390 réponses à ce sujet

[greenbrownblue]

I agree. I've never been bothered by repeating threads, unless they're spammed by the same person. I suppose they could annoy some people, but do they really annoy them enough that it's worth taking the time to write a negative comment in the thread rather than simply ignore it?

 

A couple other factors here are:

 

1. It's worth noting that a lot (most?) of the "duplicate" threads have already died out, and since we're not supposed to necro threads, well...

 

2. Related to the above, there are such things as new forum-goers, who may not have any idea how much something has already been discussed. Cut them some slack.

 

3. DA:I and all of its DLC is out, and it will be at least 2 years before the next game. So I understand that there isn't much to discuss anymore and I really don't mind repeated topics. That's just me though.

 

A few bad people ruin it for everyone else. Story of the freaking universe, right there.

Thank you for supporting newcomers, mama Banshee

[nightscrawl]

I will start this off by saying that I'm on the fence. I am VERY attached to my Inquisitor, more so than my Warden or Hawke, and would love to see him return in some form. However, I have previously been satisfied with the non-recurring protagonist concept as the model for DA games, so I won't be utterly heartbroken if they choose not to use the character. I'm also quite wary of how the whole issue of the arm would be portrayed, see below.

 

Hell, even though I adore Dorian to death, I'm not even sure if I want him in the next game. I do and I don't simultaneously.

 

It's interesting that people don't see the potential to invest more in the character because they lost a hand.

For players, I think there are several aspects of it, and each of those will apply to different players in different ways.

The first is that it can be a pretty heavy-handed (I'm sorry...) tool for the story teller, Bioware, to have the main character maimed in some way so it's easier for the audience to accept when they don't return. We saw the event happen in the game, which in some ways is much better than being told our Warden "disappeared" at the end of DA2, or earning that, regardless of whether they were viscount for a time, Hawke also eventually disappears.

I think that post-DAO Bioware is reluctant to come up with really detailed epilogues for fear of limiting themselves in future story lines. So some players see this as Bioware's signal that the Inquisitor is done, and some of those seem to have accepted that.
 
The second is the whole fact of losing a hand and what that means for combat and game mechanics, and resources in game development. This is NOT a story issue. Why do we have only a single color of a single model to use for the armless Inquisitor? Resource management. Granted, a DLC gets far less resource allocation than does the main game, so the limitation there is understandable.
 
But this would apply to the next game as well. Even if they know about having an armless Inquisitor in DA4 ahead of time, and have things planned out for that, things don't always work out like the devs want. Resources are limited. They would not just have unlimited money and time to make an armless Inquisitor absolutely perfect. How would they work out a missing arm? A prosthetic? Magic? I know I haven't been alone in not wanting an "easy fix." I bristle every time I see people throwing out the word "prosthetic" like it's some simple thing for a person to use, or even want to use. But even with a prosthetic the person would not, and should not, function as they did previously. It is not realistic (yeah, I know, "we're playing a game with magic and dragons"), and is frankly an absurd expectation.

 

So, how would this be implemented vis-a-vis combat and visuals? Going back to resource management, models with a single arm would have to be designed specifically for the Inquisitor, or an Inquisitor with a prosthetic built into the model. At best we would have a limited selection of armor models to choose, and at worst it would be like DAI Hawke and have a fixed body appearance, either with or without an arm. Then there is combat. I think mages would be relatively OK, but both warrior builds, and one-and-a-half rogue builds (I think dual-dagger can learn to compensate) would be more limited. Note that I don't say "impossible," but certainly not with the same function as previous.
 
Moving away from resources, forced use of a prosthetic takes away roleplay agency. And I would certainly be annoyed if we were forced to wear one without having the chance to offer any commentary on it at all. This arm deal is a huge thing for my Inquisitor, who is an SnS warrior. Daily life will be a struggle for quite a while and I don't want that ignored, and I do NOT want it left to head-canon. As I've said elsewhere, losing a limb is a big f-ing deal and should not be ignored by the game. It was bad enough that we didn't get to comment on it in Trespasser, but I lived with that because it was the grand finale.
 
The third issue moves away from the arm and just focuses on the Inquisitor's return in general. One word: Solas. For me, a strong argument for the Inquisitor's return in some capacity, even as a quest NPC or faction leader, is because they have more of a personal connection to Solas; friend, enemy, romance, it doesn't matter. The Inquisitor was manipulated by Solas and knows more about him and his plans than anyone else, simply from being around and talking to the man. I do worry that that missing connection will enable Solas to become some sort of caricature baddie and ultimately do harm to the story.

