322 réponses à ce sujet

[JadeDragon]

Well, if they could cut half the areas in DAI I don't think anyone would have really missed them.

Fallow Mire is a area that could have been cut and not been missed by the majority. It was always weird to me we fought Avvar in Chasind Territory anyway.

Forbidden Oasis could have been cut just put the Temple in the Waste or Approach

Storm Coast Also honestly could have been cut. Put the Blades in Crestwood keep instead of fighting random bandits and still recruited them. Iron Bull quest could have had its small own map like how cassandra had her own. The Dragon there could have been moved to a zone with another dragon.

Combine the Waste and Approach if a day and night system could be installed if not possible separated it is fine.

Either way 3 zones did not deserve there own map. That could have saved up a Free Marches zone Owtsick and Wycome since that seems to be were most of the origins took place. And if not start there at least visit post skyhold to resolve the wartable mission.

[BansheeOwnage]

You mean the Ben-Hassrath spy and/or the mercenary? Yes people would side-eye that, but that'd happen regardless of his race. 

 

How would having origins in DAI have changed Trespasser? 

 

Because for most of the game you were proving yourself to the world and thus you wouldn't be treated the same. Once you defeat Corypheus, you become a symbol and are seen the same regardless of who you are. 

That's a nice thought, but I don't think it would stop a lot of people from being racist. Or easily swayed. Plus, the whole Herald of Andraste thing is curiously not really an aspect of Trespasser or your defense.

 

Gaider didn't work on Trespasser, so I don't see the irony there. 

Didn't he? I thought he wrote his characters (Cass, Dorian) one more time. I don't think he was involved in the story though, no.

 

 

 

I don't really have anything against Origins returning, as long as they were implemented in a much better way than they were, but this isn't about extra content. If Origins aren't included, the game won't have less content, - it will have extra content in other areas. 

 

I'd much rather get more reactive content to my character in the rest of the game, than a unique 1 hour chapter for my race at the start. The plot of Inquisition had much more of an effect on me than anything in Origins did.

I'm not sure having 6 unique origins is the best way to allocate resources for DA4 either, but I want something more than just popping into existence when the game opens.

[AlanC9]

Though you only have to take on one of the dragons to get to the ocularum, and, as mentioned upthread, there are plenty of shards if you want the shard abilities to fight dragons.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

 

But this is why I honestly feel like is the real reason we have no Origin stories or follow up in DA:I with the race. It was a late addition and would have disrupted the established flow. If they planned on race selection day 1 I am sure the races would have been followed through much better. Qunari was added even later and got the least development as a race which makes sense. There was other things they still needed to work on. But a few predetermined answers to give Josie and a singular predetermine answer to give Cass about where you are from is not a trend that should continue. That is why DAO handled multiple races better. No matter what some aspects of our character will be predetermined the only difference was game had us play it and followed through with at least one main quest connection and the other just gave us codex to read with wartable missions(even more reading) as a follow up. That would be like if a Human Noble Origin was not played but Duncan asked us how we felt about being a Cousland or our family getting killed by Howe no way possible is reading going to be greater then or equal to a actual experience.

All this reads as to me is something that will constrict roleplaying possibilities, which is the last thing I want to happen in a RPG. For example, I was able to have a lot more kinds of Human Nobles that had various backstories and relationships with their family in Inquisition, whereas with Origins you only really have one kind of relationship with your family and only one kind of backstory. 

 

That's a nice thought, but I don't think it would stop a lot of people from being racist. Or easily swayed. Plus, the whole Herald of Andraste thing is curiously not really an aspect of Trespasser or your defense.

 

Didn't he? I thought he wrote his characters (Cass, Dorian) one more time. I don't think he was involved in the story though, no.

Well, we both know Trespasser was a mess when it came to story anyway. 

You're right, he wrote his characters. I meant that he didn't write the story. 

[JadeDragon]

 

 

All this reads as to me is something that will constrict roleplaying possibilities, which is the last thing I want to happen in a RPG. For example, I was able to have a lot more kinds of Human Nobles that had various backstories and relationships with their family in Inquisition, whereas with Origins you only really have one kind of relationship with your family and only one kind of backstory. 

 

Well, we both know Trespasser was a mess when it came to story anyway. 

You're right, he wrote his characters. I meant that he didn't write the story. 

