108 ответов в этой теме

[Vit246]

Dragon Age Inquisition was a mistake.

 

(a cookie for those who get the reference)

[Chiramu]

The biggest mistake for me was the pacing of the story and lack of additional story for side quests. The middle of the story wasn't strong enough so I got very bored, the side quests have zero story to them so they never helped. I can live with little mistakes but story pacing and lack of story is pretty hard for me to live with when I play a game .

[q5tyhj]

I agree about the ending/DLC issue RE From Ashes and Trespasser- these were more or less necessary edits/add-ons that should have been offered for free, requiring fans to pay even more for them is complete and utter garbage. I did it with From Ashes, but no way was I going to do it again (so I have not, and will not, be buying Trespasser), and I likely will wait to hear feedback on the next DA/ME titles to hear if they did the same thing before I buy. I'm still a big fan, but these are no longer automatic purchases for me.

[ThatsCk]

The MMO feel just gets more and more obvious as the game goes on, doesn't it? Areas filled with endless grindy trivia, and the plot barely ever making any kind of appearance.

Especially The Hissing wastes felt way to big. It took hours to explore and everything you saw was sand and stone. I hated that Area.

 

Even though i liked exploring the really beautiful maps (i mean srsly they looked awesome) it didnt feel like i was playing a Dragon Age game. It was more like a Skyrim with a seperated World map. Bioware gave us several big Areas, but all of them had the same quests. collecting Shards, solving Astrariums, .... (even fighting dragons)

I want more diversity and not the same quest over and over again (only on another map). (Please Bioware, dont do that again)

 

I personally enjoyed leraning more about Theads. But the Problem was, that i learned it by reading the codex entries, not by doing side quests. Some of the Side Quests gave you at least a bit information, but most of them were just there for you to spend time in that area. (Stuff like: a wolfdemon killed my family. pls kill it)

 

 

I never felt my inquisitor was anything important really. It sometimes feels like our protags get slapped with the whole "you're special, you're important, you're the chosen one" to compensate for lack of substance. It's like the game will periodically remember to remind us we're important, with nothing real to back it up, just to make us feel better or something, before turning its attention back to other things. I don't actually feel like my character has a place in the world.

The Inquisitor/Herald was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. And for that the inquisition made him their leader. ..... what. Even at the beginning Cassandra asks you for your opinion on how to reach the top of the mountain. And instead of doing what she wants (she is the one with power at that moment) the party follows your lead ...... again what? And after that Cass and Lel give you the authority to be the voice of the inquisition and finally make you their leader. .... WHAT THE F? They dont know nothing about you, but because you helped them and seemed to be a (more or less) nice person they let you handle everything instead of doing it their way and just using you to close the rifts (because you agreed to help them close the rifts).

Yeah you are (known as) the Herald of Andraste, but Cass, Lel and Curly know more about politics, war, templars (and even mages depending on your class) than you do. Why dont they make you just a symbol? Why do you have to solve everything? Let them do it. You are only there to close the rifts. NOT to end the War 

[Marshal Moriarty]

As I've said before many times also, the game wasn't helped by the flimsy premise of the anchor and more specifically your character being the only one who could close the rifts. Because that makes the whole game invalid for me, because there is absolutely no way they would risk your safety by letting you roam about doing whatever you please. You are too important to the world's survival, so you would be shadowed by bodyguards in every waking moment, and the only time you would be permitted to leave Haven or Skyhold is with a full compliment of troops to march you to the latest rifts, close them and then straight back again.

 

Because to do otherwise would be taking the most enormous and senseless risk with the world's safety. Until they find another way to close the rifts, you would have to get used to living in a constantly protected and monitored environment and you certainly wouldn't be free to roam over hill and dale with just 3 companions! Nobody is saying the game should have been like that, as it obviously wouldn't work. This is simply to point out that the narrative premise doesn't make any sense, and wouldn't work in the way they are portraying.

 

And while we're on the subject of things that work differently than they in theory should, Skyhold wouldn't be the bizarre 24 hour liberal party time castle 'o' fun love boat that it is in this game either, Seriously, Haven was fine and a good grassroots movement, determined feel about it, but Skyhold just feels like 'We da cool kids and we be hanging in the cool treehouse';.

