408 réponses à ce sujet

[BansheeOwnage]

Not exactly. Well, sort of. Besides one character (and one pretty much re-written character), they did in ME2. Then in ME3 they swapped back in parts of the original party, with a few new characters. But some of those characters back in, again, had weird characterization shifts. 

Not quite accurate. Joker, Doctor Chakwas, Tali, and Garrus all return. And to answer DragonKingReborn, all of the other members of Shepard's crew from the first game appear in the second even if they're not part of the crew, and same with the second to third.

[Dai Grepher]

I've waited a while to reply to this topic, because I didn't think there was much to discuss. I think it was obvious that the (ex)Inquisitor would not be the main protagonist in DA4. Instead they would have a new one, and the (x)In would play an important NPC role, or maybe act as a party companion at a certain stage of the game. He is now a mastermind, and he has his own tasks to complete. The new protag will be the focus from now on.

The slide itself doesn't really prove anything. Trespasser can wrap up the Inquisitor without ending his role completely. It's possible to have him be the protag in DA4, I just don't think BioWare wants to do that. New players to the game won't want to play as an established character from a past game. They will want to create their own new character.

Besides, BioWare failed to end the (x)In's story anyway. The cliffhanger shows that he is still in it, and he plans to stop Solas.

[Battlebloodmage]

Well you get a new protagonist like you want, why do you care if I think they will be boring?

 

The thing is...Trespasser isn't varied. All inquisitors are funneled into the same position. All vow to stop Solas' plan, all plot in the basement to stop him, all are missing the arm, none are dead. It seemed like they were setting up the inquisitor as the protagonist of the next game or at least an expansion.

 

BioWare made the world feel awfully small by continuing to carry over plotlines, NPCs, and companions. It would make sense to carry those things over if the protagonist is carried over and it's part of the same story, otherwise do a new story with new companions, new plotlines, etc...

Well, we're just sharing opinions here, that's an assumption for you to think I care as opposed to how I view the next protagonist.

 

Missing an arm, most companions are either gone or dead, hang up with LI, the Inquisition itself is disbanded or not. That's enough variation they need to take into account for, and I would rather they start something new entirely which they have and I'm happy with it. They carry the world state over, so that it can be resolved in the next game, just as the mage and templar conflicted didn't get solved by Hawke, Solas will probably be dealt with by the next protagonist, at least, we'll see the Inquisitor cameo like with Hawke, and that should be enough. Bioware doesn't carry everything over, just the big decisions that can have an influence on the next game. The series is about Thedas, not about any singular hero, the setting and cliffhanger is for the Thedas world, not for any particular hero. 

[Smudjygirl]

Well, we're just sharing opinions here, that's an assumption for you to think I care as opposed to how I view the next protagonist.

 

Missing an arm, most companions are either gone or dead, hang up with LI, the Inquisition itself is disbanded or not. That's enough variation they need to take into account for, and I would rather they start something new entirely which they have and I'm happy with it. They carry the world state over, so that it can be resolved in the next game, just as the mage and templar conflicted didn't get solved by Hawke, Solas will probably be dealt with by the next protagonist, at least, we'll see the Inquisitor cameo like with Hawke, and that should be enough. Bioware doesn't carry everything over, just the big decisions that can have an influence on the next game. The series is about Thedas, not about any singular hero, the setting and cliffhanger is for the Thedas world, not for any particular hero. 

 

How would you say they are starting something "entirely new",if you don't mind my asking. To me that does not seem to be the case, though i would vastly prefer if that were the case. It is heavily implied at the end of Trespasser that the Inquisition will "recruit" those who will stop Solas. That is not, to me, "entirely new".

 

The idea of a cameo is a problem in itself. People did not like Hawke's cameo, so are apprehensive about how the Inquisitor will be handled.

