inquisitor as a character and find them boring, do you think that having a new character will suddenly mean that varied roleplaying options will be brought back? You don't think a new protagonist will be just as restricted?
My thoughts on the Inquisitor being boring are more because of the quest system structure. We weren't allowed to decline side quests, we just walked away and didn't fulfill them. We weren't often allowed multiple solutions to achieve an objective or complete a quest. It made replaying a chore sometimes, because we would be doing the exact same thing every time, except in the few times when a companion interjects or we use a racial/perk dialogue option.
So the Inquisitor was the same across most playthroughs and became indistinguishable. Maybe I wasn't headcanoning enough to make them distinct, but I don't think that burden should be on the player.
I'm not going to say I absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return, I just find it unlikely. I do think a new protag would be a better choice because
1) It doesn't rely on the players having played and completed the previous game (and especially the final DLC, which isn't going to be everyone who bought the base game)
2) If we're leaving the South, I want a new protag to help with this clean break from the baggage of the previous three games. A major reason, IMO, for going to Tevinter is to wipe the slate clean and not worry about many lingering plot threads. Importing an Inquisitor negates this ability.
3) The only reason for an Inquisitor to be in Tevinter is to find agents against Solas and stop his plot. While I want this story line resolved, I don't want it front and center at the beginning of the game like the Reaper invasion at the very start of ME3. I want some build up, I want to experience Tevinter as it's an interesting setting, not just because we're there to find agents. I would rather have a Tevinter-Qunari main plot for Act 1 and have Solas in Act 2 or 3.
4) I didn't like how DAI handled PC background. I would like Bioware to try again with new backgrounds for a new PC in DA4. Backgrounds which explore Tevinter culture and give us insight like the DAO origins did. I know it's highly unlikely we'll ever get actual origins again, but it's better to have some form of background relevant to the setting rather than "Inquisitor who is here on a mission unrelated to the location". Orlais was ignored as an actual nation in DAI apart from WEWH. I don't want the same to happen to Tevinter.
5) I enjoyed the companions from DAI well enough, but I don't want to be stuck with them as LIs for the next game, nor do I want my PC to break up with them in order to have a new LI in DA4.
6) Controversial, but I don't want to deal with a magical or mechanical device to replace IQ's arm. I don't mind if it happens and the Inquisitor is an NPC, but to me, having the PC have a unique and powerful arm is just replacing the special snowflake of the Anchor with another one. Let's allow the Inquisitor to be a normal person and not have a gimmick in order to be effective.
7) I think it would be really cool to have the Inquisitor as an NPC adviser type. There's no reason why they couldn't be heavily involved in the story without being the PC. Then we wouldn't need to worry about importing as much of the character's personality and actions if we're not controlling their dialogue.
My thoughts on the Inquisitor being boring are more because of the quest system structure. We weren't allowed to decline side quests, we just walked away and didn't fulfill them. We weren't often allowed multiple solutions to achieve an objective or complete a quest. It made replaying a chore sometimes, because we would be doing the exact same thing every time, except in the few times when a companion interjects or we use a racial/perk dialogue option.
So the Inquisitor was the same across most playthroughs and became indistinguishable. Maybe I wasn't headcanoning enough to make them distinct, but I don't think that burden should be on the player.
Thanks for taking the time to explain, I can see the benefits of cutting ties but for me it's all or nothing. I don't want a game where a new person finishes the previous person's story alongside some (or many) of the previous person's friends against the previous person's nemesis. I either want a fitting continuation with the same plotline/protagonist/characters or I want all new everything >_< I'm afraid that either way BioWare won't really develop Tevinter, that it will end up being a mostly generic backdrop for the story the way the locations in DA:I were. I was so disappointed with Orlais 
I don't really feel that there being a previous game really affects if new players will play it or not though (and I'm not sure why that matters to people that have already played all the games?). Plenty of people started Mass Effect with ME3 or Dragon Age with DA2 or Inquisition. I never played The Witcher 1 but played the other two without a problem.
Thanks for taking the time to explain, I can see the benefits of cutting ties but for me it's all or nothing. I don't want a game where a new person finishes the previous person's story alongside some (or many) of the previous person's friends against the previous person's nemesis. I either want a fitting continuation with the same plotline/protagonist/characters or I want all new everything >_< I'm afraid that either way BioWare won't really develop Tevinter, that it will end up being a mostly generic backdrop for the story the way the locations in DA:I were. I was so disappointed with Orlais
Yeah that's my fear with Tevinter, as well. Or else it will swing back in response to feedback and the majority of the game will occur in Minrathous and we don't see any other setting.