[Draconaise]

Draconaise:

 

Well, each to their own interpretation I guess, but to me your Inquisitor seems to be given authority and more importantly perhaps autonomy based on the Anchor alone. Its sheer good fortune on the part of your subordinates that your character also happens to be incredible at everything. Diplomacy, tactical planning, combat, courtly ettiquette despite only getting a short primer from Josephine on the way in, flawless ballroom dancer, excellent leadership and communication skills, expert rider, deadeye artillerist able to operate, range and fire trebuchets by themself, master of board games that others have played their entire lives, fabulously brave, supreme Dragonslayer (because how hard can it be right...) etc etc etc

 

Your unusually multi-talented character must have been grown in a vat by Cerberus and sent back in time or something. Because nobody has the skill set that your character effortlessly displays and usually with nothing in their origins to suggest they had all these amazing talents. But lucky for the Inquisition that you do, seeing as how they appoint you leader based on the anchor and public opinion, hoping to leech support off people's faith. Your endless incredibleness is just a nice bonus really. And again very fortunate seeing as how they then rely on you to do absolutely everything, run every mission and take every decision. Cassandra sets up the Inquisition and then basically just becomes sword and shield warrior. Her importance to the story ends just before the main titles comes up at the start! By the time you reach Skyhold, she's the one standing in the corner... doing... well, nothing really.

 

And its the fact you always have people fawning over you and your getting to live in the lap of luxury in your own castle. A castle which seems so chilled out and relaxed, its amazing everyone isn't constantly stretched out on the lawn dozing the afternoon away until their next slap up meal. Saying anything like 'Oh they make you doubt your place etc' is to buy into this terminally self absorbed plot they have set up for you.

 

Inquisitor: Its not easy being me, you know? Just a little further down there.

 

(Josephine intensifies her massage)

 

Josephine: Oh, but you do it all so selflessly, and you're so brave and amazing and well we'd all be dead without you.

 

(Inquisitor looks soulful, and takes a bite out of the huge tray of food in front of her).

 

Inquisitor: Somedays, I just don't know how I manage to carry on... A bit higher please.

 

 

Bah, I say. The story and the basic premise lack any credibilty and far from getting away from this fawning hero worship of your character which made Sheperd such a tiresome charicature by ME3, they went even further in this game.

I think everything you've pointed out is constructive criticism that the devs would do well to take into consideration, because regardless of whether a person enjoyed tha game or not, it points out the blind spots and weak areas of the writing. If they listened, they could really push the story content of DA4 into more believable territory.  

I think it would be a lot of fun to see a DA game where you play as someone with far less "convenient" power and prestige. Maybe they simply wrote themselves into a corner in this case? Do you think the game should have had Cass as a playable protag? What if she was the one who got the mark instead? It would have made more sense for her to be near the Divine anyway. I sometimes wondered while playing if the game could have worked with Cassandra and/or Leliana as the main characters. But, I think the studio was committed to once again providing us with the highly customizable player character the majority of their audience expects and wants. 

I do think that despite the flaws of the Inquisitor character, they did a good job of mitigating the whole player as Overpowered Self Insert Jesus  issue by allowing you to choose to make really poor decisions. I just hope that those decisions matter in DA4. Sure, you can play as someone who does everything "right" and have companions worship you, but you also have the option to be a dick and make everyone's lives miserable. You can RP as someone who loses at chess or at Wicked Grace. You can fail missions. You can get pwned by dragons. You can screw things up. In fact, even if you do everything right, you have mostly your companions to thank for walking you through it.

Because the masses have decided to view you as some kind of saviour, you and your companions end up without much of a say in how you are seen publicly. Your power is like that of a celebrity who is famous for one stupid thing, and everything about your image gets out of control. Since Cassandra (stupidly perhaps?) relinquishes that power to you early on, it's her mistake to live with if you end up being an arse. And who is to say that anything the Inquisition does "right" in the game is going to end up changing Thedas for the better in the longterm?