 

And if the series was just about Thedas, should that not be enough for more games? Why, then, is there a need to carry over villains and hero's of years past? DA Origins to 2 did this very well. They were connected in the sense they were both a part of what was going on in Thedas, and we needed Hawke because the Warden was otherwise indisposed. But, because of the constant throw backs to Hawke in Inquisition, DA2 to Inquisition did not work as well. With Solas' story potentially being a fairly big part of DA4, there will be constant throw backs to them. And it seems the vast majority (people from every camp) believe that the Inquisitor should have a fairly big role in stopping Solas. They made the Inquisitor invested in Solas and his plans, love him or hate him. There is no option to be "neutral". 

 

The end of DA2 left on a cliffhanger. But Hawke said nothing about stopping the Mage/Templar war. They did not get together with others and say "I'm going to stop this, no matter what". There was no cliffhanger for the character. The real issue with Hawke comes with the obvious places you stop and think "This was probably something Hawke was meant to do". As you said, the end of DA2 was a cliffhanger for Thedas. I cannot agree with you that the Inquisitor's end was not a cliffhanger for them. As PC or otherwise, the ending clearly shows the Inquisitor's hand (pun!) in future events is not yet done. That, then, is a cliffhanger for a character. Now if it had ended with Solas being dealt with and his story ending, the Inquisitor saying "we have finished everything we have set out to do, thank you and good day", with no scene in Haven. Hurrah! Cliffhanger for Thedas, new PC welcome. A story about Tevinter and the Qunari with no baggage with the Inquisitor, just a mention of their deeds every now and again. As it happens, that was not the case.

 

This is how i interpreted the way DA has been. These are the reasons i think a new PC every time simply isn't working, and why i think just saying "it's about Thedas" is not a good cover for why a new PC is "needed". I would be interested in how you got your opinion, which is clearly different from mine. If you don't mind explaining, that is.

[Reznore57]

Dragon Age isn't about Thedas.

The whole thing is purely character driven and little else.

Orlais is supposed to be important , and how much time did we spend there ?Just compare companion content to the content fleshing out Orlais as a country.(not talking empty battlefield in the middle of nowhere there)

Almost no quests with peasents ,  city elves/servants , chevalier , scholar etc...I don't think we even saw a bard (except Leliana but that's not her job anymore) and those were supposed to be important in court.

[Battlebloodmage]

How would you say they are starting something "entirely new",if you don't mind my asking. To me that does not seem to be the case, though i would vastly prefer if that were the case. It is heavily implied at the end of Trespasser that the Inquisition will "recruit" those who will stop Solas. That is not, to me, "entirely new".

 

The idea of a cameo is a problem in itself. People did not like Hawke's cameo, so are apprehensive about how the Inquisitor will be handled.

 

And if the series was just about Thedas, should that not be enough for more games? Why, then, is there a need to carry over villains and hero's of years past? DA Origins to 2 did this very well. They were connected in the sense they were both a part of what was going on in Thedas, and we needed Hawke because the Warden was otherwise indisposed. But, because of the constant throw backs to Hawke in Inquisition, DA2 to Inquisition did not work as well. With Solas' story potentially being a fairly big part of DA4, there will be constant throw backs to them. And it seems the vast majority (people from every camp) believe that the Inquisitor should have a fairly big role in stopping Solas. They made the Inquisitor invested in Solas and his plans, love him or hate him. There is no option to be "neutral". 

 

The end of DA2 left on a cliffhanger. But Hawke said nothing about stopping the Mage/Templar war. They did not get together with others and say "I'm going to stop this, no matter what". There was no cliffhanger for the character. The real issue with Hawke comes with the obvious places you stop and think "This was probably something Hawke was meant to do". As you said, the end of DA2 was a cliffhanger for Thedas. I cannot agree with you that the Inquisitor's end was not a cliffhanger for them. As PC or otherwise, the ending clearly shows the Inquisitor's hand (pun!) in future events is not yet done. That, then, is a cliffhanger for a character. Now if it had ended with Solas being dealt with and his story ending, the Inquisitor saying "we have finished everything we have set out to do, thank you and good day", with no scene in Haven. Hurrah! Cliffhanger for Thedas, new PC welcome. A story about Tevinter and the Qunari with no baggage with the Inquisitor, just a mention of their deeds every now and again. As it happens, that was not the case.

