126 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

How? Tell me how a new PC would fit the story better than the Inquisitor for this one next game?

Because they'll have an actual connection to the plot? Even if Solas is the villain, that doesn't mean the Inquisitor had more of a connection with him. Again, Hawke is the example. Lots of tips between Hawke and Corypheus, and Hawke and the mage-templar war. Yet that didn't stop Bioware from a story where they created a character with more of a connection.

The Inquisitor basically bumbling into Solas doesn't create that much of a connection.

[In Exile]

I think, considering he's only been a "villain" for one DLC, if you're bored with him already, then it means that what you're really bored with is your own imagination, going over the possibilities in this open-ended scenario.

There's a lot still to learn when we get to Tevinter. We don't even have a main character for this new chapter. It can't be the Inquisitor. I'm open to being surprised.

Solas isn't the villain in the DLC. He helps you. He's on your side. Just because he will kill everyone in hell fire later doesn't make him a villain in Trespasser.

[In Exile]

Why do you think having a new protagonist will suddenly make them better written/more fleshed-out than the last? Bioware will most likely write the next protagonist similarly to the Inquisitor (text-only background, etc.). I think this is a moot point as to whether the Inquisitor should return; I don't think introducing someone new will magically make them a better character.

Besides, Trespasser finally started to flesh-out the Inquisitor, and give them a personal story. That's a lot more development and characterization than someone new has, so I think we'd actually be better off with them than someone new in that regard, and I think it would be a terrible waste of a unique and personal story if they drop it for the sake of their Rule™.

Always thought that was BS as an excuse. I've written much more in-depth about it in the past, but basically, I think it exaggerates how well Solas is actually supposed to know you while also discounting that you know him, too. And you're the only ones who do. So it seems to even out to me.

Not only that, but if the Inquisitor is still going to go against him in some way, which they say they are, doesn't that mean they didn't think it mattered enough that they shouldn't go after him? If it's still worth going after him, then it's another moot point in terms of whether or not they should be the protagonist.

Finally, it actually opens up new possibilities for characterization. You know those complaints about not being able to be "evil" and always being a "goody-two-shoes"? Well not being constrained by such a massive, relatively public organization would do wonders in terms of not only letting the Inquisitor develop as a character, but it also means that whatever Solas thinks he knows about your strategy, you could throw it out the window now.

How do you know Solas? You know nothing about him beyond his facade, and the points when he allows it to slip.

[Akiza]

Ohhhh no, it's definitely been talked about.

Err, I'm assuming we're going to Tevinter

Wrong We are going to Ferelden

[German Soldier]

Wrong We are going to Ferelden

No please have mercy on me i know that country better than my pockets by now.

[German Soldier]

Because they'll have an actual connection to the plot? Even if Solas is the villain, that doesn't mean the Inquisitor had more of a connection with him. Again, Hawke is the example. Lots of tips between Hawke and Corypheus, and Hawke and the mage-templar war. Yet that didn't stop Bioware from a story where they created a character with more of a connection.
 

Hawke had all the interactions and ties with Flemeth,Corypheus,Varric,Stroud and many others....even those words in DAI of "Corypheus is mine" 

Hawke could have been a better protagonist than the Inquisitor for DAI since it was more tied to its story and characters.

[vertigomez]

Wrong We are going to Ferelden

No... please, no! There's only so much dirt and muck and dogs I can handle. Let's go somewhere with indoor plumbing and an abundance of dwarves.

[WardenBlue]

No... please, no! There's only so much dirt and muck and dogs I can handle. Let's go somewhere with indoor plumbing and an abundance of dwarves.

And Elves! Maybe not Qunari though..

[Xilizhra]

Why do you think having a new protagonist will suddenly make them better written/more fleshed-out than the last? Bioware will most likely write the next protagonist similarly to the Inquisitor (text-only background, etc.). I think this is a moot point as to whether the Inquisitor should return; I don't think introducing someone new will magically make them a better character.

Maybe not, but using the Inquisitor for half the game will certainly lower the bar for how fleshed-out the fourth character could be. We should encourage Bioware to excellence, yes?

 

 

Besides, Trespasser finally started to flesh-out the Inquisitor, and give them a personal story. That's a lot more development and characterization than someone new has, so I think we'd actually be better off with them than someone new in that regard, and I think it would be a terrible waste of a unique and personal story if they drop it for the sake of their Rule™.