 

Really because If i remember correctly there was plenty of dialogue options you can have with your mother and father to show your actual characterization of your relationship with your family. A human noble in DAI had only 3 options when talking to Josie about how they reacted to there family at functions. and another chance to explain how they would support the Inquisition which was only a handful of options. But in Origins my Warden could either be obedient to there father and they could have been more defiant about the fact they were being left behind. We got to have our Noble react to different ways when it came to the treatment of there elf servants, displayed if we actually knew our family's history or just straight showed the scholar we did not care about that stuff, We got to actually react in different ways towards being stuck in the castle with our mother and our brother going away either being happy because we did not want to go and be left behind or upset we could not go or show we were ready to lead the house while our father and brother was away. We dont even have any characterization moment about our father in Inquisiton only our Aunt. So if anything The Trevelyan Inquisitor had way more roleplay constrictions vs The Cousland Warden, we even got a chance to react about marriage to another noblemans daughter. Only thing that was constant with the Couslands was 1)we were going to be left at the castle, 2)favored to be a warden because of our skill 3)Our family loved us either way we reacted which made the last point more impactful 4) Our entire house minus our brother is slaughtered. Trevelyan restricitons are 1)our family is devote Andrastians no matter what and has ties to the chantry 2)our aunt threw parties 3) they were a minor noble house 4)our father was a ban. A Warden Human Noble life prior to the origin story can be just as much headcanoned like the Inquisitor Noble, we were skilled in combat but our feats was never described maybe we won a skirmish against Avvar maybe we saved another Noble Family. Not only does the Warden Noble have less roleplaying restrictions what is offered in the game is RPG characterization moments something that what lacking from the Inquisitor Noble.So I am failing to see how you more Inquisitor nobles then Warden Nobles when there was less options to fleshout that aspect of what type of noble you were personally?

[Abyss108]

The only points that was truly reactive was Winter Palace which honestly was just the initial and really made no difference in the quest. A qunari may have started off with less approval but they could then gain the same amount of approval just as easy as a human not even a point or two less. The quest was not harder at all for a qunari. The elves as far as a non-human race had the most effective racial content with Arbor Wilds and extra if they were a mage. But Origins Races actually had more of a effect of certain plot points Dwarf Noble and The main quest for the dwarves is a example and When a human noble faces Arl Howe the dialogue content is also different. Other then that neither game really made a certain race get effected by the plot especially dwarves who had almost nothing compared to the dwarves in Origins who had either first and accounts on Carta issues or Noble issues. Inquisition was not anymore reactive to any other race then Origins was. Both games gave certain races there respective moments because if that was the case when was the plot reactive to your race besides your opening speech at skyhold or WInter Palace? And like I said before did we really need extra content in Inquisition to say we dont need origins? Was every quest in Hinterlands needed or Emerald Graves? Storm Coast? lets feel the darkspawn holes in the storm coast because if we dont they will appear on the map and fight the Blades, yet after we complete the quest darkspawn are still there proving the quest accomplished nothing but give us a reason to fight a old enemy did not make the map any easier or harder.

 

I played an Elf and had dialogue options throughout the game to reflect that, and had an entire unique romance. I got much more enjoyment out of that, then I did anything in Origins.

 

Also, I was talking about the next game, not how things were handled in previous ones. I would rather development resources be spent on more reactions in the main part of the game, rather than a unique chapter at the start.

[JadeDragon]

I played an Elf and had dialogue options throughout the game to reflect that, and had an entire unique romance. I got much more enjoyment out of that, then I did anything in Origins.

 

Also, I was talking about the next game, not how things were handled in previous ones. I would rather development resources be spent on more reactions in the main part of the game, rather than a unique chapter at the start.

I am aware you played a elf which is why I stated that the Elf race was the best done as far as races in the game. 1 out of 4 does not mean it was overall better then Origins. Thanks to the origins in Origins that hour of content gave it a leg up to Inquisition and the only non-human race that could be compared was the elf. If the other 3 had the same treatment as the Elves I doubt we would be having this thread. So again can I get a example outside of the Elves? Nobles, Dwarves and Qunari did not have dialogue options as much as Elves so its really easy to pick the best done race and say well playing a elf was awesome so Inquisition handled races better then origins when the correct phrase is Inquistion did elves better then Origins. Lets not be selfish to the other races I have played all 4 and its not even close to being even across the board.