 

This is how i interpreted the way DA has been. These are the reasons i think a new PC every time simply isn't working, and why i think just saying "it's about Thedas" is not a good cover for why a new PC is "needed". I would be interested in how you got your opinion, which is clearly different from mine. If you don't mind explaining, that is.

Heavily implied is a headcanon thing, especially with the Inquisition being disbanded, then it's not happening. 

 

Solas may or may not be a big part, everything thought DA4 would have templars and mages war play a big part, but it basically ended in the first arc. Even if it did become the central conflicts, inquisitor doesn't have to be the one who solve it. There are some characters that will definitely return like Dorian who said he will be back to Tevinter. If the game involved Solas, the Inquisitor may be back as cameo. Pretty sure Cassandra looking for Hawke is a pretty big cliffhanger that could interpreted as him returning as well, but in the end, it's all just your interpretation for the story. As the developers intended for Inquisition to be the closure of Inquisitor, anything else is just basically people projecting their desire to see Inquisitor again and the only connection would be Solas, something that involved Thedas at large, and something that can be solved by a different hero.

[Smudjygirl]

Heavily implied is a headcanon thing, especially with the Inquisition being disbanded, then it's not happening. 

 

Solas may or may not be a big part, everything thought DA4 would have templars and mages war play a big part, but it basically ended in the first arc. Even if it did become the central conflicts, inquisitor doesn't have to be the one who solve it. There are some characters that will definitely return like Dorian who said he will be back to Tevinter. If the game involved Solas, the Inquisitor may be back as cameo. Pretty sure Cassandra looking for Hawke is a pretty big cliffhanger that could interpreted as him returning as well, but in the end, it's all just your interpretation for the story. As the developers intended for Inquisition to be the closure of Inquisitor, anything else is just basically people projecting their desire to see Inquisitor again and the only connection would be Solas, something that involved Thedas at large, and something that can be solved by a different hero.

 

It is most definitely heavily implied that the Inquisitor will be involved in some capacity. It is not a "head canon" in any way. And the "heavily implied" goes beyond the game. Weekes has said Solas' story will be in the next game. He doesn't say how much, but killing everyone is hardly a mid game plot....unless it is poorly written. I'm still trying to find that tweet, however. I've seen it before, but would like it to back up that it was said. I don't expect anyone to just take me at my word. Just as Hawke was involved in Cory (which she knew almost nothing about) i would guess the Inquisitor will be involved in DA4 and Solas' story (which she knows a lot about)

 

In fact, we do not know who will "definitely return", other than Solas himself. Your "head cannon" is getting in the way here. Dorian is more than likely going to show up, since he always returns to Tevinter. But there has been no hints of him "definitely showing up", it's just people connecting the fact he is in Tevinter and that's where we "might" be going next.

 

The ending of DA2 went something like "oh well, we tried". They clearly give up on their search for Hawke, so it could have gone either way.

 

As for the last bit, i didn't want my Inquisitor back after the main game. My desire for Trespasser was closure. That is not what i got.

[Tidus]

From what I read I'm not to excited since that was for the Trespasser DLC..

 

At any rate I'm not sure if Tidus,Camine or Chasha would be interested in staring in another DA game. All three of those knife ears is wanting better pay if they decide to take the roll.

[CronoDragoon]

I don't think it's controversial to say the Inquisitor and Solas will be involved in DA4 to some capacity. I just don't believe it will be the focus. It will be a backdrop, the context through which DA4's particular story will be told. That doesn't mean there won't be big-picture plot movement, but at the forefront will be the local story. So, for example, DA4 will be about (making things up there) a slave revolt in Tevinter threatening to destabilize the country enough for the Qunari to gain the upper hand in the war. The DA4 protag needs to decide between supporting the revolution at the possible cost of strengthening the Qunari's position, or protecting the status quo (with some changes) so that the Qunari are beaten back. The big-picture context of this being that the revolt is being supported by Solas because something something Eluvians ancient magic, and that the Inquisitor might ask you to infiltrate the revolt in order to find out about Solas and stop him from obtaining whatever he's after.