[nightscrawl]

Please provide them. So far I haven't heard a single way for Bioware to bring the Inquisitor back without being the protagonist or one of the protagonists that sounded good.

They could be a quest NPC or faction leader, giving the new PC instructions from the shadows. I think it would be a great return to form for Bioware if they moved back into a Neverwitner Nights type of story. Your PC was highly competent and skilled, which made certain folks take notice, but you were not a/the leader.

 

Of course those of us that romanced Dorian or Solas would likely be disappointed with that result, since the interaction would be more limited or non-existent.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

They could be a quest NPC or faction leader, giving the new PC instructions from the shadows. I think it would be a great return to form for Bioware if they moved back into a Neverwitner Nights type of story. Your PC was highly competent and skilled, which made certain folks take notice, but you were not a/the leader.

Bioware taking control of the Inquisitor as an NPC is one of the worst ways they can do this. They failed utterly with Hawke for a lot of players, myself included. I'd rather not see my Inquisitor butchered the same way they butchered my Hawke.

[Al Foley]

Bioware taking control of the Inquisitor as an NPC is one of the worst ways they can do this. They failed utterly with Hawke for a lot of players, myself included. I'd rather not see my Inquisitor butchered the same way they butchered my Hawke.

Its the likely outcome.  And at least from my perspective they didn't fail with Hawke.  

[nightscrawl]

Its the likely outcome.  And at least from my perspective they didn't fail with Hawke.

 
I didn't mind Hawke too much, really. I just wanted her to stop harping on about blood magic, and I wasn't even a blood mage (I bet those folks were pissed). All right, in reality it was only like three mentions, but it seemed a lot more!

 

Bioware taking control of the Inquisitor as an NPC is one of the worst ways they can do this. They failed utterly with Hawke for a lot of players, myself included. I'd rather not see my Inquisitor butchered the same way they butchered my Hawke.

This is understandable, and I would also have some reservations about how the character would be portrayed, particularly in his interaction with Dorian.

 

However, it actually seems like the most likely scenario, and also an interesting one for the reasons I mentioned. If the devs are concerned about the arm, then an NPC that doesn't do a lot of combat is a good choice. Also, whether the Inquisitor is still the Inquisitor, or now the former Inquisitor, I don't think it's wise to make themselves known by traipsing about Tevinter. The Dorian romance slide makes mention of him "sneaking into the heart of Tevinter," to aid Dorian, suggesting he wants to stay relatively hidden. Also, if you're trying to counter Solas's efforts in recruiting servants and the like, it  makes sense to do that using your own agent.

 

They could actually make the next game all about subterfuge (or at least a heavy component), which would certainly be interesting.

 

Geez, the more I think about it the more I like the idea!

Modifié par nightscrawl, 06 décembre 2015 - 08:36 .

[Vegeta 77]

You need to accept Quis is done his part in DA is complete now they will move on to a new protag like they always do. Or you can be like the warden fanboys who can't accept his story over and 6 years later still keep going on about him coming back let it go you are not getting another game with him. If you like quis thats fine but you need to accept the part you play as him is over.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You need to accept Quis is done his part in DA is complete now they will move on to a new protag like they always do. Or you can be like the warden fanboys who can't accept his story over and 6 years later still keep going on about him coming back let it go you are not getting another game with him. If you like quis thats fine but you need to accept the part you play as him is over.

The Warden's story had a conclusive end. The Archdemon was killed and the Blight was ended. Mission accomplished.

The Inquisitor's story has no such closure. Our mission was to close the Breach and stop those responsible. Solas, the man responsible for it all, is still out there and still plans on sundering the Veil to such an extent that the Breach is like a popped seam in comparison. 

[Donk]

You need to accept Quis is done his part in DA is complete now they will move on to a new protag like they always do. Or you can be like the warden fanboys who can't accept his story over and 6 years later still keep going on about him coming back let it go you are not getting another game with him. If you like quis thats fine but you need to accept the part you play as him is over.

 

The difference there is the devs actually said they wouldn't be bringing back the Warden.

 

Now, when I first played Trespasser I thought it was to conclude the Inquisitor's story. But after thinking about it, it is possible to go two ways about it. The hand needed to come off in order for the Inquisitor to survive.

 

Come DA4, provided it's even focused around Solas (and not say, some "in between event like DA2) I think it will be hard for the devs to deal with the Inquisitor unless they just make him/her the protagonist.