That's a matter of opinion. Personally, I hated Trespasser and think it did everything involving the Inquisitor's personal story very poorly, unless you're romancing Solas. Then it becomes... well, I still wouldn't call it good, but it's no longer terrible.

 

Also, frankly, I'm just sick of the Inquisitor.

[Addictress]

That's actually not what the writers have said in the past. They've been clear that there is a hard word budget.

Yes, the game would be the same length with the budget split between the two protagonists, but that's why I don't like it. I don't want to water down the connections my protagonist is able to form in the game to add a second protagonist. I find the development of the protagonist and their party member to be the main draw to Bioware games, so having that thinned is an issue for me.

I said before that it wouldn't bother me if you controlled the Inquisitor for only a pretty minor period of the game, though. If you got about as much content as Hawke in DA:I, but instead it was a one off quest line where the Inquisitor and maybe 3 random allies chosen from who would make sense for the plot, that would be fine with me. "One or two missions" isn't a big deal, but I wouldn't really call that "dual protagonists". I wouldn't consider Joker to be a second protagonist in ME. It's just about how much. Less than 50% still leaves plenty of room for "too much". I'm looking more at less than 10%. I doubt it would have more than a couple lines with Solas still rejected the romance, though, because otherwise it eats up too much resources on a niche group of people that had to have played the previous game.

Yeah, I'd be okay with just 10% honestly. The Solavellan romance faction is strong ok

I also have to agree with the others that mentioned the inquisitor was the most poorly fleshed out protagonist of the entire series.

[vertigomez]

And Elves! Maybe not Qunari though..

Oh, definitely Qunari. At least 527% Qunari.

[BloodKaiden]

Solas isn't the villain in the DLC. He helps you. He's on your side. Just because he will kill everyone in hell fire later doesn't make him a villain in Trespasser.

I hope this is sarcasm, cause everyone should understand that Solas was the villain for the entire game. He was the catalyst for all the events leading up to Trespasser, as much as he was my Trevelyan's friend, dude is getting straight murder knifed if possible in DA4.

[Fredward]

Ya'll see that video in the Twitter thread? The template says a/the goal of Trespasser was to bring the story of the Inquisitor to a definitive end (paraphrasing), doesn't seem like dual protagonist was/is on the table.

[In Exile]

I hope this is sarcasm, cause everyone should understand that Solas was the villain for the entire game. He was the catalyst for all the events leading up to Trespasser, as much as he was my Trevelyan's friend, dude is getting straight murder knifed if possible in DA4.

 

No, it's not a joke. It's literally the definition of antagonist. Solas actively helps you throughout the game, including in Trespasser. That he has his own genocidal agenda in the background doesn't make him the villain in DA:I. 

[In Exile]

 

Hawke had all the interactions and ties with Flemeth,Corypheus,Varric,Stroud and many others....even those words in DAI of "Corypheus is mine" 

Hawke could have been a better protagonist than the Inquisitor for DAI since it was more tied to its story and characters.

 

 

Not to the Inquisition, which was quite clearly invented around a new protagonist. If we're looking at the Hawke template, Varric would have been dead by the equivalent of DA:I. But I'm not going to object if you think Hawke had better ties - my point was that this "ties" argument didn't stop Bioware the first time around. 

[BloodKaiden]

No, it's not a joke. It's literally the definition of antagonist. Solas actively helps you throughout the game, including in Trespasser. That he has his own genocidal agenda in the background doesn't make him the villain in DA:I.

Depends on one's point of view, ultimately Solas was mainly helping himself by infiltrating the Inquisition under false pretenses. Everything he did was centered on a selfish desire to bring back his people at the expense of the current world. Seems pretty villainess to me.

[In Exile]

Depends on one's point of view, ultimately Solas was mainly helping himself by infiltrating the Inquisition under false pretenses. Everything he did was centered on a selfish desire to bring back his people at the expense of the current world. Seems pretty villainess to me.

 

I don't think being selfish, having ulterior motives, or even planning on opposing the hero in a future plot makes on an antagonist in the present plot. I mean, Solas is basically a racial supremacist. A relatively likeable racial supremacist, but his ideology has a lot in common with organizations we pretty much consider the epitome of evil IRL. I just don't think that makes him an antagonist. I mean, Blackwall was a fraud too. 

