21 réponses à ce sujet

[Hrungr]

 

Creative Director Mike Laidlaw and Lead Writer Patrick Weekes discuss the ingredients of a good character. Warning: Solas and Mordin feels ahead.

[Nimlowyn]

Couldn't agree more about agency. The only character I want under my control is mine. I want other characters to be who they're designed to be, in looks, behavior, beliefs, everything. 

[Reznore57]

It is bizarre to start talking about player agency and ending the talk about the emotional impact of something which the player has no agency over.

The Inquisition becoming a corrupted behemoth is 100 % out of the player hand and it's a case of the story dictates.

I was actually annoyed at the strange turn in conversation in Trespasser and found it jarring , you go from "Yes I plan to destroy the world but let's not bother with that right now , your Inquisition has issues."

Oh yes game right now I really care about corruption in my organisation , way more important than that world getting destroyed thingie....

 

Anyway still loved Mordin and the genophage.Trespasser was really good overall still had a couple of flaws , and the flow of the discussion with Solas was one of those.

[Rascoth]

I was all teary and all after talk about Mordin... and then "Solas thinks of himself as Harry Potter".

 

K.O.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

I still don't feel the so called corruption of the Inquisition was properly sold in the DLC. There are *spies* in the Inquisition, yeah. The Qunari are screwing with it, Solas' people are screwing with it. But they're not really Inquisition interests gone amok, they're infiltrators. I don't know what the actual Inquisition did that was corrupt. Stopped a servant who was carrying a gatlok barrel? Locked down the conclave? I don't consider either of those actions corrupt.

Maybe he means the fact we apparently have't given Caer Brannach (sp?) back to Ferelden? To me, that particular accusation sounded like Teagan complaining about something that could have been solved easily enough outside of the conclave. If I had control over my PC to make the decision and he'd asked for it back, I'd have handed it over. (Or at least strongly considered doing so.) And even though I as the player didn't get the choice to do so, I am sure the Inquisitor would have made the decision in the two year gap if they'd been asked. But our responses to Teagan imply this is the first the Inquisitor is hearing of this complaint, which tells me that Teagan hasn't asked before. Cus if he had, it would have gone to Josie and Josie would have told the Inquisitor.

Even the lockdown of the palace is something that takes place with the Inquisitor's knowledge. Cullen says he's gonna do it to us in the makeshift war room before he goes and does it. Sure, the Inquisitor and the player don't get a chance to tell him not to, but that's more because the story is dictating the action happen, not b/c the Inquisitor couldn't have told him not to. It's not an example of corruption or of some action the organization is taking that the Inquisitor is unaware of.

I'd understand if the point was being made that you've become so large, it's impossible to protect your organization from infiltration. But saying the organization has become somehow corrupt in itself? If you have actual members of the Inquisition somehow going off the reservation and doing things you possibly wouldn't approve of in the name of the Inquisition and without your consent -- that would have been corruption. But, unless I totally missed the signs, that was not something we saw.

Totally agree with Weekes about the agency stuff, though. He writes characters brilliantly with that mindset.

[First Enchanter]

Regarding corruption in the Inquisition:

 

I don't necessarily think the idea of the Inquisition being corrupted was unbelievable in theory. I think part of the problem is that we didn't get that much of a sense as to how big the Inquisition really got. Agency only goes so far when you have a massive organization...I"m not convinced it was that massive. It would have helped if we'd had to appoint advisors and ambassadors to handle Inquisition stuff in certain regions, for instance, but instead we get the impression that an entire organization is being run by roughly 4 people. It's supposed to be big, but it still feels pretty small throughout the game.

[BansheeOwnage]

I agree with AlleluiaElizabeth about the whole "corruption vs. infiltration" thing, but I'm also not a huge fan of the infiltration either. I'm not saying it's unrealistic to have any (and there were examples in the main game too, but those didn't matter for whatever reason), but it just feels a bit forced after a two-year timeskip with no authority, as do some other things. I'm not a huge fan of the two-year skip.

 

"Oh no, Fereldan and Orlais hate us now, even though they wanted to eat out of our palms last time you played, and you couldn't do anything to prevent this from happening (like giving Ferelden back their keep) during those two years!"

 

"Oh no, the Inquisition is now pretty much half spies, and there was nothing you could do about this, because we did a timeskip! Muhahaha."

 

"For some reason you're not married to Cullen yet, sucker!"