 

I don't care either way; I never liked any of my Inquisitors save for the dwarf in my avy. That isn't the Inquisitor's fault, but more or less the cheesy lines that were often a little off.. so yeah. I'm pro-Inquisitor but damn it, give them some decent lines!

[Abyss108]

You need to accept Quis is done his part in DA is complete now they will move on to a new protag like they always do. Or you can be like the warden fanboys who can't accept his story over and 6 years later still keep going on about him coming back let it go you are not getting another game with him. If you like quis thats fine but you need to accept the part you play as him is over.

 

I accepted her part was over at the end of Inquisition.

 

Then she came back, and swore that she was going to stop Solas. Multiple times. Completely irrelevant of what dialogue options I choose. I'm going to believe something that's stated in the most recent game multiple times, over something a dev stated years ago. Plans change. One of the big criticisms of DA has been having a new protagonist every game, and underdeveloped villains with no relation to the protagonist. Having the Inquisitor return fixes both of these.

 

I'm sure we'll get a new protagonist for DA5, once the plot for DAI is done. Which it isn't. The devs admitted this was only the first half of the story they had planned, they just couldn't fit it all in one game. Until the dev state otherwise, I'm going to assume DA4 will be the second half of that story.

 

If they do exactly the same thing they did at the end of DA2, where they build up to a massive thing (mage-templar war, Solas vs Inquisitor), then completely ignore it, I might actually be done with Dragon Age. As much as I like the gameplay for these games, I play them for the plot (otherwise I never would have gotten through DA2...). If 2/3 games don't finish the plot they build up to, why continue playing? No point getting invested in whatever the next story is, when it probably won't have an ending either.

[KaiserShep]

Playing as the Inquisitor again is a silly idea, and you're deluding yourself if you think it's possible to play as a character THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN ARM ANYMORE! Why do you all fail to understand that, in an action RPG, the character you play as needs both arms! Get this into your heads!

 

It's only really necessary insofar that BioWare will probably want to retain its standard class types and weapon specializations. Other than that, it's not really impossible to have an action RPG with a character with one arm; it just severely limits the weapon types our character can use, which, I admit, would actually be kind of interesting to see how they would pull such a thing off. 

[nightscrawl]

Come DA4, provided it's even focused around Solas (and not say, some "in between event like DA2)...

Please no... I actually like DA2 and played it multiple times, but I don't want a bridge game ever again.

 

 

One thing though... I don't suppose we'll be able to import our appearance, which makes me sad. I hate recreating characters, and in fact I use the same save file repeatedly just to avoid that.

[Zafireria]

You also have to remember, each installment brings in new players who haven't played a BioWare or a Dragon Age game before. Having the Inquisitor be the protagonist is going to require a lot of explanation for new players to process, most of which I think would be difficult to understand without knowing what happened in Inquisition. A new protagonist for a new player would cut a lot of that out.

 

This is the reason why I can't understand why they don't just make an expansion pack about it. Solves the problems they face. I suppose they can shorten the story down, I mean when you choose a character you get a short text describing who you are and where you are from, I suppose they could do the same. 

The inquisitor could work in a way Hawke did, here I mean that Hawke is your character from DA:2, for a person who played the game, they know her/him on a personal level and they might know and feel different. And those who did not play DA:2 (myself included) I had no idea who Hawke was, but the short explanation they gave me, actually explained enough for me to understand what was going on. I'll never have the same understanding/feels as those who actually played Hawke, but enough for it to be enjoyable. So a long explanation might not actually be required, still, there is a difference between a protagonist and an NPC helper, so yeah. I really believe an expansion pack about this issue would have been better, but we'll see what Bioware decides to do.   

[AEve]

You also have to remember, each installment brings in new players who haven't played a BioWare or a Dragon Age game before. Having the Inquisitor be the protagonist is going to require a lot of explanation for new players to process, most of which I think would be difficult to understand without knowing what happened in Inquisition. A new protagonist for a new player would cut a lot of that out.

 

I have to disagree here. Example, from my personal experience, I began the mass effect trilogy by playing ME3 (a shame). I didn't know about the universe, didn't even know about Shepard, reapers, Anderson or any of the companions. I remember Shepard being in Canada and then, robot alien from the war of the worlds attacking, so it was, run, survive & after that, unite the galaxy. I don't remember any informations or introductions to any of the past events (apart from learning from them through the game) but it didn't stopped me from enjoying /understanding it afterwards.

 

Of course months later, I did the ME trilogy ME1 to ME3 and it add to the gaming experience much more depth.