[Lezio]

I am aware you played a elf which is why I stated that the Elf race was the best done as far as races in the game. 1 out of 4 does not mean it was overall better then Origins. Thanks to the origins in Origins that hour of content gave it a leg up to Inquisition and the only non-human race that could be compared was the elf. If the other 3 had the same treatment as the Elves I doubt we would be having this thread. So again can I get a example outside of the Elves? Nobles, Dwarves and Qunari did not have dialogue options as much as Elves so its really easy to pick the best done race and say well playing a elf was awesome so Inquisition handled races better then origins when the correct phrase is Inquistion did elves better then Origins. Lets not be selfish to the other races I have played all 4 and its not even close to being even across the board.

 

And, to be fair, even elven characters know very little about their own people. Which is even funnier if the elf is a mage, a First who can't read, or at least kinda understand, elvish and doesn't know who Mythal is?

In Origins, at least, an elven character had different knowldege based from where s/he came from, and also was treated differently by the dalish and city elves based on their Origin

 

And just to add something else, i 100% preferred seeing Jowan/Tamlen/Papa Cousland/Shiani/whatever at the temple of Sacred Ashes instead of having a demon of envy, first, and a demon of fear, later, taunting my Inquisitor about...... uh, what? It's not like he's a character with fear, connections or emotions, sillies

[nightscrawl]

... taunting my Inquisitor about...... uh, what? It's not like he's a character with fear, connections or emotions, sillies

Maybe yours. Mine was quite f'd up over the whole Fade thing, thanks.

[Lezio]

Maybe yours. Mine was quite f'd up over the whole Fade thing, thanks.

 

Of course i can headcanon that the experience shook him up, just as i can headcanon that he cared about leaving a guy he talked to twice to die in the Fade (Stroud), but, to me, it comes off as forced at best.

Like, seriously, Here Lies The Abyss' big choice is structured to be hard for the player. Replace Hawke with a random NPC, which is basically what Hawke is to The Inquisitor since they talked three times at best, and the choice becomes much less Virmire-ish

[JadeDragon]

And, to be fair, even elven characters know very little about their own people. Which is even funnier if the elf is a mage, a First who can't read, or at least kinda understand, elvish and doesn't know who Mythal is?

In Origins, at least, an elven character had different knowldege based from where s/he came from, and also was trated differently by the dalish and city elves based on their Origin

 

And just to add something else, i 100% preferred seeing Jowan/Tamlen/Papa Cousland/Shiani/whatever at the temple of Sacred Ashes instead of having a demon of envy, first, and a demon of fear, later, taunting my Inquisitor about...... uh, what? It's not like he's a character with fear, connections or emotions, sillies

Exactly! thanks for the reminder about the urn of sacred ashes quest a MAJOR main quest that is connected to the game. While you can skip some main quest you have no choice but to do that to progress and it is aligned with your origins and it has characterizations moments you could be emotional to see your dead father  again or shake it off. But you want to talk about roleplaying restrictions lets talk about our fear of Spiders, and if you want to bring up the fact we can tell Sera we are not normally scared of spiders then all that does is question why didnt NIghtmare a demon who has been feeding off fear since Blight 1 not just make a fearling we are actually afraid of. All Inquisitors are afraid of spiders to some degree that much is a canon we can not avoid and apparently so is Hawke.

[vbibbi]

Except those side quests are optional. An origin would not be. It would be something you have to play through every single time. 

 

And no, they do not need to have origins to introduce players to Tevinter. There are many other ways the setting can be introduced than by having an origin story. 

 

Yes, I will definitely hope that whatever introduction mechanic is used in DA4, it provides a better introduction to the setting than DAI did. I really don't want another amnesia story or drop us in the middle of the action with no idea where we are or what's going on.

 

Do you have any suggestions for other ways of introducing the setting? I'm not being snarky, I am curious what kinds of methods you're thinking of.

 

I've found that focusing only on the frost and fire is the most useful, since not as many enemies throw out lightning damage. So it is certainly possible to have the full resistance of frost and fire before fighting the higher level dragons.
 
 
I think even Bioware would admit that it was filler content, but even filler can be designed with a goal in mind; to encourage exploration, to give players more things to do in each zone, and to give a nominal reward at the culmination of it. Do I think it was the best use of resources? No. But neither do I really mind its inclusion.
 