To me, having either dual PCs or having the Inquisitor reappear as a mentor/adviser would keep the game from being solely the new PC's story. Since the Keep imports whether we want to redeem or stop Solas, the Inquisitor-as-NPC can customize their attitude toward the hunt for Solas and can provide the most substantial and significant link to the past game. Realistically, we will need some form of exposition to catch new players up to the plot, since it would be hard to summarize Solas and his plans briefly. If we have multiple acts, each act the Inquisitor could reveal more information and give a new player (or someone who only played DAO, etc.) a connection to the antagonist that you and I already have.
It would be very difficult to have this exposition if we're already playing as the Inquisitor. Why would they need to catch the player up on Solas? They already know everything. Maybe if they go the dual PC route, we could even have flashbacks of the Inquisitor interacting with Solas, as a way to establish what kind of relationships we had with him (since much of that is not captured in the Keep).
I think Bioware needs to step up their game and make DA4 a memorable game. I think DAI was successful for them but not a blockbuster or a significant demonstration of their abilities as a game developer. It's too polarizing a game. So having a more interactive dual PC system would make it stand out more and rework how plots and characters can be imported between games. And TBH, EA would be happy if they're copying some game element from TW3 and theoretically riding those coattails.
I guess my response question to you is: is there no scenario where we have a new PC but the Inquisitor remains a major player that would satisfy your wishes?
I'm not going to say I absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return, I just find it unlikely. I do think a new protag would be a better choice because
1) It doesn't rely on the players having played and completed the previous game (and especially the final DLC, which isn't going to be everyone who bought the base game)
2) If we're leaving the South, I want a new protag to help with this clean break from the baggage of the previous three games. A major reason, IMO, for going to Tevinter is to wipe the slate clean and not worry about many lingering plot threads. Importing an Inquisitor negates this ability.
3) The only reason for an Inquisitor to be in Tevinter is to find agents against Solas and stop his plot. While I want this story line resolved, I don't want it front and center at the beginning of the game like the Reaper invasion at the very start of ME3. I want some build up, I want to experience Tevinter as it's an interesting setting, not just because we're there to find agents. I would rather have a Tevinter-Qunari main plot for Act 1 and have Solas in Act 2 or 3.
4) I didn't like how DAI handled PC background. I would like Bioware to try again with new backgrounds for a new PC in DA4. Backgrounds which explore Tevinter culture and give us insight like the DAO origins did. I know it's highly unlikely we'll ever get actual origins again, but it's better to have some form of background relevant to the setting rather than "Inquisitor who is here on a mission unrelated to the location". Orlais was ignored as an actual nation in DAI apart from WEWH. I don't want the same to happen to Tevinter.
5) I enjoyed the companions from DAI well enough, but I don't want to be stuck with them as LIs for the next game, nor do I want my PC to break up with them in order to have a new LI in DA4.
6) Controversial, but I don't want to deal with a magical or mechanical device to replace IQ's arm. I don't mind if it happens and the Inquisitor is an NPC, but to me, having the PC have a unique and powerful arm is just replacing the special snowflake of the Anchor with another one. Let's allow the Inquisitor to be a normal person and not have a gimmick in order to be effective.
7) I think it would be really cool to have the Inquisitor as an NPC adviser type. There's no reason why they couldn't be heavily involved in the story without being the PC. Then we wouldn't need to worry about importing as much of the character's personality and actions if we're not controlling their dialogue.
My thoughts on the Inquisitor being boring are more because of the quest system structure. We weren't allowed to decline side quests, we just walked away and didn't fulfill them. We weren't often allowed multiple solutions to achieve an objective or complete a quest. It made replaying a chore sometimes, because we would be doing the exact same thing every time, except in the few times when a companion interjects or we use a racial/perk dialogue option.
So the Inquisitor was the same across most playthroughs and became indistinguishable. Maybe I wasn't headcanoning enough to make them distinct, but I don't think that burden should be on the player.
There will always be baggage from the previous games. We have spent three games making decisions and seeing outcomes that affect the whole of Thedas. That's the whole point of the Keep, so we can shape the world how we want to start our playthroughs. I would be sad to suddenly have nothing left from three previous games. What was the point?