But that's a thing, there's a few people who discovered DA through DAI, and enjoyed it despite having so little information about mage/templar conflict , Hawke, or the chantry... some even played DAO and DA2 because DAI piqued their interest.

 

There could be some ways to present Inqui/Solas relationship quite easily , but my preference would go for a dual protagonist so we could have a particular inside Tevinter point of view.

 

Anyway, that was just about it & I understand your opinion about including the inquisitor in another role than the protagonist one.

[AedanStarfang]

Another one of these threads? My Inquisitor is retired. Let him be a wandering hobo in peace.

My inquisitor is an angry drunk Andrastian Qunari with a British accent.

[tanuki]

What was the point in cutting off Luke's hand when within 15 minutes he gets a prosthetic?

Plus the Anchor made Inquisitor basically unstoppable, so that needed to go, if Bioware really has some plans about making them the PC for the next game. Start from square one and all that.

[Drago_28]

No.

[Corades]

Dual protagonist for me Bio. Thank you! 

[Heathen Oxman]

My Inquisitor is retired.

 

If anyone approaches him about being the lead in the next game, he is going to use his remaining hand in a very explicit gesture directed at the person asking.

[kimgoold]

My two cents, I want my Inky back and I hope they don't replace the arm. Where does this nonsense that a person is useless if they have any type of impediment come from?. Thats rubbish!. My inky has a brain and a network of highly skilled friends and allies, the loss of an arm is not the loss of her brain. And if you've seen the asian classic movie they depict a one armed fighter who kicks ass! (cant remember title).

[ESTAQ99]

Let's follow the logic of those who want the inquisitor back in a next DA game because there are unfinished business between said inquisitor and Solas and that if the devs were bringing a new pc it would make no sense because a new pc won't have this close relationship with him (even when at the end of Trespasser, we hear the inquisitor clearly stating he won't be able to participate directly in the hunt for Solas because the psycho knows too well who they are and how they operate so they need to find new people). How is it then that  this inquisitor came from nowhere (unless you guys know something I don't) and literally took over on every aspect of what it was Hawke unfinished business. As far as I remember, Coryphaeus was a recycled antagonist from DA2 (Hawke's antagonist in Legacy), whose prison was reinforced by Malcolm Hawke (Hawke's father) by blood magic and was awakened and battled by Hawke. The mages/templars conflict was Hawke's main plot in DA2 third act and it would have made much more sense if it was him (Hawke) who was directly involved in solving it in a new game. Cassandra and Leliana, under the orders of the Chantry, were searching desperately for Hawke to solve these conflicts as you can see in the epilogue of DA2 and yet we have this new character in DAI, swooping out of nowhere, with no previous involvement in any of said previous events, just to take over where the previous pc left.

 

If you (and I mean you, who are so attached to your inquisitor), really think the writers/devs can't come up with some of the thousand possible ways to justify the introduction of a new pc and give the chance to players to build a fresh and interesting new character in a new game that will very probably take place in a new land, with many new different arcs and, hopefully, new companions and tons of other new fleshed out characters, how is it then you didn't have any problem getting attached to a new pc (one who literally fell from the sky), who took over Hawke's on almost every conflicts (including the main antagonist) with no problem whatsoever.

 

You may say you hate DA2 for this or that reasons so you didn't want to play as Hawke in a new game or some will say that Hawke was a constant recipe for failure or disaster (though I saw a lot of hype with the prospect of Hawke's role in DAI, after people catched him/her in DAI trailers), but the truth is that is just the way the devs presented Hawke in DA2 and that could have been solved very easily giving him/her some deserved victories against Cory or with Hawke direct involvement in solving the mage/templars mess.

 

Solas wasn't the main villain in DAI, it was Corypheus. The inquisitor apparently defeated him in DAI. Trespasser introduced a new antagonist (no Solas but Solas/Fen'harel +one or +two, depending who else is cohabiting Solas's body). This is a completely different character. Someone the inquisitor knows almost nothing about. There is no real bond here because this character is not what the inquisitor thought he was. The inquisitor helped to introduce this new character . This new villain will probably play an important role in the new game plots, as other characters from DAO and DA2 did in DAI. And as arcs were introduced in DA2 by Hawke but were solved by the inquisitor with no mayors complaints from players, DA4 can perfectly be played with a brand new pc who, I hope, will get introduced with a better background and be one with a less bland personality than the inquisitor had in DAI.