 

Now that's all just BS I came up with, but let's look at this: it's very difficult to argue with this setup that the Inquisitor should be the main protagonist. First, your origin will likely tie you to the Tevinter situation in some way, making the consequences there more personal. For the Inquisitor, Tevinter is another country, for the protagonist, it could well be your home. Second, the Inquisitor simply wouldn't be able to take an active role in such a plot premise, because they'd be easily recognized by Solas's underlings. Third, since Solas would be backing this in the shadows, you'd have a separate antagonist as the actual face of the opposition, with their own motives and purpose. Such an antagonist, introduced and dealt with in the same game, should be taken care of by a similar protagonist, introduced and concluded in the same game. It's more thematically appropriate. Meanwhile, the roles of the Inquisitor and Solas as chess piece movers mirror one another, and everything lines up.

 

None of this is being suggested as even likely, by the way. I'm just presenting one possibility of many that demonstrates how it's far too simplistic to say "DA4 will have Solas, therefore Inquisitor should =PC".

[Beerfish]

My quizzy applauds this new path ...wait.....damn...

 

As long as they don't force feed us along certain paths with the ancient elves and the Qunari I'll be fine.  I don't like either of them.

[Battlebloodmage]

It is most definitely heavily implied that the Inquisitor will be involved in some capacity. It is not a "head canon" in any way. And the "heavily implied" goes beyond the game. Weekes has said Solas' story will be in the next game. He doesn't say how much, but killing everyone is hardly a mid game plot....unless it is poorly written. I'm still trying to find that tweet, however. I've seen it before, but would like it to back up that it was said. I don't expect anyone to just take me at my word. Just as Hawke was involved in Cory (which she knew almost nothing about) i would guess the Inquisitor will be involved in DA4 and Solas' story (which she knows a lot about)

 

In fact, we do not know who will "definitely return", other than Solas himself. Your "head cannon" is getting in the way here. Dorian is more than likely going to show up, since he always returns to Tevinter. But there has been no hints of him "definitely showing up", it's just people connecting the fact he is in Tevinter and that's where we "might" be going next.

 

The ending of DA2 went something like "oh well, we tried". They clearly give up on their search for Hawke, so it could have gone either way.

 

As for the last bit, i didn't want my Inquisitor back after the main game. My desire for Trespasser was closure. That is not what i got.

Yes, something I have already pointed out, Inquisitor could come back as cameo, doesn't mean that it's "heavily implied" they would be the protagonist. I would rather for Dorian not returning, one of the worst characters for me, so either ways work. Both of them would likely be cameo, and I'm glad it would just stay that way. Tevinter has its own culture and value, I would rather for someone who has some relations to the place anyway. A new protagonist would be better for these kinds of things rather than the Inquisitor, especially when the Inquisitor's name would related to the Inquisition, they either have to change the name or have to make it about another inquisition. It's better with a new character and a blank slate. 

[robertthebard]

Where on earth did you get that from? Nowhere did i say that we should get an "info dump" and i did not say any one character should have all the answers. I said that Cory clearly was an interesting character, but his story was not apart of Inquisitions story. For all the talk about "finding the truth" and stopping him, the Inquisitor effectively learns nothing about Cory save that he "might have been a magister". There is usually an info gap between player and character. For example, i don't expect the Inquisitor to learn about the Warden seal and such, because Hawke learned that when it was needed. But the Inquisitor should have learned much, much more about Cory. If we were pursuing him, why reduce him to a couple of codex here and there, but have him be the main villain?
 
Moral of the story: I do not think that PC's should be omniscient. But they should not be left completely in the dark either.

From reading your post. The Varric point was an extrapolation, and pre-counter to "But Varric was there" posts that I felt would be inevitable. Anything that they could have given us would have had to have been in codex entries, who are we going to talk to that was there for the entirety of his millennium long nap? Who are we going to talk to that was there when he was discovered? The only person that we have awareness of that could have even a remote chance of being there was Solas, and I don't think he's going to blow his own cover. So it's codex or nothing, and there are plenty of posts about how there was too much of that already. So while more information might have been a great thing, there was no way we were going to get it w/out a lot of complaints about having to actually read stuff to get it.