 

The game forces you to confront the indulgences you take as a player of video games, and the privilege and power you are given as the player. When a character like Solas becomes more autonomous than you probably expected, the story shifts in a way that forces you to consider the consequences of your decisions. What you may have taken to be a good decision could later be revealed to have terrible consequences. That was what Trespasser was all about. 

What struck me most was that it seemed to be a game that was as much about gaming as anything. The hand imagery was everywhere. Thematically, the idea of the anchor on your hand connecting you to Solas, the "hand" of the Maker (/devs!?) and your hand on the mouse/controller playing the game... it was a game about the passing of power from hand to hand to hand, and how those roles are defined. What gives the "hands" of the gods more power? What gives us more or less power in a game? Does that power need to be earned? Do we ever feel entitled to it? Why?

 

Whether the game actually sells these ideas of exploring celebrity/godhood/being an icon or of challenging the player to consider the very experience of gaming is certainly up for debate! I think it's fair to say they fell short in some places (many of which you've pointed out). Perhaps story logic and plausibility could have been better. All things considered though, in comparison to the load of crap most games ask us to swallow, I found Inquisition refreshing in its presentation of power. I enjoyed considering the way in which the Inquisitor (and player's) power was challenged or cultivated, throughout the game and found that the content encouraged me to dissect the experience in this way. 

 

This turned into quite the ramble, sorry...  

[Marshal Moriarty]

But the point is that you shoudn't have a character who by default is amazing at everything unless you *choose* not to be. That isn't roleplaying, that's just power trip wish fulfillment. RPGs are (or were at any rate!) a genre defined by stats. You created a character through stats and abilities, that informed what they were and were not capable of doing. How charismatic they were, what kinds of things they knew and were good at etc. DAI doesn't do that - it just has your Inquisitor be great at everything. ME3 did the same thing with the sniper game with Garrus. The game didn't allow Garrus to simply be better than Shepard (i,e the player) despite him actually being a sniper and Shepard only being one in 2 of the available classes. This and the chess game don't set up the idea that you can choose to be unskilled at these things - they say that you actively are letting the other guy win and could have won if you wanted to.If you wanted a character that could do things like that in older RPGs, you had to take relevant skils, or bump up intelligence or wits or something.

 

Giving people this much power does not encourage them to be sensible and reflect on whether they deserve it. They seize it with both hands and use it to shape the world in their own image, as far as the game will let them get away with. And when the game very occasionally does put a brake on that, they throw a raging tantrum because they aren't used to being told No. So when the Inquisitor's hand is cut off, people immediately say 'Oh, that's no problem, we'll just get a prosethetic hand or magically grow it back' like that's the most natural and obvious response. Worse still, they lambast and excoriate characters like Hawke for being human and not being able to beat impossible odds, because 'Tch, Shepard did it all the time, or the Warden did it etc etc'

 

This game gives you power, authority and autonomy that you *have not earned* and nobody ever gainsays your decisions, even though they (your inner circle) know that you are a complete amateur at this. You are taking decisions that affect nations, religion, politics, diplomacy, troop movements, social equality etc with *no* training in those fields and only judging by your conversations a potted history understanding of most of these things. The idea that Cullen and Cassandra would simply leave it up to you as to whether or not you save the Orlesian Empress from being assasinated during your 5 minute meeting about this in the middle of a palace corridor where anyone could be listening is utterly absurd. This is not the kind of decision you can make in isolation and ignorance of the consequences! The fact is that the Inquisition knew beforehand that she would be killed, and only showed up because of that. If this information came to light (and honestly, given the fact the Inquisition just happened to bring along a whole lot of soldiers they snuck in, it wouldn't be hard for people to work out that you knew), you would all be accessories to regicide! The whole Inquisition could be arrested and sentenced to high treason for what they did there! Yet nothing ever comes of it, because its just that kind of game with no consequences, because The Inquisitor is Always Right'.

 

The ending slides of Tresspasser support this. No matter what you did, the slides still basically boil down to 'You epically won, and did everything right, and it all works out basically fine'. This is because when Bioware have in the past seemed to indicate right and wrong solutions based on actions (as in Origins), people simply played again and made the 'right' choices for their canon playthrough. Often though Bioware don't even rely on that and simply either retcon these things so it doesn't matter one way or the other, or they actually choose a canon version and enforce it in later games (Leliana being alive for example).