I don't get the dislike for a one-armed character - why would having a prosthetic be a super magical replacement for the Anchor? It just means they have the use of another limb again. Prosthetics aren't gimmicks. I don't mean to be confrontational, but your use of 'normal person' in this context just made me wince. Do you mean 'normal person' as in they don't have a magical advantage yet again? Because if not, then if Bioware choose to not use the Inquisitor for the reason that then Inquisitor is disabled in some way, it's an appalling departure from their previous attempts to be as inclusive as possible - something they, in general, do very well compared to their competitors.
I guess my response question to you is: is there no scenario where we have a new PC but the Inquisitor remains a major player that would satisfy your wishes?
In response to your point 7 and this - the Inquisitor, for many of us, is a unique character for which we all have canon in our heads. I don't see, in a million years, an NPC character being able to take the place of my Inquisitor in a meaningful way. I won't have control of her decisions, what she says or how she interacts with others. It's exactly the same problem with Hawke all over, but probably worse if there's extensive involvement without a playable character. Someone else will make all that up for me which then makes my character who I put so much time and effort into irrelevant.
Also to redeem or stop Solas is personal. Bioware made it that way. If you cannot control the Inquisitor who should be heavily involved in that arc, then the story loses all meaning. There's no consistency. There's no way a new protagonist can replicate that relationship given Solas is presumably hiding/running away (unless you become his closest confidante and then turn on him in Bull style - the only scenario I can think of that gives meaningful interaction). So no, no scenario for me unless the Inquisitor is a playable character.
I'm sure they're aware their games aren't perfect. I can tell they've been improving since Mass Effect 1. Heck, it's one of the things people complain about on these boards, that Bioware "overreacts" to fan input.
My point stands.
Bioware doesn't make mistakes. Bioware simply has confused and sad players. 
At any rate, the same things that were in Mass Effect would be in Dragon Age if they kept the same protagonist. Said protagonist will be separated from most/all of the old companions. WIll lose their power base. WIll lose their LIs (in order to introduce new ones) All for the sake of new players not familiar with the series, and to make sure everyone starts out in the same place.
Everything you got attached to besides the Inquisitor him/herself will be gone. So in the end, what's the point?
To those who absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return as the protagonist of DA4 and think a new protagonist would be the better choice, would you be willing to explain what potential you see there? What kind of story do you envision that would be better with a new and unrelated character? (because personally I don't see it at all)
The biggest potential is you're playing without the baggage of previous games. There won't be a need to remind the player at every turn that you are "the Herald of Andraste" or "Inquisitor". Playing a new character opens up so many more stories and RP opportunities. You are someone else. You are telling a different story. THis won't be "Dragon AGe Inquisiton Part 2 any more than DAI was Dragon Age 2, Part 2. Or even Dragon Age 2 being Dragon Age Origins, Part 2.
You are telling a different story.
I don't want DA4 to be a different story.
I want it to be the second half of the story they started in Inquisition. Bioware themselves said Inquisition was only the first half of the story they wanted to tell for DA3, so I want to see the second half.
Every other Dragon Age age they make can be a different story, every other game can have a new protagonist, every other game can be an introduction to another new culture.
But this is the only game that can tell a story such as the Inquisitor vs Solas. Where they have had an entire other game to build up a story between the protagonist and the villain. I don't want that to go to waste.
I love the fact that Dragon Age has new protagonists every game. But that can be done in every single game Bioware makes. A game where you already have an entire game of content building a connection to the villain can't.
And there's also the fact that if the Inquisitor doesn't get to finish her story, why would I get attached to a new protagonist who also may not ever get an ending. If Bioware introduces a new protagonist and asks me to care when you introduce a villain who harms her, I won't. Because the chances are, she won't ever get to confront that villain.
I don't want DA4 to be a different story.
I want it to be the second half of the story they started in Inquisition. Bioware themselves said Inquisition was only the first half of the story they wanted to tell for DA3, so I want to see the second half.
Every other Dragon Age age they make can be a different story, every other game can have a new protagonist, every other game can be an introduction to another new culture.
But this is the only game that can tell a story such as the Inquisitor vs Solas. Where they have had an entire other game to build up a story between the protagonist and the villain. I don't want that to go waste.
I love the fact the Dragon Age has new protagonists every game. But that can be done in every single game Bioware makes. A game where you already have an entire game of content building a connection to the villain can't.
And there's also the fact that if the Inquisitor doesn't get to finish her story, why would I get attached to a new protagonist who also may not ever get an ending. If Bioware introduces a new protagonist and asks me to care when you introduce a villain who harms her, I won't. Because the chances are, she won't ever get to confront that villain.
