414 réponses à ce sujet

[Smudjygirl]

Hmm, interesting. It would be an interesting turn of events if the Evenuris had already escaped somehow and were simply regaining their strength before revealing themselves to Solas and trying to regain what they'd lost. Though how exactly they'd escape from their sleep 'behind a mirror' due to the breach eludes me. I assumed from cole/solas banter that they had been trapped behind one of the Eluvians that lead to somewhere in the fade (i would assume The Golden City), and that it would be far harder to escape from than just having a rip in the fade. 
If that's one of your theories, what are your ideas about how that would come to pass?

 

It's probably not likely that they have escaped. And i doubt they are all trapped in the same place, since that would make them more powerful than Solas as a collective. But all it would need is one to escape for the others to. Plus, Flemeth has been up to stuff, and i don't think Mythal is the beacon of honestty and loyalty Solas holds her up to be. But from Hanako's post, we'll find out soon.

 

Well, you win New Protagonist people.

 

Just a qestion, if i may.

1) Where and when is this from?

 

I think they may have failed at  "conclusively tying off this protagonist". Whatever, though. We'll see what comes of it

[Abyss108]

It's from a talk at GDC.

 

I'll wait until there's actually a stream or something that explains exactly what was said, but if that confirms what it looks like, looks like I'm out of the Bioware fandom and this forum. I had fun here, but I don't want to be one of the people who hangs around the forum for a game they don't like just to complain about it. Ah well.

[Smudjygirl]

It's from a talk at GDC.

 

I'll wait until there's actually a stream or something that explains exactly what was said, but if that confirms what it looks like, looks like I'm out of the Bioware fandom and this forum. I had fun here, but I don't want to be one of the people who hangs around the forum for a game they don't like just to complain about it. Ah well.

 

I'll wait to see exactly what they have planned. But i may very well follow, though i don't know. I'll have to see if what they have panned works. I'd hate to drop them just because of this.

[Abyss108]

I'll wait to see exactly what they have planned. But i may very well follow, though i don't know. I'll have to see if what they have panned works. I'd hate to drop them just because of this.

 

It doesn't matter what they have planned to me.

 

If they think a story ends when the protagonist declares they are going to stop the villain, then there's no way I can ever care about the next story they write - after all, it could just end the same way. Dragon Age 4 could "end" when the protagonist meets whoever their villain will be. Same for the next game. I could spend the entire next game getting involved in the plot and caring about the relationship and conflict between characters, and then it's just suddenly dropped because they couldn't fit it in the game again.

 

It just sets the expectation that I shouldn't care about the characters, because any conflict will be unresolved so the writers can start another unrelated plot, repeat to infinity.

 

So if this gets officially confirmed, I'm out.

[Smudjygirl]

It doesn't matter what they have planned to me.

 

If they think a story ends when the protagonist declares they are going to stop the villain, then there's no way I can ever care about the next story they write - after all, it could just end the same way. Dragon Age 4 could "end" when the protagonist meets whoever their villain will be. Same for the next game. I could spend the entire next game getting involved in the plot and caring about the relationship and conflict between characters, and then it's just suddenly dropped because they couldn't fit it in the game again.

 

It just sets the expectation that I shouldn't care about the characters, because any conflict will be unresolved so the writers can start another unrelated plot, repeat to infinity.

 

So if this gets officially confirmed, I'm out.

 

hhmmm i agree 100%. For me it's just the lingering affection from how much i have enjoyed Dragon Age. But to be honest, i won't play the next game if the Inquisitor isn't PC. Because, as you say, they'll just do it all over again. It didn't work from DA2 to DAI, and those plots were significantly less connected to the PC's (Mage War and Cory). Which explains why they got away with it, really. But i can't think of a way it will work this time. And i care too much about the story and characters to be able to let this slide.

 

But, although the slide probably speaks for itself, we will have to wait and see for it to be elaborated on more.

[In Exile]

It doesn't matter what they have planned to me.

 

If they think a story ends when the protagonist declares they are going to stop the villain, then there's no way I can ever care about the next story they write - after all, it could just end the same way. Dragon Age 4 could "end" when the protagonist meets whoever their villain will be. Same for the next game. I could spend the entire next game getting involved in the plot and caring about the relationship and conflict between characters, and then it's just suddenly dropped because they couldn't fit it in the game again.