 

To see this kind of thing done properly (along with the whole skills and stats make your character, not your own wishful thinking) play Fallout New Vegas by Obsidian. That game gives a huge number of different possibilites in every quest, depending on how your stats are, plus the ending slides are exhaustive, covering every single decision big and small you ever made in the game and if you handled it poorly, the game doesn't spare your blushes one bit. It puts Bioware's lazy 'people just want to be awesome all the time at everything' approach to shame.

 

And no, I don't think Cassandra should have been the main character, as she has too stiff a personality (which is already something that the Inquisitor is accused of). I think the solution was obvious. If Corypheus was becoming the main villain, and Varric, Cullen, Leliana and Cassandra were coming back then Hawke should have been the Inquisitor. It doesn't make any sense that they changed the protagonist, neither does it work because all those above characters (with the possible exception of Cullen I suppose) are very badly used in this game. Leliana has a whole litany of problems from her mood whiplash, bizarre pyschotic tendencies, dubious faith, general incompetance at her job and the fact that it walks all over the Warden's decision to turn her from her old life and encourage her to embrace her faith and optimism - Bioware just say 'Wrong, you should have gone with the hardened version, so we'll write that instead'. Meanwhile Varric and Cassandra struggle to have any relevance to the plot. Varric simply shouldn't have been there at all if Hawke wasn't the protag, and whilst Cassandra should (whether Hawke is Inquisitor or not), she is terribly underutilized. Like I say, her importance to the story ends at the closing of the breach in Heart shall Burn (and that's being generous, being honestly she slides out of focus as soon as the intro titles come up at the unfurling of the flag in Haven).

 

This game only has a story in Act 1. In comparison to the other Acts, the first one is alrightish. The MMO feel is still unacceptable, but the choice of Mage or Templar quests is a good idea (even if the final choice ends up being completely ignored as the game tries its best to say 'Okay Mage Templar thing over - moving on now and let us never speak of this again...) But when you get to Skyhold, its just full on MMO lite, wish fulfillment 'You're the big boss of the big castle' nonsense and the plot never matters again. The few main quests you do get are insulting in their unlikely premises, and the game doesn't seem to care one bit about making the enemies seem a credible threat ever again.

 

Like I said, this game is just terrible from start to finish IMO. It has no narrative credibility, it wastes characters and plotlines that have been building for years, it has far too much pandering and fanservice, and frankly its just a crushing disappointment to see how far Bioware have fallen. Its hard to believe this is the same company who made KOTOR, Mass Effect 1 (and 2 I suppose), Dragon age Origins and the criminally underrated DA2.

[straykat]

But the point is that you shoudn't have a character who by default is amazing at everything unless you *choose* not to be. That isn't roleplaying, that's just power trip wish fulfillment. RPGs are (or were at any rate!) a genre defined by stats. You created a character through stats and abilities, that informed what they were and were not capable of doing. How charismatic they were, what kinds of things they knew and were good at etc. DAI doesn't do that - it just has your Inquisitor be great at everything. ME3 did the same thing with the sniper game with Garrus. The game didn't allow Garrus to simply be better than Shepard (i,e the player) despite him actually being a sniper and Shepard only being one in 2 of the available classes. This and the chess game don't set up the idea that you can choose to be unskilled at these things - they say that you actively are letting the other guy win and could have won if you wanted to.If you wanted a character that could do things like that in older RPGs, you had to take relevant skils, or bump up intelligence or wits or something.

 

Giving people this much power does not encourage them to be sensible and reflect on whether they deserve it. They seize it with both hands and use it to shape the world in their own image, as far as the game will let them get away with. And when the game very occasionally does put a brake on that, they throw a raging tantrum because they aren't used to being told No. So when the Inquisitor's hand is cut off, people immediately say 'Oh, that's no problem, we'll just get a prosethetic hand or magically grow it back' like that's the most natural and obvious response. Worse still, they lambast and excoriate characters like Hawke for being human and not being able to beat impossible odds, because 'Tch, Shepard did it all the time, or the Warden did it etc etc'

 