 

True about using specific doors strategically, but that requires strong metagaming through multiple playthroughs or using game guides, which I don't think should be how a player does a quest. I guess one can argue that it encourages replaying the game, since the first playthrough we will either give up or complete the entire temple, and subsequent playthroughs we can be more judicious in which doors to open. But I dislike using that argument for inclusion of something in a game; I want it to make sense within the game, not be a metagame mechanic.

 

Hopefully the filler in subsequent games will be better implemented. All of the collection quests in DAI just seemed like blatant filler to me. It was cool to get the codices from the astrariums and mosaics, but it still felt very gamey to me and was not worth the effort of searching for all the pieces or solving the puzzle. It was very immersion breaking for me. So no one else had been able to solve the astrarium puzzles and write down the information they shared? No one had found the mosaic pieces in the Hinterlands before us? Or the Dales? It makes sense for the Western Approach, but even the Hissing Wastes, why were Tevinter mosaics left in surface dwarf buildings?

 

And this doesn't even address the pointlessness of the bottles, or the immense letdown of collecting all the shards only to fight a standard pride demon and read some cryptic writing which may or may not be relevant in the future.

 

All this reads as to me is something that will constrict roleplaying possibilities, which is the last thing I want to happen in a RPG. For example, I was able to have a lot more kinds of Human Nobles that had various backstories and relationships with their family in Inquisition, whereas with Origins you only really have one kind of relationship with your family and only one kind of backstory.

 

But did you also feel restricted in roleplaying because we were forced to become the Inquisitor, even if we claimed not to be the Herald or even believe in the Maker? It constricted our roleplaying that we just accepted the title rather than decline it. Cassandra didn't even ask us if we would accept, she just told us we were accepting the position and we had to say why we accepted. That's pretty restricting, IMO.

[nightscrawl]

Of course i can headcanon that the experience shook him up, just as i can headcanon that he cared about leaving a guy he talked to twice to die in the Fade (Stroud), but, to me, it comes off as forced at best.

Like, seriously, Here Lies The Abyss' big choice is structured to be hard for the player. Replace Hawke with a random NPC, which is basically what Hawke is to The Inquisitor since they talked three times at best, and the choice becomes much less Virmire-ish

 

I wasn't even thinking about that part when I made the statement. However, I don't think that that is the best example. All of the followers have unique content specific to them because they are set characters, but they can't do that for the Inquisitor, just as they can't have Cole read him as he does with the other followers. You can't account for that sort of RP variation when it comes to things like personal fears. In that case, I vastly prefer the DAI method of a generic statement from Nightmare, leaving the rest to headcanon, rather than saddling me with thoughts or feelings that might be a gross misrepresentation of my character.

 

However, you overlook the fact that we do get to emote about it in the post-Fade dialogue with Dorian where he specifically asks you how you're doing; you have several (more then the typical three) responses. There is also a dialogue with Varric specific to the big choice. So it's not all left up to headcanon.

[Lezio]

I wasn't even thinking about that part when I made the statement. However, I don't think that that is the best example. All of the followers have unique content specific to them because they are set characters, but they can't do that for the Inquisitor, just as they can't have Cole read him as he does with the other followers. You can't account for that sort of RP variation when it comes to things like personal fears. In that case, I vastly prefer the DAI method of a generic statement from Nightmare, leaving the rest to headcanon, rather than saddling me with thoughts or feelings that might be a gross misrepresentation of my character.

 

However, you overlook the fact that we do get to emote about it in the post-Fade dialogue with Dorian where he specifically asks you how you're doing; you have several (more then the typical three) responses. There is also a dialogue with Varric specific to the big choice. So it's not all left up to headcanon.

 

If i close my eyes i can hear the demon taunting my Amell about helping a blood mage escape, or my Cousland about leaving his parents to die, my Tabris about accepting Vaughn money/not saving Shianni in time ecc ecc. Those things would actualy shake my character because i he, and me both, lived them. They didn't do this in Origins, i think, because even back then it would have come out as forced, just as it happened in Inquisition IMHO.

 

Fear in a character, as you said, is a touchy subject, and if they really wanted to implent it in the game they could/should have sneaked here and there some questions about the character's fears and motivations (Leliana/Varric asking if there is a creature the character considers fearful, a discussion about regrets with Solas, Vivienne/Dorian/Solas talking to a mage about Tranquility and if they fear it, fear of losing the LI ecc ecc). As it is, the demon of envy taunts my character about what The Inquisition would become if he got possessed, which just feels impersonal, and the demon of fear completely overlooks him.