[BloodKaiden]

I don't think being selfish, having ulterior motives, or even planning on opposing the hero in a future plot makes on an antagonist in the present plot. I mean, Solas is basically a racial supremacist. A relatively likeable racial supremacist, but his ideology has a lot in common with organizations we pretty much consider the epitome of evil IRL. I just don't think that makes him an antagonist. I mean, Blackwall was a fraud too.

True enough.

[Lazarillo]

No, it's not a joke. It's literally the definition of antagonist. Solas actively helps you throughout the game, including in Trespasser. That he has his own genocidal agenda in the background doesn't make him the villain in DA:I.

Solas is not the antagonist in either Trespasser or vanilla Inqusitiion, in that he is not the force that must be overcome in order for the story to be resolved. He could, however, be seen as the villain in that he is a force for evil, on whom the ultimate responsibility for a lot of the story still relies, and all that even though he used the Inquisitor to achieve his goals. He's not necessarily helping the Inquisition, so much as finding a mutually beneficial way to have the Inquisition to help him. Manipulating the hero to serve one's own ends is a classic "villain" move.

[Iakus]

I don't think being selfish, having ulterior motives, or even planning on opposing the hero in a future plot makes on an antagonist in the present plot. I mean, Solas is basically a racial supremacist. A relatively likeable racial supremacist, but his ideology has a lot in common with organizations we pretty much consider the epitome of evil IRL. I just don't think that makes him an antagonist. I mean, Blackwall was a fraud too. 

An antagonist is literally just someone who opposes the protagonist.  They don't have to be a villain, or evil at all.  Just not like the way the main character does things.  

 

I mean, the grumpy captain in a buddy cop movie could be an antagonist, even as he sends the maverick cop out to catch the crime boss who put his soon to be retired partner in the hospital.

[Iakus]

Also, new character next game please.  I liked my Inquisitor and all, but I want as much baggage shed as possible between games. 

[Sifr]

No, it's not a joke. It's literally the definition of antagonist. Solas actively helps you throughout the game, including in Trespasser. That he has his own genocidal agenda in the background doesn't make him the villain in DA:I. 

 

Just because Solas' goals are aligned with the Inquisitor for the moment does mean he's not the overall antagonist of the game.

 

He needs the Breach closed and Corypheus defeated, as well as the Qunari plot thwarted in Trespasser, because all of those things threaten his plans. So the reason that he is helping us in the present, is because it will ultimately help him in the future.

 

If we should define Solas' actions, I'd say that he's a heroic antagonist in our story, while a villain protagonist in his own.

[Shechinah]

So I've been rewatching some old scenes including from Trespasser and something came up; can anyone tell me where the Inquisitor supposedly says the line about how their adventuring days are over?

 

The reason I'm asking is because my Inquisitor does not seem to say that anywhere Trespasser including in the last scene that takes place in Haven.

[Andraste_Reborn]

So I've been rewatching some old scenes including from Trespasser and something came up; can anyone tell me where the Inquisitor supposedly says the line about how their adventuring days are over?

 

Whether they say it or not depends on what dialogue option you choose when you're disbanding (or not disbanding) the Inquisition. Off the top of my head, I can't remember which options yield that response and which don't, though.

[nightscrawl]

You said you wanted to keep playing the Warden before, and it's been over a decade from the first game, is what I was saying with that.

 
DAO was released in November 2009... so not "over a decade."


[edit]
I just realize you meant in Thedas time LOL! Woopsie...

 

 

At any rate, the fact that people can continue to play DAO and pick up their Warden sort of lends a certain timelessness to the whole thing. I don't think it would be as bad if the devs hadn't been dropping breadcrumbs, especially about finding a cure for the Calling and such. If they had allowed the Warden to drop off the face of Thedas with no further mention, or just had the small references with the Morrigan, Leliana, and Alistair romances, people might not be clamoring as much.

 

Then again, because DAO was the first game, some players are always going to be attached to that character as their first and want to continue on with them. In addition, regardless of the fact that the DA devs have refuted this, the similarities with the Mass Effect franchise by the same developer, and its single protagonist, will always be strong, so that is in people's minds as well.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 23 juillet 2016 - 01:52 .