There's no Inquisitor vs. Solas story. For that story to exist, the Inquisitor would have to be more than a blip on his radar. And that's just not true. You fail in every meaningful way at even opposing Solas. DAI ends with Solas saving your life even if he actively hates you, because your just THAT irrelevant a figure (or saves you due to friendship).
But the relationship is personal. The Inquisitor is just a background character in Solas' plot. At this point Morrigan has more of a connection as the heir to Mythal.
The Inquisitor had a story: stop the breach, find out who caused it. That story wrapped up. It just so happened that it didn't end with the Inquisitor winning.
Just because the Inquisitor is really sore about things at the end of Trespasser doesn't make this a versus situation.
The Inquisitor declaring at the end of Inquisition that she was going to stop Solas made it a versus situation.
The protagonist having a confrontation with the villain where they lose, and the villain lets them live because they underestimate them, only to have that being their undoing is quite a common trope.
How exactly can you say the Inquisitor fails at opposing Solas when they haven't tried to oppose Solas yet. They literally declared they were going to start doing that at the end of the game. Before that, they were allies.
And yes Morrigan does have a connection to Mythal. It's pretty obvious she's also going to play a large role in this story.
The Inquisitor declaring at the end of Inquisition that she was going to stop Solas made it a versus situation.
The protagonist having a confrontation with the villain where they lose, and the villain lets them live because they underestimate them, only to have that being their undoing is quite a common trope.
How exactly can you say the Inquisitor fails at opposing Solas when they haven't tried to oppose Solas yet. They literally declared they were going to start doing that at the end of the game. Before that, they were allies.
And yes Morrigan does have a connection to Mythal. It's pretty obvious she's also going to play a large role in this story.
The biggest potential is you're playing without the baggage of previous games. There won't be a need to remind the player at every turn that you are "the Herald of Andraste" or "Inquisitor". Playing a new character opens up so many more stories and RP opportunities. You are someone else. You are telling a different story. THis won't be "Dragon AGe Inquisiton Part 2 any more than DAI was Dragon Age 2, Part 2. Or even Dragon Age 2 being Dragon Age Origins, Part 2.
Some of us don't want a new story, with completely new companions and a blank slate? Why would that appeal when I've got so much invested from years of gameplay across three previous plotlines? I want this current tale to be finished (with Inquisitor) before introducing something else yet again - and finished properly. Because right now, it isn't.
And, a lot of us like the 'baggage' from previous stories. I actually am not sure what this is? The history of what happened makes things far more interesting and meaningful. Also, a lot of us like our former protagonists and would like to know what happened to them. There's nothing wrong with that.
Whether we get to see any of this in the future is another matter.
No, it didn't. If I declared Paul McCartney my mortal nemesis right now, it doesn't make me his antagonist. It makes me a wacko. It's not that different with the Inquisitor. Shaking a fist and the heavens and yelling "I'll get you next time, Solas!" doesn't make you anything.
Solas doesn't underestimate you. He just doesn't value you. He doesn't care if you try and stop him. He says as much, if you're very openly antagonist (though it varies if you're friends or not).
Solas uses the Inquisition as a vehicle to achieve every one of his plots. You're the instrument for his rise to godhood, and he infiltrated your entire organisation from day 1. He tells you as much. He is one of the architects behind your rise as Inquisitor (he is the one who tells you about Skyhold and then has you prophetically lead the survivors of Haven there) and then uses you to stabilise the breach, stop Corypheus, and recover the Anchor.
You're left neutered and broken at the end of Trespasser. Declaring yourself to still be relevant doesn't make you relevant.
There's nothing stopping Bioware from making the Inquisitor the DA4 protagonist. It's easy to see how that story goes on. But there's nothing in DAI that requires it, because all throughout the Inquisitor is a dupe who loses in the end without even realising it. That's how completely Solas wins.
Solas didn't manipulate the Inquisitor into stopping Cory or sealing the breach. That would imply the Inquisitor wanted Cory to live and to sit back and let the breach destroy the world. The had mutual goals. Giving someone some help to complete a task they want to complete is not manipulation. If you want to go somewhere, and I give you a lift in my car, I did not manipulate you to to go somewhere.
Solas telling you where his old house was, does not change anything that the Inquisitor achieved. Did Solas convince Halamshiral to support the inquisition? - No. Did Solas convince the Grey Wardens? - No. Did Solas win victory in any of the major battles you fought? - No. Solas did nothing but give you a house and say "Hey, you know that guy you are already fighting? Go fight him!". Nothing the Inquisition achieved was because of him, unless you count him being the very reason it needed to exist. The entire game is Solas' plans going wrong, and him being shocked that the Inquisitor could handle it.