 

Sure, i can go talk with Varric and Dorian and explain how he felt and, as i said, i can headcanon everything....... but i still can't help but feel that my Inquisitor wasn't even touched by the things he experienced because everything felt so impersonal. Most of all the Stroud/Hawke choice, which, again, is hard for the player and not really for the character (Especially since, by that point, the Inquisitor has sent Makeronlyknows how many people to die through War Table missions)

 

Another choice like that (player vs character) is Leliana's "kill the traitor or don't"(at the very beginning of the game). I, the player, stopped her because i didn't like seeing Leliana like that, but why would my character, someone who just met her and who just got back from the Hinterlands after killing something like 50 people, object about her giving a quick death to someone who sent Inquisition's people to die. That's just Merrill Act 1 level of naivety

[JadeDragon]

If i close my mind i can hear the demon taunting my Amell about helping a blood mage escape, or my Cousland about leaving his parents to die, my Tabris about accepting Vaughn money/not saving Shianni in time ecc ecc. Those things would actualy shake my character because i he, and me both, lived them. They didn't do this in Origins, i think, because even back then it would have come out as forced, just as it happened in Inquisition IMHO.

 

Fear in a character, as you said, is a touchy subject, and if they really wanted to implent it in the game they could/should have sneaked here and there some questions about the character's fears and motivations (Leliana/Varric asking if there is a creature the character considers fearful, a discussion about regrets with Solas, Vivienne/Dorian/Solas talking to a mage about Tranquility and if they fear it, fear of losing the LI ecc ecc). As it is, the demon of envy taunts my character about what The Inquisition would become if he got possessed, which just feels impersonal, and the demon of fear completely overlooks him.

 

Sure, i can go talk with Varric and Dorian and explain how he felt and, as i said, i can headcanon everything....... but i still can't help but feel that my Inquisitor wasn't even touched by the things he experienced because everything felt so impersonal. Most of all the Stroud/Hawke choice, which, again, is hard for the player and not really for the character (Especially since, by that point, the Inquisitor has sent Makeronlyknows how many people to die through War Table missions)

 

Another choice like that (player vs character) is Leliana's "kill the traitor or don't"(at the very beginning of the game). I, the player, stopped her because i didn't like seeing Leliana like that, but why would my character, someone who just met her and who just got back from the Hinterlands after killing something like 50 people, object about her giving a quick death to someone who sent Inquisition's people to die. That's just Merrill Act 1 level of naivety

The dehardening of Leliana really bugged me. It made that entire decision in Origins mean nothing. A warden who did not harden her did not matter she gets hardened anyway or if you did harden her the Inquisitor can undo all the work you have done, literally a warden who romanced leliana and travel with her during the blight and hardend her will come back from the finding a cure to the calling to find out she is back soft because someone she she met undid what they did in less then a year.

 

But my biggest problem with it is why her? Did Leliana really need that extra characterization vs idk maybe some of the new companions like Viv breaking her out of her icy shell or Sera to be more accepting towards elves. Why could we not harden Josie? I dont mind the fact we ca harden certain characters it worked well in origins with Alister and Leliana but why not continue the feature with new characters instead of redoing it again with a old one. Seems like lazy writing to me,"what should we do with Leliana oh idk lets deharden her because we dont feel like giving that extra needed content to characters like Viv who has next to none in character development.

[Abyss108]

I am aware you played a elf which is why I stated that the Elf race was the best done as far as races in the game. 1 out of 4 does not mean it was overall better then Origins. Thanks to the origins in Origins that hour of content gave it a leg up to Inquisition and the only non-human race that could be compared was the elf. If the other 3 had the same treatment as the Elves I doubt we would be having this thread. So again can I get a example outside of the Elves? Nobles, Dwarves and Qunari did not have dialogue options as much as Elves so its really easy to pick the best done race and say well playing a elf was awesome so Inquisition handled races better then origins when the correct phrase is Inquistion did elves better then Origins. Lets not be selfish to the other races I have played all 4 and its not even close to being even across the board.

 

I am aware the other races were not handled as well as the Elf in Inquisition.