 

This is all accentuated by the following:

Regarding corruption in the Inquisition:

 

I don't necessarily think the idea of the Inquisition being corrupted was unbelievable in theory. I think part of the problem is that we didn't get that much of a sense as to how big the Inquisition really got. Agency only goes so far when you have a massive organization...I"m not convinced it was that massive. It would have helped if we'd had to appoint advisors and ambassadors to handle Inquisition stuff in certain regions, for instance, but instead we get the impression that an entire organization is being run by roughly 4 people. It's supposed to be big, but it still feels pretty small throughout the game.

That's the thing - the Inquisition is said to have downsized somewhat significantly after Corypheus was defeated, as explained here:

 

Logic would dictate that that would continue over the two years, leaving only the most devoted, devout, those wanting a purpose or with nowhere else to go... and spies. So it should have been easier than ever to vet new recruits and keep tabs on the organization during the two-year gap. So like I said, it feels a bit forced, and it rubs me the wrong way.

 

My girlfriend had an idea before Trespasser was released that we could have a short series of conversations during the two years where we could make a few decisions in relation to how we're running the organization, like whether to return Caer Bronach (and maybe getting married ), and just to check in with companions in a less odd way than how it turned out. I say that simply because I find it odd that you have seemingly ignored and been ignored by all of them for two whole years. Who was with you when you were closing all of the remaining rifts? It's still one of their best DLCs, but when I sit and think about it, I wish it was a bit different.

[nightscrawl]

I agree with AlleluiaElizabeth about the whole "corruption vs. infiltration" thing, but I'm also not a huge fan of the infiltration either. I'm not saying it's unrealistic to have any (and there were examples in the main game too, but those didn't matter for whatever reason), but it just feels a bit forced after a two-year timeskip with no authority, as do some other things. I'm not a huge fan of the two-year skip.
 
"Oh no, Fereldan and Orlais hate us now, even though they wanted to eat out of our palms last time you played, and you couldn't do anything to prevent this from happening (like giving Ferelden back their keep) during those two years!"
 
"Oh no, the Inquisition is now pretty much half spies, and there was nothing you could do about this, because we did a timeskip! Muhahaha."
 
"For some reason you're not married to Cullen yet, sucker!"
 
This is all accentuated by the following:
That's the thing - the Inquisition is said to have downsized somewhat significantly after Corypheus was defeated, as explained here:

Spoiler

 
Logic would dictate that that would continue over the two years, leaving only the most devoted, devout, those wanting a purpose or with nowhere else to go... and spies. So it should have been easier than ever to vet new recruits and keep tabs on the organization during the two-year gap. So like I said, it feels a bit forced, and it rubs me the wrong way.
 
My girlfriend had an idea before Trespasser was released that we could have a short series of conversations during the two years where we could make a few decisions in relation to how we're running the organization, like whether to return Caer Bronach (and maybe getting married ), and just to check in with companions in a less odd way than how it turned out. I say that simply because I find it odd that you have seemingly ignored and been ignored by all of them for two whole years. Who was with you when you were closing all of the remaining rifts? It's still one of their best DLCs, but when I sit and think about it, I wish it was a bit different.

That's amazing. The next time I play I really need to do more exploration of post-game Skyhold. Normally, the deadness of the place, and our followers (and LI!) having no additional dialogue, bums me out so that I haven't bothered to do much after that point.

I'm rather torn on the whole two year time skip. There are the issues you mention. But I also like the idea of the Inquisitor "settling" into the role and developing a sort of routine as Inquisitor, even if they aren't happy (according the the player roleplay) with what their new function entails when not off closing remaining rifts, finding the Last Inquisitor, or saving the dwarf lyrium trade. That is one reason I save both DLC for the post-game, to have something to do during that two year time span.

And... if I'm totally honest, I like that we have two years with our LI, being sort of a normal couple, before everything goes to crap in Trespasser. This is especially meaningful to me with the Dorian romance, since he leaves later on.

[VivainaDX]

I really didn't like the 2 year time skip that you had no say in, I felt like I was being bulldozed into a scenario that wouldn't have happened had I have had the option to play it out instead of be shoved into it. I was playing my IQ with the attitude that once this is over and I finish this battle with Cory, I'm going to help these rulers get there crap together and then slowly shut things down. My IQ didn't want to be in this position of power, it fell in her lap and then to find out my IQ was being made out to be a threat after a two year jump, WTH. I get that there was a statement in what was being attempted, but they went about it the wrong way...and I'm still suspicious of Teagan.  :/

 

As for what makes a good character, it has to be someone with varying depths of emotions, who holds up well during conflicts and maintains their core personality during different events. They continually grow, adjust and learn and have reactions believable to their established persona while they contend with new situations and issues. They have to be constant, they can't flip-flop or come off as bland and uninteresting. How they are portrayed is very important too. IMO Dorian is the best written and performed character in the entire series, his story was emotional and conflicted, while his voice actor was brilliant in presenting a multifaceted personality.  