This game gives you power, authority and autonomy that you *have not earned* and nobody ever gainsays your decisions, even though they (your inner circle) know that you are a complete amateur at this. You are taking decisions that affect nations, religion, politics, diplomacy, troop movements, social equality etc with *no* training in those fields and only judging by your conversations a potted history understanding of most of these things. The idea that Cullen and Cassandra would simply leave it up to you as to whether or not you save the Orlesian Empress from being assasinated during your 5 minute meeting about this in the middle of a palace corridor where anyone could be listening is utterly absurd. This is not the kind of decision you can make in isolation and ignorance of the consequences! The fact is that the Inquisition knew beforehand that she would be killed, and only showed up because of that. If this information came to light (and honestly, given the fact the Inquisition just happened to bring along a whole lot of soldiers they snuck in, it wouldn't be hard for people to work out that you knew), you would all be accessories to regicide! The whole Inquisition could be arrested and sentenced to high treason for what they did there! Yet nothing ever comes of it, because its just that kind of game with no consequences, because The Inquisitor is Always Right'.

 

The ending slides of Tresspasser support this. No matter what you did, the slides still basically boil down to 'You epically won, and did everything right, and it all works out basically fine'. This is because when Bioware have in the past seemed to indicate right and wrong solutions based on actions (as in Origins), people simply played again and made the 'right' choices for their canon playthrough. Often though Bioware don't even rely on that and simply either retcon these things so it doesn't matter one way or the other, or they actually choose a canon version and enforce it in later games (Leliana being alive for example).

 

To see this kind of thing done properly (along with the whole skills and stats make your character, not your own wishful thinking) play Fallout New Vegas by Obsidian. That game gives a huge number of different possibilites in every quest, depending on how your stats are, plus the ending slides are exhaustive, covering every single decision big and small you ever made in the game and if you handled it poorly, the game doesn't spare your blushes one bit. It puts Bioware's lazy 'people just want to be awesome all the time at everything' approach to shame.

 

And no, I don't think Cassandra should have been the main character, as she has too stiff a personality (which is already something that the Inquisitor is accused of). I think the solution was obvious. If Corypheus was becoming the main villain, and Varric, Cullen, Leliana and Cassandra were coming back then Hawke should have been the Inquisitor. It doesn't make any sense that they changed the protagonist, neither does it work because all those above characters (with the possible exception of Cullen I suppose) are very badly used in this game. Leliana has a whole litany of problems from her mood whiplash, bizarre pyschotic tendencies, dubious faith, general incompetance at her job and the fact that it walks all over the Warden's decision to turn her from her old life and encourage her to embrace her faith and optimism - Bioware just say 'Wrong, you should have gone with the hardened version, so we'll write that instead'. Meanwhile Varric and Cassandra struggle to have any relevance to the plot. Varric simply shouldn't have been there at all if Hawke wasn't the protag, and whilst Cassandra should (whether Hawke is Inquisitor or not), she is terribly underutilized. Like I say, her importance to the story ends at the closing of the breach in Heart shall Burn (and that's being generous, being honestly she slides out of focus as soon as the intro titles come up at the unfurling of the flag in Haven).

 

This game only has a story in Act 1. In comparison to the other Acts, the first one is alrightish. The MMO feel is still unacceptable, but the choice of Mage or Templar quests is a good idea (even if the final choice ends up being completely ignored as the game tries its best to say 'Okay Mage Templar thing over - moving on now and let us never speak of this again...) But when you get to Skyhold, its just full on MMO lite, wish fulfillment 'You're the big boss of the big castle' nonsense and the plot never matters again. The few main quests you do get are insulting in their unlikely premises, and the game doesn't seem to care one bit about making the enemies seem a credible threat ever again.

 

Like I said, this game is just terrible from start to finish IMO. It has no narrative credibility, it wastes characters and plotlines that have been building for years, it has far too much pandering and fanservice, and frankly its just a crushing disappointment to see how far Bioware have fallen. Its hard to believe this is the same company who made KOTOR, Mass Effect 1 (and 2 I suppose), Dragon age Origins and the criminally underrated DA2.

 

I like this human... he understands!

[Marshal Moriarty]

You're too kind!