[Smudjygirl]

Yes, something I have already pointed out, Inquisitor could come back as cameo, doesn't mean that it's "heavily implied" they would be the protagonist. I would rather for Dorian not returning, one of the worst characters for me, so either ways work. Both of them would likely be cameo, and I'm glad it would just stay that way. Tevinter has its own culture and value, I would rather for someone who has some relations to the place anyway. A new protagonist would be better for these kinds of things rather than the Inquisitor, especially when the Inquisitor's name would related to the Inquisition, they either have to change the name or have to make it about another inquisition. It's better with a new character and a blank slate. 

 

Where did i say i was talking about the Inquisitor being PC, other than when i said "PC or not". I said it is "heavily implied" they will be "involved in some capacity". Not that they would be PC. You made an assumption on what i meant. I'm for the Inquisitor returning, but it's not longer a complaint. As long as they can get some feedback. Whining will get us nowhere.

 

And i agree, but i would prefer a new PC and a game where we could focus solely on Tevinter and the Qunari. With Solas' plan and involvement, Tevinter may be reduced to nothing more than a backdrop. Minrathous may be Val Royoux 2.0.

 

And while i am most certainly interested in seeing Tevinter through a Tevinter, i prefer the story. Solas, in my eyes, belongs to the Inquisitor. You should not set up a conflict between a PC and Antagonist and the not have it followed through. My fear is that a new PC will be more likely to cause Inquisition 2.0 more than having the Inquisitor come back

[BansheeOwnage]

 

This is how i interpreted the way DA has been. These are the reasons i think a new PC every time simply isn't working, and why i think just saying "it's about Thedas" is not a good cover for why a new PC is "needed".

There are reasons I think it's not working either, and I feel like saying them, so:

 

The main, general reason I don't think it's working is simply that in a lot of ways, Dragon Age is constructed like a series that has a returning protagonist, with many of the features thereof... just without the protagonist itself. As you said, this is less of an issue between DA:O and DA2, but it's still there. You have overarching plotlines, returning characters, even returning antagonists, just no returning protagonist.

 

Bioware still treats all the protagonists as though they're not really separate though, in the sense that Bioware just sees them as the player. With that viewpoint, they don't understand the disconnect when Alistair goes all the way to Kirkwall to meet Hawke, even if it's a bit far-fetched. I mentioned this problem with Morrigan in another thread too. Your dialogue options with her are more suited to someone who already knows her, not someone who just met her and should be suspicious. They don't understand how odd it is when the Inquisitor decides if Hawke or Stroud/Loghain/Alistair sacrifices themselves, because even though the Inquisitor just met them and really has no right to make that decision, the player does. It's really pretty contrived that the Inquisitor makes that call, like it's only there so the player can make a "tough decision", not so the Inquisitor has to. After all, there's hardly any follow-up to it, since unlike Kaidan/Ashley, the Inquisitor didn't know them. They don't realize the damage to the narrative that happens when plotlines old PCs were invested in are wrapped-up by new PCs who lack any connection to them. Because they're still wrapped up by the player. Bioware thinks the player's investment is enough to provide that satisfaction.

 

So I just realized, Thedas isn't the protagonist! It never has been. The Player is the protagonist. This is really how they're writing it. They're writing it on a meta level. I don't think that's a good or satisfying way to write a series. The more I think about it, the more I don't like it. (Which is also a funny thing to think about, because if the writing satisfies me at first, I don't end up analyzing this much and don't find more things to get angry about. It's like a snowball-effect for problems with the game. Happened with ME3 too.)

 

I hope that made some sense to people, even if they disagree.