[Spirit Vanguard]

Should this be in the "NO Spoilers" section...?  (Liked, regardless.)

 

Feels... At least Mordin's story is concluded.   Solas, though, is letting us wallow in our unresolved feels.   

[Ski Mask Wei]

It is bizarre to start talking about player agency and ending the talk about the emotional impact of something which the player has no agency over.

The Inquisition becoming a corrupted behemoth is 100 % out of the player hand and it's a case of the story dictates.

I was actually annoyed at the strange turn in conversation in Trespasser and found it jarring , you go from "Yes I plan to destroy the world but let's not bother with that right now , your Inquisition has issues."

Oh yes game right now I really care about corruption in my organisation , way more important than that world getting destroyed thingie....

 

Anyway still loved Mordin and the genophage.Trespasser was really good overall still had a couple of flaws , and the flow of the discussion with Solas was one of those.

 

People change subjects all the time when they don't want to discuss something.  Solas does you a solid by telling you he's going to destroy the world.  There's practically no tactical reason for him to do this.  It's a sneak peak into the future if you will. He's also right about the Inquisitor's more pressing concerns (Inquisition/Life). Solas even says he's not going to tell you too much during the convo.

 

The conversation flow is logical because Solas is done talking about his plans and you're in no position to make him talk.

[Dai Grepher]

What a load! The Inquisitor can't cause corruption if the player is not given the choice to run the Inquisition as desired. All Weekes did was force a plot on everyone's Inquisition regardless of how well it was run, or how minimalistic and uninvolved it was. And the only characters I saw making choices for you on behalf of the Inquisition were Leliana and Cullen, and they weren't even spies. Meaning, it was Weekes making the choices for us just so he could write Solas as some hypocritical "jester" who pokes at you and you can't fire back at with truth and logic because you aren't given the dialogue options to do so.

[Fredward]

I feel like the devs were subtly selling the idea of inevitable corruption and inversion from the ideas that established a good organization from the base game. Mother Giselle talks about how she admires the original Inquisiition for having the 'strength' to lay down their swords when their was no longer any need of them, Cassandra asks whether the corruption of the Seekers means such is inveitable for the current Inquisition, in JoH Ameridan being disorientated by what his legacy had turned into underlines it some more, I dunno if Leliana is the only one to ask it but the Divine herself suggests its time for the Inquisition to disband etc.

 

Which, okay. I think it's inevitable for any organization or any nation to morph into something its founders wouldn't recognize if enough time passes, entropy or evolution, whichever. But I don't  think disbanding it so that you can finish on a morally superior fullstop is somehow better in the long run. You maintain an Inquisition and you fall prey to corruption, you disband the Inquisition and the people your changes miffed start to roll back the positive changes you've enacted. You're no longer in a position of power and weren't long enough to create a new normal so people in power will just revert to what benefited them most. Except the big things like breaking the Circle ofc, that's at least mostly permanent probably.

 

I don't have much of a problem with the idea of long term establishment power inevitably leading to corruption but I do  have a problem with the idea that just stopping is somehow the panacea to that. You're just swapping cancer for erosion.

 

EDIT:

 

And also, seriously whose in a better position to track Solas and his merry band of idiot elves? A (wo)man who is no longer in a position of power, has a handful of loyal friends, has nothing to trade with except her name, will be recognizable just about anywhere and easily kept tabs on OR the organization which is owed favors all over Thedas, has a solid monetary base, manpower and access to Chantry's resources? I mean honestly.

 

I know the that in future games these two options are gonna be functionally equivalent (or close to it) and the devs might even pet you if you chose the option they subtly painted as superior but if this decision didn't have the "Important Plot Consequences" tag and so had to lead to a similar result you just know that choosing to go at it on your own is dumb.

 

Hell, if I was Solas orientating the Inquisitor to reactively disband would be exactly  what I'd do.

[AlleluiaElizabeth]

I disagree. All the manpower in the world is useless if Solas knows your every move. It makes plenty of sense to pare down your forces to those you know you can trust.