 

It just sets the expectation that I shouldn't care about the characters, because any conflict will be unresolved so the writers can start another unrelated plot, repeat to infinity.

 

So if this gets officially confirmed, I'm out.

 

You misunderstand, I think. The story clearly doesn't end in DA:I. That is the very point of DA4. The difference is between "the story" and the "Inquisitor's story". Declaration aside, and potential personal relationship aside, the Inquisitor isn't the protagonist to Solas's antagonist, anymore than Captain Anderson was the protagonist in ME because of his pre-existing history with Saren. 

 

Solas was a protagonist in DA:I, and is at absolute worst a neutral figure in Trespasser. Bioware doesn't need the Inquisitor to be the protagonist to explore any of these points. Whether it's unsatisfying to switch protagonists in this way is a different question. 

[Inkvisiittori]

I don't want the Inquisitor to be just forgotten, but they don't need to be the main player character for them to have a major part in the story of DA4. I could see the new protagonist being Inquisitors lackey who collects all the elfroot and kills their enemies, because the Inquisitor is now almost larger than life, symbolic, legendary character. Maybe they are the newbies mentor and are in charge of the force that will try to stop Solas. As long as Inquisitor is playable in major scenes I'm fine with this. She needs to be there when the final confrontation with Solas happens and then I wan't to be able to control what they say and do because it's my character and not a three personalities NPC like Hawke.

[Wulfram]

You misunderstand, I think. The story clearly doesn't end in DA:I. That is the very point of DA4. The difference is between "the story" and the "Inquisitor's story". Declaration aside, and potential personal relationship aside, the Inquisitor isn't the protagonist to Solas's antagonist, anymore than Captain Anderson was the protagonist in ME because of his pre-existing history with Saren. 
 
Solas was a protagonist in DA:I, and is at absolute worst a neutral figure in Trespasser. Bioware doesn't need the Inquisitor to be the protagonist to explore any of these points. Whether it's unsatisfying to switch protagonists in this way is a different question.

That they can explore Solas' story without the Inquisitor doesn't mean that the Inquisitor's story doesn't need a proper ending. And giving the Inquisitor's story a proper ending needs them to be playable.

[Vegeta 77]

I both like and dislike it on one hand i'm glad because i don't want to play warden or Quis again and you get a lot more new squadmates and li. On the other hand i hate it because i want to play Hawke again. i like that DA does its own thing but i care a lot more about shep because he gets three games.

[wright1978]

I don't want the Inquisitor to be just forgotten, but they don't need to be the main player character for them to have a major part in the story of DA4. I could see the new protagonist being Inquisitors lackey who collects all the elfroot and kills their enemies, because the Inquisitor is now almost larger than life, symbolic, legendary character. Maybe they are the newbies mentor and are in charge of the force that will try to stop Solas. As long as Inquisitor is playable in major scenes I'm fine with this. She needs to be there when the final confrontation with Solas happens and then I wan't to be able to control what they say and do because it's my character and not a three personalities NPC like Hawke.

 Really don't want the new protagonist to Inquisitor's lackey.

[Reznore57]

You misunderstand, I think. The story clearly doesn't end in DA:I. That is the very point of DA4. The difference is between "the story" and the "Inquisitor's story". Declaration aside, and potential personal relationship aside, the Inquisitor isn't the protagonist to Solas's antagonist, anymore than Captain Anderson was the protagonist in ME because of his pre-existing history with Saren. 

 

Solas was a protagonist in DA:I, and is at absolute worst a neutral figure in Trespasser. Bioware doesn't need the Inquisitor to be the protagonist to explore any of these points. Whether it's unsatisfying to switch protagonists in this way is a different question. 

 

I disagree.

Solas in Trespasser is not a neutral figure , he can't be when he goes "Oh Yeah I'm planning on destroying the world by the way."

There's no fight because the Inqui can't do anything (although you can try an attack ).

Then the Inqui goes "I will stop you".

If this isn't the start of a protag/antagonist relationship ,well what was it?

 

Anderson/Saren...I have vague memory but I seem to remember Anderson only had suspicion about Saren , and Saren had friends in high places so Anderson dropped the case.

There never was a discussion between them and Saren went "muhahaha destroy the galaxy" , Anderson replied "I will vanquish you" then turned around and thought "oh well no I'm too old for this **** , I'll wait for somebody else to do it."