 

How is that relevant to my point that I would prefer the next game to be handled in the same way the Elf was in the next game, rather than the way origins were handled? Just expand it so all races get that type of content. That's much better for me than an Origin.

[Addictress]

We can't empirically reason why the origins were better. We'll never convince the naysayers.

All I can say is that we have good taste, and we liked the origins, and there isn't much rhyme or reason to it, but good taste.

[vbibbi]

The dehardening of Leliana really bugged me. It made that entire decision in Origins mean nothing. A warden who did not harden her did not matter she gets hardened anyway or if you did harden her the Inquisitor can undo all the work you have done, literally a warden who romanced leliana and travel with her during the blight and hardend her will come back from the finding a cure to the calling to find out she is back soft because someone she she met undid what they did in less then a year.

 

But my biggest problem with it is why her? Did Leliana really need that extra characterization vs idk maybe some of the new companions like Viv breaking her out of her icy shell or Sera to be more accepting towards elves. Why could we not harden Josie? I dont mind the fact we ca harden certain characters it worked well in origins with Alister and Leliana but why not continue the feature with new characters instead of redoing it again with a old one. Seems like lazy writing to me,"what should we do with Leliana oh idk lets deharden her because we dont feel like giving that extra needed content to characters like Viv who has next to none in character development.

 

Yeah it seemed to be rehashing her DAO character arc. I actually did like the arc better in DAI, as it was more tied to her faith and skills as a spymaster than just her past relationship with Marjolaine (and past as a bard, I know, but that wasn't well illustrated).

 

I really just hope Harding is the only Inquisition agent who appears in DA4. Cassandra and Leliana and all the rest need to remain in Southern Thedas.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Yes, I will definitely hope that whatever introduction mechanic is used in DA4, it provides a better introduction to the setting than DAI did. I really don't want another amnesia story or drop us in the middle of the action with no idea where we are or what's going on.

 

Do you have any suggestions for other ways of introducing the setting? I'm not being snarky, I am curious what kinds of methods you're thinking of.

 

But did you also feel restricted in roleplaying because we were forced to become the Inquisitor, even if we claimed not to be the Herald or even believe in the Maker? It constricted our roleplaying that we just accepted the title rather than decline it. Cassandra didn't even ask us if we would accept, she just told us we were accepting the position and we had to say why we accepted. That's pretty restricting, IMO.

Well, since I don't think they'll do the amnesia thing again one example is us being in attendance to a meeting that reveals exposition. Sort of like if they decided to show the Conclave instead of starting with its destruction. Perhaps some magisters in Tevinter are having a meeting over what to do with the invading Qunari or the different factions are debating with each other while we're in attendance as say one of the magister's slaves or servants or whatever backstories will be there. That exposes you to the plot, the setting, and major characters without doing anything about your origins. You'll have a backstory since Bioware always does, but like DAI or Mass Effect it isn't an origin. 

 

Yes, that was a restriction. But Origins did the exact same thing with us becoming a Grey Warden, Dragon Age 2 with going to Kirkwall, or Mass Effect with us becoming a Spectre, working with Cerberus, leaving Earth, etc. Restrictions done for the sake of plot are different than restrictions that don't serve the plot but just limit roleplaying possibilities, and Origins did the latter more than Inquisition. 

[vbibbi]

Well, since I don't think they'll do the amnesia thing again one example is us being in attendance to a meeting that reveals exposition. Sort of like if they decided to show the Conclave instead of starting with its destruction. Perhaps some magisters in Tevinter are having a meeting over what to do with the invading Qunari or the different factions are debating with each other while we're in attendance as say one of the magister's slaves or servants or whatever backstories will be there. That exposes you to the plot, the setting, and major characters without doing anything about your origins. You'll have a backstory since Bioware always does, but like DAI or Mass Effect it isn't an origin.

 

 

Okay thanks. What you're proposing though sounds similar to what I would want from an origin. Is the difference that you're seeing as being the starting area of the game, regardless of the PC background rather than origins, which would be different for each different background?

 

I would prefer having a variety of origins again, but I would also be happy with what you're suggesting. I really just want more build up and context for the PC than in medias res from DAI and ME3.

[Addictress]

I thought ME3 was fine because it was the same PC from the last two games, so it essentially had double the origin

I liked DA2's origin too.I felt Hawke's flight with their family from Lothering an effective origin, even if it was just one.