 

But seriously, when did Bioware stop understanding that you have to give the Devil his due? If the enemies don't get to do dastardly acts *which directly impact the party, player character and the player him/herself* then why should anyone care about them? The villains need to be able to attack the players and score victories, in terms of deaths or grave injuries to party members or beloved NPCs, they need to be able to destroy and/or despoil locations that we care about and they have to (at least in the short term) get away with it.

 

Haven was the only slight nod to this, but it was so tepid and filled with caveats. Yes the villains attack but considering this is supposedly a big defeat of the Inquisition, it looks suspiciously like lots of fight which you win, cutscenes of your Inquisitor being brave and awesome, and single handedly saving the day, abolutely no cutscenes or sequences of your troops being killed en masse, and at the end of it all? No party members die or are injured, no major NPCs die or are injured (oh sorry no, Chancellor Roderick dies... yeah). And it just feels like the most painful, pyrrhic victory for Corypheus, as the whole quest has been nothing but his forces getting completely pwned and made to look like fools (and you even kill one of his officers in Fiona or Dennett).

 

For this scene to really have impact, we needed to see something major that made our blood boil for vengeance. If Samson had engaged Cullen in combat and used his Red Lyrium enhancements to severely injure Cullen (not saying kill him, but give him a lasting wound). Instead of being able to save all the minor NPCs, make sure only *some* of them can be saved, have some shots of the Venatori or Templars tearing down Inquisition banners and killing innocent people trying to escape or surrender. Its not good enough for stuff like this to happen in visions or flashbacks which are then nullified by the reset button (as In Hushed Whispers and Champions of the Just do). No reason to discount those missions of course, as they are IMO the best in the game, but we need real world victories on screen for the villains.

 

DAI is just too safe. The Inquisitor's mental noodling about whether they should be the Messiah or whatever is a first world problem compared to the world ending menace (or it should be!) As with other high profile RPGs that try to win over the crowd with too much fanservice and constant victory (think Persona 4 for example), it needed the characters to *really* suffer. Not have some 'issues' to mull over and have everything be alright with a few words of wisdom from the Inquisitor. And suffering isn't limited to the party members - the villains should suffer too, and we need to see them and see what's going on with them. Its one to be told about Samson's crippling addiction to Lyrium, but we should see it affecting him, see his reaction to his friends mutating into monsters etc.

 

And please don't mention Here lies the Abyss. That mission was awful from start to finish, with its ludicrous premise for what the wardens are doing, the siege that your forces apparently have no hope of winning and can only hold out whilst you accomplish your mission, yet again is just a series of cutscenes of your guys owning all, to the panto villain fade creature and its inability to get past 1 human warrior - when its about 50 times bigger than him/her. Yes, I want difficult choices and sacrifice, but this didn't sell the situation at all, It was another series of wins and death defying escapes etc (do your party members ever seem scared by this supposedly terrifying nexus of fear - you wouldn't think so as they snark and taunt the villain when it addresses them). Only to hit you right at the end with 'You're screwed - sacrifice a NPC, even though the time you're taking to do this, would probably be better spent running away, seeing as how 1 human can't possibly even slow down something that huge'. If nothing else, it just feels lame to lose someone to such a completely unthreatening villain... Even if Hawke or Alistair etc die, nobody really gives a damn. Even Varric is only upset for a few minutes, and has a hug and a cry with you... despite you barely knowing him and knowing even less about Hawke.

 

But of course, there does need to be humor as well and there does need to be light. It can't just be non stop terror and death all the time, but come on - it needs more edge than this for crying out loud! ME3 was another cringe inducing effort in that regard (though it did have its moments - for all the flack he gets, Mac Walters did write TIM pretty well IMO, having him commit or order some truly dastardly deeds. I didn't care at all about the Reapers, but I did want to kill TIM in that game). But too often ME3, had scenes of your characters hanging out on their super duper ship, saying ultra corny things that amounted to 'War... its like... heavy man. There's like... casualties and stuff...' pausing to look soulful and serious as they do so. It was ridiculous, and made the characters look like right fools. Emotional response to crisis is crucial to selling these kinds of stories (which DAI routinely fails to do), but this kind of writing is just embarassing. I suppose we should just be grateful that DAI didn't have any dreams of you running through a forest for... reasons.