[Abyss108]

Let's follow the logic of those who want the inquisitor back in a next DA game because there are unfinished business between said inquisitor and Solas and that if the devs were bringing a new pc it would make no sense because a new pc won't have this close relation with him (even when at the end of Trespasser, we hear the inquisitor clearly stating he won't be able to participate directly in the hunt for Solas because the psycho knows too well who they are and how they operate so they need to find new people). How is it then that  this inquisitor came from nowhere (unless you guys know something I don't) and literally took over on every aspect of what it was Hawke unfinished business. As far as I remember, Coryphaeus was a recycled antagonist from DA2 (Hawke's antagonist in Legacy), whose prison was reinforced by Malcolm Hawke (Hawke's father) by blood magic and was awakened and battled by Hawke. The mages/templars conflict was Hawke's main plot in DA2 third act and it would have made much more sense if it was him (Hawke) who was directly involved in solving it in a new game. Cassandra and Leliana, under the orders of the Chantry, were searching desperately for Hawke to solve these conflicts as you can see in the epilogue of DA2 and yet we have this new character in DAI, swooping out of nowhere, with no previous involvement in any of said previous events, just to take over where the previous pc left.

 

If you (and I mean you, who are so attached to your inquisitor), really think the writers/devs can't come up with some of the thousand possible ways to justify the introduction of a new pc and give the chance to players to build a fresh and interesting new character in a new game that will very probably take place in a new land, with many new different arcs and, hopefully, new companions and tons of other new fleshed out characters, How is it that you didn't have any problem getting attached to a new pc (one who literally fell from the sky), who took over Hawke's on almost every conflicts (including the main antagonist) with no problem whatsoever.

 

You may say you hate DA2 for this or that reasons so you didn't want to play as Hawke in a new game or some will say that Hawke was a constant recipe for failure or disaster (though I saw a lot of hype with the prospect of Hawke's role in DAI, after people catched him/her in DAI trailers), but the truth is that is just the way the devs presented Hawke in DA2 and that could have been solved very easily giving him/her some deserved victories against Cory or with Hawke direct involvement in solving the mage/templars mess.

 

Solas wasn't the main villain in DAI, it was Corypheus. Inquisitor apparently defeated him in DAI. Trespasser introduced a new one, Solas. The inquisitor helped to introduce this new character (no Solas but Solas/Fen'harel +one or two depending who else is cohabiting Solas's body). This new villain will probably play an important role in the new game plots, as other characters from DAO and DA2 did in DAI. And as arcs were introduced in DA2 by Hawke but were solved by the inquisitor with no mayors complaints from players, DA4 can perfectly be played with a brand new pc who, I hope, will get introduced with a better background and be one with a less bland personality than the inquisitor had in DAI.

 

1 - Yes you are right, Hawke would have made more sense for the Inquisitor. Whilst it's not confirmed, it definitely looks like this was the original plan which was changed after Hawke was unpopular. It would have made much more sense to have a character other than Cory for the Inquisitor's villain. But I don't see how Bioware making this mistake once, means they should make the same mistake again.

 

2 - Hawke didn't actually have a personal connection to Cory. Not in the same sense as Inquisitor-Solas. Hawke met Cory once in a few hour long DLC, and learnt he had a connection to her father. That's not the same as someone manipulating/lying to you for a year, using you for their own purposes, destroying your life and disintegrating your arm, all while claiming to stand beside you and help you. And all of that is much worse if you considered Solas a friend/romance, but I won't get into that as it's irrelevant as it's not true for all Inquisitors. DA2 doesn't end with Hawke declaring that Cory is their responsibility to stop or that they feel personally responsible for him. Every single Inquisitor, regardless of whether you love/hate/were indifferent to Solas, declares they have to stop him. 

 

3 - Of course they could come up with a new protagonist and write an interesting plot about her. But that means ignoring the plot they have already set up. Mass Effect 3 could have had a different character to Shepard. You can write a perfectly interesting story about that, but you wouldn't get the interesting character relationships you built over the last 2 games. Baldur's Gate 2 could have been written about a different Bhaalspawn, but the narrative about Imoen wouldn't have been as interesting if she wasn't raised as your best friend from the first game. Literally any story that has a returning protagonist could have been written with a different protagonist, but that doesn't mean it should have been, especially not for the reason "we always have a different protagonist no matter what, even if we openly admit we only told the first half of a story we had planned for the first protagonist".