[Smudjygirl]

From reading your post. The Varric point was an extrapolation, and pre-counter to "But Varric was there" posts that I felt would be inevitable. Anything that they could have given us would have had to have been in codex entries, who are we going to talk to that was there for the entirety of his millennium long nap? Who are we going to talk to that was there when he was discovered? The only person that we have awareness of that could have even a remote chance of being there was Solas, and I don't think he's going to blow his own cover. So it's codex or nothing, and there are plenty of posts about how there was too much of that already. So while more information might have been a great thing, there was no way we were going to get it w/out a lot of complaints about having to actually read stuff to get it

 

Then you misunderstood my post. I meant to say Cory was actually far more interesting than what we were presented with in Inquisition. Had his story been intertwined with the actual plot he would have been a far more interesting villain. For example, Dorian researches who he is and finds his name. To me, that should have had a consequence in the game.

 

What happened during the first blight, what happened when he was imprisoned and such was irrelevant. But who he was impacted who he is. In the Templar route we get a glimpse of a far more complicated character. He genuinely thinks he is doing the right thing. But the for the rest of the game he was just a crazy darkspawn monster. He deserved better. His breakdown at the end makes more sense when you know his character better.

[CronoDragoon]

So I just realized, Thedas isn't the protagonist! It never has been. The Player is the protagonist. This is really how they're writing it. They're writing it on a meta level. I don't think that's a good or satisfying way to write a series. The more I think about it, the more I don't like it. (Which is also a funny thing to think about, because if the writing satisfies me at first, I don't end up analyzing this much and don't find more things to get angry about. It's like a snowball-effect for problems with the game. Happened with ME3 too.)

 

I hope that made some sense to people, even if they disagree.

 

It makes perfect sense and I do agree. I just think it's a great way to write a series.

[JWvonGoethe]

So with regards to the next game involving ancient elves and Qunari in Tevinter, I was reading through an old developer Q&A thread from 2012 and found this:
 

Mary Kirby wrote...
 

So if all the elves fought all the qunari, who'd win?

The Tevinter Imperium.

She knew.

Spoiler

(probably shouldn't take it too seriously though...)

[BansheeOwnage]

Then you misunderstood my post. I meant to say Cory was actually far more interesting than what we were presented with in Inquisition. Had his story been intertwined with the actual plot he would have been a far more interesting villain. For example, Dorian researches who he is and finds his name. To me, that should have had a consequence in the game.

 

What happened during the first blight, what happened when he was imprisoned and such was irrelevant. But who he was impacted who he is. In the Templar route we get a glimpse of a far more complicated character. He genuinely thinks he is doing the right thing. But the for the rest of the game he was just a crazy darkspawn monster. He deserved better. His breakdown at the end makes more sense when you know his character better.

I agree, and it would have been pretty cool if we could call him by his name in a confrontation, either as an appeal to reason or simply to get on his nerves. Similarly to how you can convince Calpernia to switch sides if you did the right missions. Obviously, it probably wouldn't work on Corypheus, but it would have been cool regardless.

[vertigomez]

The main, general reason I don't think it's working is simply that in a lot of ways, Dragon Age is constructed like a series that has a returning protagonist, with many of the features thereof... just without the protagonist itself. As you said, this is less of an issue between DA:O and DA2, but it's still there. You have overarching plotlines, returning characters, even returning antagonists, just no returning protagonist.

Just my two cents, 'cause I can't seem to stop responding to these threads. That's specifically what I like about it. I like that the PC - in every game - is just one character among many, not necessarily more important or special than any other notable NPC (except that the player steers them). Cullen could have fallen through the Fade and ended up with the Anchor. Shianni or Fergus could have been a Grey Warden instead. The eldest Hawke could have suffered death-by-ogre, leaving Bethany or Carver as the protagonist of DA2.

Things would have turned out differently, but the world of Thedas remains constant. The same villains would still be trying to end the world. The mages and the Templars would still be at odds. The Qunari would still be poised to strike.

I just dislike the idea of one person being so special that they're (for instance) the only Grey Warden to survive killing the Archdemon, and they were there when the mage/templar war broke out, and they're also the second coming of Andraste... I don't want to be Shepard who is THE person to go to when the world's in peril. Does that make any sense, even if you disagree? I feel like I'm not explaining myself very well.