If you don't think the Inquisitor stands a chance against Solas, why do you think a new nobody does? What do they have that the Inquisitor couldn't?
I don't want DA4 to be a different story.
I want it to be the second half of the story they started in Inquisition. Bioware themselves said Inquisition was only the first half of the story they wanted to tell for DA3, so I want to see the second half.
Every other Dragon Age age they make can be a different story, every other game can have a new protagonist, every other game can be an introduction to another new culture.
But this is the only game that can tell a story such as the Inquisitor vs Solas. Where they have had an entire other game to build up a story between the protagonist and the villain. I don't want that to go to waste.
I love the fact that Dragon Age has new protagonists every game. But that can be done in every single game Bioware makes. A game where you already have an entire game of content building a connection to the villain can't.
And there's also the fact that if the Inquisitor doesn't get to finish her story, why would I get attached to a new protagonist who also may not ever get an ending. If Bioware introduces a new protagonist and asks me to care when you introduce a villain who harms her, I won't. Because the chances are, she won't ever get to confront that villain.
And I wanted a different ME3 ending. We all have our disappointments.
I'm pretty sure they didn't only told half the story they wanted; they only implemented half the stuff they planned for the game. ANd the rest ended up on the cutting room floor. As often happens. Things like the Red Templars attacking Crestwood.
Sorry, the story wasn't the Inquisitor vs Solas. It was the Inquisitor vs Corypheus. That story ended when the Inquisitor turned Cory inside out and shoved him into the Fade. Trespasser was epilogue, no more.
Some of us don't want a new story, with completely new companions and a blank slate? Why would that appeal when I've got so much invested from years of gameplay across three previous plotlines? I want this current tale to be finished (with Inquisitor) before introducing something else yet again - and finished properly. Because right now, it isn't.
And, a lot of us like the 'baggage' from previous stories. I actually am not sure what this is? The history of what happened makes things far more interesting and meaningful. Also, a lot of us like our former protagonists and would like to know what happened to them. There's nothing wrong with that.
Whether we get to see any of this in the future is another matter.
YOur three previous plotlines were three different characters, The Hero of Ferelden, The Champion of Kirkwall, and the Herald of Andraste. DA4 will be no different. The Good Neighbor of Tevinter?
It's fine to want to know what happens next with your characters. But it should be left to the imagination. Everyone has a different idea what should happen anyway. But those are different stories. This one finished with the death of Corypheus.
"Baggage" is everything connected to the character: friendships, romances, policies, decisions made both major and minor. Everything that Bioware would have to account for to continue the story. THings that would restrict the story that could be told because not everyone married Cullen. Not everyone played a qunari Inquisitor. Not everyone befriended Dorian, not everyone drank from the Well, and so on.
And I wanted a different ME3 ending. We all have our disappointments.
I'm pretty sure they didn't only told half the story they wanted; they only implemented half the stuff they planned for the game. ANd the rest ended up on the cutting room floor. As often happens. Things like the Red Templars attacking Crestwood.
Sorry, the story wasn't the Inquisitor vs Solas. It was the Inquisitor vs Corypheus. That story ended when the Inquisitor turned Cory inside out and shoved him into the Fade. Trespasser was epilogue, no more.
And ME3 nearly turned me away from Bioware for good. I only bought Inquisitor because I'm a big fan of what Weekes writes.
Considering they said cut half the story, I'm going to take them at their word. And yes, it might get cut. But if they cut the entire second half of the story they had planned, I'm officially out of Dragon Age.
No, the story wasn't Inquisitor vs Solas. The "vs Solas" is the plot of the next game, but the Inquisitor has been set up to be the perfect person to do this, and even states at the end of the game that they are going to do this.
An epilogue does not end by forcing the playable character to swear to stop the bad guy. If the Inquisitor wasn't going to have to face Solas they wouldn't have forced you to say that, no matter what character you play. They wouldn't have printed on the screen in big text how keeping/losing the Inquisition was going to affect that battle against Solas.
I'm not going to say I absolutely would hate for the inquisitor to return, I just find it unlikely. I do think a new protag would be a better choice because
1) It doesn't rely on the players having played and completed the previous game (and especially the final DLC, which isn't going to be everyone who bought the base game)
2) If we're leaving the South, I want a new protag to help with this clean break from the baggage of the previous three games. A major reason, IMO, for going to Tevinter is to wipe the slate clean and not worry about many lingering plot threads. Importing an Inquisitor negates this ability.