 

4 - A new protagonist makes the choice you made at the end of Trespasser completely weightless. A new character has no reason to want to redeem Solas. The Inquisitor only has that option because she knows him. A new character would have to been insane to consider such a thing. The writers have said they want to support different views against Solas, how can they do that with a new character that has no connection to him and no reason to have those different views? They have also said they want to provide more closure between the Inquisitor and Solas, so the Inquisitor will at least make an appearance in the next game. They know how much people hated not getting to choose how Hawke acted in Inquisition, why would they choose to do that again in DA4 with the Inquisitor?

 

5 - The Inquisitor was only bland if you made her bland. Having played every Bioware game since Baldur's Gate, and a very large number of RPGs made by other companies, the Inquisitor is one of the 2 most interesting characters to me (The other being the Exile from KotOR 2).

[vbibbi]

Hell, even though I adore Dorian to death, I'm not even sure if I want him in the next game. I do and I don't simultaneously.

I agree with most of your post, especially about the reality of implementing IQ versus personal preference. But why are you torn on whether or not Dorian should appear? He seems to be the clear bridge character between games, and wouldn't feel shoehorned in if DA4 is heavily going to involve Tevinter politics.

 

They could be a quest NPC or faction leader, giving the new PC instructions from the shadows. I think it would be a great return to form for Bioware if they moved back into a Neverwitner Nights type of story. Your PC was highly competent and skilled, which made certain folks take notice, but you were not a/the leader.

 

Of course those of us that romanced Dorian or Solas would likely be disappointed with that result, since the interaction would be more limited or non-existent.

I think Inquisitor as faction leader would be great. Bio has now hopefully learned from Hawke's cameo a bit on not making polarizing characterizations that aren't necessary, so the Inquisitor as NPC would be better handled.

 

Many of the arguments for Inquisitor returning also revolve around the relationship to Solas; that's discounting the fans of DAI who didn't feel a strong connection to him, didn't romance him, or didn't have strong feelings about being personally involved in stopping his plans. My IQ would want to stop him from ending the world, of course, but wasn't close enough to him to care about being there personally. She would be just as happy having her agents stop him, as if it were another war table mission that she oversaw. The Inquisitor doesn't have to be in the front lines in order to stop him.

 

I accepted her part was over at the end of Inquisition.

 

Then she came back, and swore that she was going to stop Solas. Multiple times. Completely irrelevant of what dialogue options I choose. I'm going to believe something that's stated in the most recent game multiple times, over something a dev stated years ago. Plans change. One of the big criticisms of DA has been having a new protagonist every game, and underdeveloped villains with no relation to the protagonist. Having the Inquisitor return fixes both of these.

 

I'm sure we'll get a new protagonist for DA5, once the plot for DAI is done. Which it isn't. The devs admitted this was only the first half of the story they had planned, they just couldn't fit it all in one game. Until the dev state otherwise, I'm going to assume DA4 will be the second half of that story.

 

If they do exactly the same thing they did at the end of DA2, where they build up to a massive thing (mage-templar war, Solas vs Inquisitor), then completely ignore it, I might actually be done with Dragon Age. As much as I like the gameplay for these games, I play them for the plot (otherwise I never would have gotten through DA2...). If 2/3 games don't finish the plot they build up to, why continue playing? No point getting invested in whatever the next story is, when it probably won't have an ending either.

Well, from a cynical perspective, if Bio doesn't fully wrap up a story in one game, they're hoping that fans will automatically buy the next game in the hopes of finishing the story. It's a good marketing way of retaining customers.

[Abyss108]

Well, from a cynical perspective, if Bio doesn't fully wrap up a story in one game, they're hoping that fans will automatically buy the next game in the hopes of finishing the story. It's a good marketing way of retaining customers.

 

I'm honestly fine with this, as long as they do actually carry on/end the story in the next game. I buy episodic games like Telltale all the time, and if Bioware want to do the same thing on a much larger scale that sounds awesome to me. 

 

But that's not what happened in DA2. Dragon Age 2 built up a mage-templar war, and then ended it off screen, between games, with no input from the player. DAI should have been about that conflict after they spent so much time building it up. 

[vbibbi]

I'm honestly fine with this, as long as they do actually carry on/end the story in the next game. I buy episodic games like Telltale all the time, and if Bioware want to do the same thing on a much larger scale that sounds awesome to me. 

 

But that's not what happened in DA2. Dragon Age 2 built up a mage-templar war, and then ended it off screen, between games, with no input from the player. DAI should have been about that conflict after they spent so much time building it up. 

Agreed. That was one of my disappointments of DAI