[Heimdall]

They're definitely nudging the Inquisitor out of the limelight, but I still have hope for a dual protagonist scenario (Especially since mine involves an 80/20 split with the Inquisitor playing second fiddle)

[In Exile]

That they can explore Solas' story without the Inquisitor doesn't mean that the Inquisitor's story doesn't need a proper ending. And giving the Inquisitor's story a proper ending needs them to be playable.

I disagree with both. Or rather, I think there is a difference between a proper ending (in the sense of how say ME3 or NWN2 lacked one) and a satisfying ending for the player (which is what may require the character to be playable).

Take DAA as an example. The HOF is playable, and yet the very concept of the expansion can take multiple dumps on the character.

[In Exile]

I disagree.
Solas in Trespasser is not a neutral figure , he can't be when he goes "Oh Yeah I'm planning on destroying the world by the way."
There's no fight because the Inqui can't do anything (although you can try an attack ).
Then the Inqui goes "I will stop you".
If this isn't the start of a protag/antagonist relationship ,well what was it?

Anderson/Saren...I have vague memory but I seem to remember Anderson only had suspicion about Saren , and Saren had friends in high places so Anderson dropped the case.
There never was a discussion between them and Saren went "muhahaha destroy the galaxy" , Anderson replied "I will vanquish you" then turned around and thought "oh well no I'm too old for this **** , I'll wait for somebody else to do it."

Solas isn't trying to destroy the world in Trespasser. He's actively working to stop the qunari from blowing up the South. The plot of Trespasser isn't to stop Solas. Solas doesn't put his plot into motion. He can't yet - he needs the anchor, and he saves your life in getting it.

I can - right now - yell at a political leaders at a speech that I'll stop him or her. That doesn't make me their antagonist. That's not how it works.

If you want another example, TIM in ME2. He's not an antagonist, despite the fact that he actually betrays you. He's at worst a neutral figure, and he wants to overthrow a government to advance a supremacist agenda.

As for Saren, he's actually the antagonist in the prequel novel. He actively works to undermine Anderson. He betrays him in the end and ruins his chance to be a Spectre. Anderson does basically swear that he'll stop Saren.

DA4 will likely have the Inquisitor opposing Solas - the character will be a supporting protagonist. That doesn't mean Solas is an antagonist in DAI. It also doesn't make the Inquisitor the MAIN protagonist, which is the point of the Anderson comparison.

[JadeDragon]

Idk why there is any surprise. Bioware been stated that the game is about the Dragon Age hence the name and that they will change heroes each game. Its a few fans who created in there own canons that DA4 will have the Inquisitor return as the main hero. They made the Inquisitor lose there arm as a sign they are moving from that character. A cameo is certainly possible but it was always fans who looked deep into ways for the Inquisitor to return. The Inquisitor saying he will stop Solas doesnt mean they have to do it personally, A General of a Army can vow to take down a opposing force and its not expected that General would be in the front lines when they have a Army. I dont want the DA4 hero to work for the Inquisition but a Inquisition companion or working with them also allows the Inquisitor to stick to what was said. The Dragon Age was always about various heroes who rose to fame in a Age that needed them the most which makes Dragon Age games so unique. So if your expectations was the Inquisitor to be the next protagonist then you get disappointed when its not the case that is your fault for ignoring what was stated. The Inquisitor story is not over just like The Warden and Hawke story is not over. In one game we were told The Warden was on a Quest looking for a cure for the calling something that is huge to DA lore, Hawke either is trapped in the fade with the most powerful demon we encountered or headed towards a Warden Civil War, and The Inquisitor wants to stop The Dread Wolf. Seems like nobodies story is done which is why fans of each hero want to experience these stories but that expectation is on our part not Bioware. That is why they decided to take the arm of the most recent hero so there would not be a Warden scenario of constant cries for a return. No hero should return over the other if the Inquisitor comes back Warden fans would want that return to happen. There is nothing wrong with feeling connected to your heroes I am to all 3 equally which is way I look forward to making a 4th hero that could hopefully do the same the last 3 did for me.

[vertigomez]

The real question is... will our new protagonist get their very own mabari warhound, or did Quizzie finally buck the trend?

[Obliviousmiss]

 

 That is why they decided to take the arm of the most recent hero so there would not be a Warden scenario of constant cries for a return. No hero should return over the other if the Inquisitor comes back Warden fans would want that return to happen. There is nothing wrong with feeling connected to your heroes I am to all 3 equally which is way I look forward to making a 4th hero that could hopefully do the same the last 3 did for me.