So with regards to the next game involving ancient elves and Qunari in Tevinter, I was readng through an old developer Q&A thread from 2012 and found this:

Spoiler

She knew.(probably shouldn't take it too seriously though...)

Well, that's ominous. I like it.

[Battlebloodmage]

Where did i say i was talking about the Inquisitor being PC, other than when i said "PC or not". I said it is "heavily implied" they will be "involved in some capacity". Not that they would be PC. You made an assumption on what i meant. I'm for the Inquisitor returning, but it's not longer a complaint. As long as they can get some feedback. Whining will get us nowhere.

 

And i agree, but i would prefer a new PC and a game where we could focus solely on Tevinter and the Qunari. With Solas' plan and involvement, Tevinter may be reduced to nothing more than a backdrop. Minrathous may be Val Royoux 2.0.

 

And while i am most certainly interested in seeing Tevinter through a Tevinter, i prefer the story. Solas, in my eyes, belongs to the Inquisitor. You should not set up a conflict between a PC and Antagonist and the not have it followed through. My fear is that a new PC will be more likely to cause Inquisition 2.0 more than having the Inquisitor come back

Not sure why you even reply to me when I said Inquisitor is likely gonna be cameo, and you're basically reiterate the same point. If there's gonna be Inquisition 2.0, it would probably gonna be lazy writing, so I hope not. We don't know the plot for the next game, so we can't say what role Solas will play regardless, I hope not as the main antagonist though, I'm sick of ancient elves, they already have an entire game focuses on them, bring on the dwarves and city elves in the next game. 

[Smudjygirl]

Not sure why you even reply to me when I said Inquisitor is likely gonna be cameo, and you're basically reiterate the same point. If there's gonna be Inquisition 2.0, it would probably gonna be lazy writing, so I hope not.

 

I like to make sure there are no misunderstandings, which there seemed to be, I was clarifying what i was saying. That's what happens in discussions. But if you'd prefer i don't reply to you, so be it

[Cespar]

I may be reaching here, but the inquisitor's storyline is over, not Trevelyan, Lavellan, Cadash, and Adaar. Whether you disband the inquisition or not, the inquisitor is not the inquisitor by the end of the Trespasser. 

[Battlebloodmage]

I like to make sure there are no misunderstandings, which there seemed to be, I was clarifying what i was saying. That's what happens in discussions. But if you'd prefer i don't reply to you, so be it

No need to get hostile. I just don't see the point when we're talking about the same, saying stuffs like I was whining and act like a victim will get us nowhere, reply if you want, it's a free forum discussion afterall.

[Smudjygirl]

I may be reaching here, but the inquisitor's storyline is over, not Trevelyan, Lavellan, Cadash, and Adaar. Whether you disband the inquisition or not, the inquisitor is not the inquisitor by the end of the Trespasser. 

 

I literally just read a Tumblr post that said the same thing. Not important, but you're not alone in that assumption i guess

[Sah291]

So I just realized, Thedas isn't the protagonist! It never has been. The Player is the protagonist. This is really how they're writing it. They're writing it on a meta level. I don't think that's a good or satisfying way to write a series. The more I think about it, the more I don't like it. (Which is also a funny thing to think about, because if the writing satisfies me at first, I don't end up analyzing this much and don't find more things to get angry about. It's like a snowball-effect for problems with the game. Happened with ME3 too.)
 
I hope that made some sense to people, even if they disagree.

The player as the protagonist, yeah I see it now that you mention it.

I think part of it may be simply that people (many people probably) don't actually like to role play these games as deeply as some of us here do. They just play the game, and more or less self insert each time. So in essence, the protagonist always is the player, and always the same character. It's strange to me, but it's a different style of play.

I think the writers intentionally play with that a little too, I notice places where they break the fourth wall a bit and wink at the player. The way Solas and Cole appear to realize they are a game, in their banter, for instance, or the way Varric comments about being a writer, etc.

So yeah, there's a lot of meta storytelling going on with the player. But I don't know... I'm starting to feel a little schizophrenic here.