3) The only reason for an Inquisitor to be in Tevinter is to find agents against Solas and stop his plot. While I want this story line resolved, I don't want it front and center at the beginning of the game like the Reaper invasion at the very start of ME3. I want some build up, I want to experience Tevinter as it's an interesting setting, not just because we're there to find agents. I would rather have a Tevinter-Qunari main plot for Act 1 and have Solas in Act 2 or 3.
4) I didn't like how DAI handled PC background. I would like Bioware to try again with new backgrounds for a new PC in DA4. Backgrounds which explore Tevinter culture and give us insight like the DAO origins did. I know it's highly unlikely we'll ever get actual origins again, but it's better to have some form of background relevant to the setting rather than "Inquisitor who is here on a mission unrelated to the location". Orlais was ignored as an actual nation in DAI apart from WEWH. I don't want the same to happen to Tevinter.
5) I enjoyed the companions from DAI well enough, but I don't want to be stuck with them as LIs for the next game, nor do I want my PC to break up with them in order to have a new LI in DA4.
6) Controversial, but I don't want to deal with a magical or mechanical device to replace IQ's arm. I don't mind if it happens and the Inquisitor is an NPC, but to me, having the PC have a unique and powerful arm is just replacing the special snowflake of the Anchor with another one. Let's allow the Inquisitor to be a normal person and not have a gimmick in order to be effective.
7) I think it would be really cool to have the Inquisitor as an NPC adviser type. There's no reason why they couldn't be heavily involved in the story without being the PC. Then we wouldn't need to worry about importing as much of the character's personality and actions if we're not controlling their dialogue.
My thoughts on the Inquisitor being boring are more because of the quest system structure. We weren't allowed to decline side quests, we just walked away and didn't fulfill them. We weren't often allowed multiple solutions to achieve an objective or complete a quest. It made replaying a chore sometimes, because we would be doing the exact same thing every time, except in the few times when a companion interjects or we use a racial/perk dialogue option.
So the Inquisitor was the same across most playthroughs and became indistinguishable. Maybe I wasn't headcanoning enough to make them distinct, but I don't think that burden should be on the player.
1 Agree, and this is also a reason I find it unlikely. The reliance on the previous game is way too heavy.
2 I think the only lingering plot thread involving the Inquisitor directly is just the Solas one. Everything else, Titans and whathaveyou, can be considered as belonging to Thedas as a whole. The two year gap for Trespasser did a good job of wiping out everything all on its own, I think, leaving only the Solas issue unresolved.
3 I don't think experiencing Tevinter as a setting along with the task of finding agents has to be mutually exclusive. And you know there will be side quests that help us learn the lay of the land that have nothing to do with the larger threat. Tons of side quests...
4 No counter here, this is a personal preference I just don't share.
5 I... really don't think a breakup would happen, particularly as there are a couple of marriages. I think that would make it way too complicated. If anything, the relationships would be given as much weight as the Warden's during DAA, which is to say, hardly any at all with the Ali-mancers getting some bonus content. This would also mean that Solas-mancers and Dorian-mancers get a considerable amount of extra content, which, even as a Dorian-mancer myself, would be incredibly unfair to other players.
6 Yep, I agree. I have serious issues with the deus ex machina of a prosthetic, regardless of what it is, or how it is created. Aside from the various RP reasons (which I take quite seriously regarding this particular issue), it completely overwrites the emotional, dramatic, and story impact of the loss in the first place, especially since we the player never get to respond about it, at all. If that's the case, why did they even bother with it, except, as some have said, a device to eliminate the Inquisitor as a possibility. So, they're all alive, unlike the variable state with the Warden (alive/dead), but have been rendered essentially ineffective. This is one reason I think it likely that the Inquisitor may be some sort of advisory NPC. Or perhaps they may even allow us to control them for some scenes that are more emotive.
7 I think it would be pretty fun. As I mentioned elsewhere, it would be a return to the Neverwinter Nights type of adventure, where your PC is the hero/adventurer, but there are actual leaders that you report to. And if this is the case, and Dorian is one too, I'd better have a scene where I walk in on them making out or something (I kid... sort of). But I would like to move away from the "special snowflake" type of hero.
Give the break up options and new companions to romance. Like in ME.
Retour en haut