 

Thank you...... I know people are attached to the Warden, Hawke, and the Inquisitor, but this is how Dragon Age is.

 

Bioware isn't going to pull a 2010 Ubisoft and keep Ezio around for two more games because fans loved him. 

[Wulfram]

I disagree with both. Or rather, I think there is a difference between a proper ending (in the sense of how say ME3 or NWN2 lacked one) and a satisfying ending for the player (which is what may require the character to be playable).

Take DAA as an example. The HOF is playable, and yet the very concept of the expansion can take multiple dumps on the character.

ME3 had a proper ending, at least as I'm using the term, it was just terrible. There was no sense that it needed a sequel, unless you believed Indoctrination theory anyway.

The Inquisitor needs to be playable for a proper ending because Bioware can't write them as a real character otherwise, because Bioware doesn't know what their character is. Unless they force a canon Inquisitor - or perhaps two, a Kill Solas Inquisitor and a Redeem Solas Inquisitor - which would still leave the player's Inquisitor without a proper ending.

Since I'm arguing that being playable is necessary, not that its sufficient, your Awakening example doesn't really seem relevant.

[dawnstone]

 

So Weekes says, when they say that the Inquisitor is tied off, they mean no more rift-closing, which I guess means they lose their job title.

 

Which can mean, if you want to look at it that way, since that they lose that power set, they are free to pursue a new one (aka a kick-ass prosthetic and its associated learning curve).

 

Am I being too positive? Too pie in the sky?

[Obliviousmiss]

 

So Weekes says, when they say that the Inquisitor is tied off, they mean no more rift-closing, which I guess means they lose their job title.

 

Which can mean, if you want to look at it that way, since that they lose that power set, they are free to pursue a new one (aka a kick-ass prosthetic and its associated learning curve).

 

Am I being too positive? Too pie in the sky?

 

The Inquisitor became the Inquisitor because they needed to close the giant rift in the sky. 

 

Since the rift is closed, and the arm with the mark is off the Inquisitor, that to me is enough to say the Inquisitor's work is done. 

[vertigomez]

^^ I think that just means that losing the arm isn't the reason the Inq won't be the protagonist, not that that Inq will be the protagonist.

[Smudjygirl]

^^ I think that just means that losing the arm isn't the reason the Inq won't be the protagonist, not that that Inq will be the protagonist.

Yep, i took it to mean the Breach is 100% done. He clearly states that the arm isn't the reason, which suggests to me there will be another reason. Good and bad. Good because it would be highly offensive if they went "no arm now, inquisitor is a dud". Bad because i want the Inquisitor back for Solas haha

[dawnstone]

^^ I think that just means that losing the arm isn't the reason the Inq won't be the protagonist, not that that Inq will be the protagonist.

True. Until there's an announcement to the contrary, I'm going to keep on trucking with my hopes of seeing them in an active, controllable role. I'm planning to play the next game, either way, unless it is a complete potato.

[Neras]

Well, you win New Protagonist people.

  t

 

Well as much as I love Tresspasser, it doesn't feel like to me that they finished the Inquisitor's--the character's--story, just the Inquisition's. If they do . . . well, okay then. But both Hawke and the Inquisitor both felt very unfinished to me (unlike the Warden who's story felt complete) and that is becoming tiresome for me.  As much as I love the lore and world building, perhaps this just isn't the game series for me. I won't say I won't buy the next game--I said that after II and was wrong, but the chances did just drop significantly.

[Smudjygirl]

Well as much as I love Tresspasser, it doesn't feel like to me that they finished the Inquisitor's--the character's--story, just the Inquisition's. If they do . . . well, okay then. But both Hawke and the Inquisitor both felt very unfinished to me (unlike the Warden who's story felt complete) and that is becoming tiresome for me.  As much as I love the lore and world building, perhaps this just isn't the game series for me. I won't say I won't buy the next game--I said that after II and was wrong, but the chances did just drop significantly.

 

The fact so many people have said exactly what you have said shows that they didn't conclusively tie off the Inquisitor's story. And if it was just people "head cannoning" stuff, most people would have the same opinion on exactly why. I wonder how they plan on satisfying everyone when so many feel we've been cut short on story content for our PC, 2 times already. Oh well