They definitely did plant the idea of the inquisition possibly becoming corrupt with time in the base game. They just didn't deliver on it in the dlc in my opinion.

[Fredward]

I disagree. All the manpower in the world is useless if Solas knows your every move. It makes plenty of sense to pare down your forces to those you know you can trust.

 

Like your inner circle, which Solas was a part of? Paranoia is counterproductive if its to the degree that it severely limits your reach and access. Which, I imagine, is why Solas is recruiting a lot of followers while castigating you for the same. Infiltration can happen whatever size you are, it's a matter of pros and cons and from my perspective you're giving up more than you're gaining if you disband.

 

But different strokes and etc.

[Secret Rare]

Couldn't agree more about agency. The only character I want under my control is mine. I want other characters to be who they're designed to be, in looks, behavior, beliefs, everything. 

They can believe whatever they want to believe is the moment they start with deception over my PC what start the issues.

There are many DA characters who plays this kind of unfair games and always getting away with no consequences for their actions.

[Aren]

I truly appreciate what Mike Laidlaw said (At 1:00 of the interview) it is fine if you love or hate something it is not fine if you did not care.

[German Soldier]

 it is not fine if you did not care.

 

This is my attitude toward some of the DA npc  Alistair being the number 1 he really wasn't able to transmit me something.

[DDJ]

This is my attitude toward some of the DA npc  Alistair being the number 1 he really wasn't able to transmit me something.

 

I like your comment.  He did transmit something to me though.  In addition to the incessant whining and the if you don't agree with me you are obviously wrong attitude, his overall lack of honesty in just about everything.

 

I was impressed, but not favorably.

[Ferretinabun]

I have very mixed feelings about Mordin 'repenting'.

 

On one hand, it's good that he can see his actions from other points of view. It's good that he grows.

 

On the other, I loved Mordin from the moment he gave us, the player, a different perspective on the genophage. He challenged our views of what was right and what was wrong. And that, to me, makes a truly great character.

[Dai Grepher]

I disagree. All the manpower in the world is useless if Solas knows your every move.

True. In that sense, being able to act in an unseen way, even if it's a small action, is better than having your action telegraphed. Also, even the grandest plan can be foiled by a small action.

It makes plenty of sense to pare down your forces to those you know you can trust.

And who can you trust? Any group runs the risk of corruption. It's just that the disband option has less of a chance. Still, Leliana continues to work with the ex-Inquisitor in the disband option, and her main problem was incompetence. She also kept on Charter, an elf. Not saying all elves are bad or anything, but she's a risk, and the idea that Leliana can keep Charter in line because she has enough dirt on her is dumb if Charter willing serves someone who promises destruction to the old life and rebirth in a new and better one.

They definitely did plant the idea of the inquisition possibly becoming corrupt with time in the base game. They just didn't deliver on it in the dlc in my opinion.

Trespasser failed on many levels. The Inquisition's growth as a military power was BioWare's choice, not the player's. So BioWare merely forced corruption on us. The players had no way of preventing corruption from taking root in the Inquisition, and we should have had that ability. The Venatori were infiltrating too, and so did the Ben-Hassrath if you let the Qunari die. The House of Repose can even manage to get an assassin through. It isn't like this wasn't a possibility we always knew existed.

Like your inner circle, which Solas was a part of? Paranoia is counterproductive if its to the degree that it severely limits your reach and access. Which, I imagine, is why Solas is recruiting a lot of followers while castigating you for the same. Infiltration can happen whatever size you are, it's a matter of pros and cons and from my perspective you're giving up more than you're gaining if you disband.

Agreed. Plus, keeping the Inquisition around could be used as distraction for any of Solas' agents. Misinformation and misdirection could be the Inquisition' main goal now, while the Inquisitor and his most trusted friends use the Inquisition's money and name in the covert ways that they see fit.

Also, if you played a mage who kept the Circles, it's hypocritical of you to tell mages to live in Circles while you go off to do your own thing. At least as Inquisitor you have legitimacy to continue living outside the Circles.

[Solace]

A good character is a character that can get you to like him/her or hate him/her. The more a writer can get the audience to hate/like their characters, the better those characters are. if a character is easily forgettable, and inspires no feelings towards that character, then the writers didn't do well writing the character. Another thing that makes a good character is the evolution of that character as the plot unfolds. It's rather one-dimensional, if the character does not change at all as the story progresses.