[Lezio]

I thought ME3 was fine because it was the same PC from the last two games, so it essentially had double the origin

I liked DA2's origin too.I felt Hawke's flight with their family from Lothering an effective origin, even if it was just one.

 

ME3's is even more messy, IMHO. Shepard knows Vega and we don't, the 1st big NONO. Shepard sat doing nothing for 6 months NONO. Every Shepard, either Renegade or Paragon, gave him/herself up to the Alliance knowing the Reapers were coming NOPE "Something is coming" "Something is destroying our fleets" "There are players who never picked up 1 or 2, we need to be dramatic and pretend we don't it's the Reapers" NEIN

Of course then there is the big plan "We FIGHT or we DIE"- everyone dies

As you might have understood, i just love ME3 

 

DA2's, though, i like. For me Hawke's origin is effectively all of Act 1, with the prologue presenting the world, the characters and making us feel like actual refugees. If i compared it to Inquisition, it would be like finding ourselves at the gates of Kirkwall(post-Flemeth meeting) with a codex entry explaining why Hawke ran away from Ferelden

 

I don't pretend a whole Origins system from DA4, even though i would love one (and also an option for the protagonist to be silent), but at least something like DA2 would be nice. Establishment of the characters and the setting without needing the codex to make sense of things

[vbibbi]

I thought ME3 was fine because it was the same PC from the last two games, so it essentially had double the origin

I liked DA2's origin too.I felt Hawke's flight with their family from Lothering an effective origin, even if it was just one.

 

Although I like DA2, I really dislike the Lothering section. One, because it looks like a desert, not a blighted farmland, and there is no hint of the actual village of Lothering or any civilization within view.

 

Two, the impact of losing a sibling so abruptly only is effective if the player actually knows anything about the sibling. Yes, on replays it's sad because we've had a chance to get to know Bethany or Carver for more than two minutes, but not on the first two playthroughs before I've had a chance to form an attachment to them.

 

Three, it just feels so rushed. I would have liked to have the origin be in Lothering prior to the Blight, maybe see the entire family living together, we see Leandra interacting with the twins at the same time, we can gang up with one sibling against the other. See the family as a unit, making the cracks in the unit more salient when the sibling dies, when Leandra dies, when the surviving sibling leaves.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Okay thanks. What you're proposing though sounds similar to what I would want from an origin. Is the difference that you're seeing as being the starting area of the game, regardless of the PC background rather than origins, which would be different for each different background?

 

I would prefer having a variety of origins again, but I would also be happy with what you're suggesting. I really just want more build up and context for the PC than in medias res from DAI and ME3.

In a sense, yes. Like for example if Origins started with us approaching Ostagar with Duncan as a new Grey Warden recruit, but without the reaction to the events of the different origins and instead treated similarly to the backgrounds of ME. By that I mean they are part of the reason you were chosen, but only the broadest of things are known and the rest is left up to you, either in headcanon or in dialogue like DAI did. 

[Lezio]

In a sense, yes. Like for example if Origins started with us approaching Ostagar with Duncan as a new Grey Warden recruit, but without the reaction to the events of the different origins and instead treated similarly to the backgrounds of ME. By that I mean they are part of the reason you were chosen, but only the broadest of things are known and the rest is left up to you, either in headcanon or in dialogue like DAI did. 

 

That would be terrible, if i have to be honest

But i'm not adverse to your idea in general

 

EDIT: One of the reasons i loved the Origins is also because each and every single one depict a different side to Duncan and, by proxy, of the Grey Wardens.

In the dalish and city elf he's a shem who shows actual respect to different races and whom, in the end, the soon-to-be-warden owns his life

In the human noble the more ruthless side of him, and of the wardens, comes out, he negotiates the young Cousland's conscription to the grey with his father who's dying and after that doesn't even try to talk Lady Cousland into following

In the mage he can be basically what you want him to be, in my RP my mage actually idolized Duncan because h thought him a hero who gave him the chance to matter

And so forth and so on

 

In DA4 it could be the same. The Origins could be about a slave who sees all magisters as evil bastards, then there could be a mage origin where you see that maybe not all magisters are monsters, the warrior/rogue origin about a guy who is just living his/her life ecc ecc

 

Each Origins, in my opinion, gives a different perspective, and would be really great to experience that in Tevinter since we know nothing about how the place actually works from a day to day life perspective