 

The TL DR of it is that Bioware, you need to make us *care* about what's going on. A good start to that would be to actually *have* things going on, rather than the nothing which seems to be happening for most of ME3 and DAI. Pile on the pressure, and make us feel it, so we can really feel awesome when we finally win. Because then we will have earned it, and we will have done something that we feel actually matters! Its not good enough to say 'Oh the Reapers are attacking Earth', when we never even saw Earth before that game in the ME universe, and list casualty figures. Its not good enough to say Corypheus is powerful and he's out there doing... something. Show us why it matters, hit us where it hurts, and then us hit back. Not because the story needs us to, but because we *want* to, because we can't let what has being going on stand.

 

At any given moment, I was ready to drop DAI and do something else. Come back to it later, if at all. That shouldn't be possible - the game needs to be something that hooks me and keeps me from a narrative standpoint. Not some deluge of fetch quest trivia, and some daft contrived quests with panto villains like Florianne 'Hon hon hon, I will rule ze worrlld wiz myyyy MASterrrrrrrrrr' du Chalons, or Livius 'Can you believe that any Tevinter Magister was ever like this?' Erimond. Quests that prove remarkably easy to accomplish, despite your characters barely ever seeming to understand any of what is going on, and change their plans so often during the mission that you're amazed you don't end up in a different country, asking for directions to the Asparagus shop... you know... for reasons..

 

Look I get it - a lot of people liked it. And I try to restrict the amount of time I spend expressing my somewhat forthright views about this, but I can't overstate (though you may think I do!) how disappointing this game was to me. I thought ME3 was the worst Bioware could sink to, but I was wrong. Which is why I feel the argument needs to be continually made (not always by me obviously), that DAI was not just a game *with* mistakes, it *was* a mistake.

[Blueblood]

Though I actually think, for me, ME3 wasn't TOO light hearted. It did feel kind of dark. Every time I play ME3 there's a kind of grey cloud following me around. But maybe I'm just really easy.

But then I go to Purgatory, get drunk, dance, and seem to forget all about the Reaper war. Or, I go to Silversun Strip and visit the arcade, and that grey cloud dissipates pretty quickly. It's almost like time isn't of the essence. And it IS of the essence.

So yeah, for the most part, the "dark and edginess" gets drowned out by the ridiculous amount of down time. We need less down time with storylines like that; the Reapers were a very immediate threat, like, really immediate, but it never felt like it.

As for Corypheus, well he didn't even feel threatening, so in a way I can't even blame anyone in the game for forgetting the danger and instead focusing on decorating a castle.

[Marshal Moriarty]

The Reapers were hamstrung by having no actual characters and being very tiresomely straightfoward in their 'Show up and shoot big laserzzz at everyone' tactics. The terror tactics that Javik speaks about them employing in his time makes them sound like such a more interesting enemy than they ever are in ME3. And before anyone mentions Harbinger as being a Reaper character, don't do it more than 3 times in your post. Because if you do, you'll be mentioning him more than ME3 does.

 

But yeah, they were just some giant squid robots. And having them come in a start blasting away is all well and good, but if they aren't targeting places we know and have grown attached to, then it feels very hollow. ME2 (for all the issues I have with the silly resurrected Shepard thing) gets off to a flying start when the Collectors make their debut by destroying the Normandy and killing characters from the first game. A deadly attack on the Normandy is worth a million 'Such and such a system was attacked, X race's homeworld is under attack etc'. ME3 should have started with an attack on the Citadel. I'm not saying kill everyone on board, and you can have some of the significant NPCs escape or not have been there at the time. But have the Reapers attack it and leave it filled with horror and death, so when you arrive its like they've just had their fun and left it for you to find.

 

I don't feel that ME3 is light hearted (its nowhere near as bad as DAI in that regard, which always seems far too chilled out after Act 1), but it does feel very hokey most of the time, and is also full of many unlikely scenarios that are solved by the Sheer Power of Shepard. ME3 is ultimately a victim of having to resolve a story (the Reaper invasion) that none of the writers seemed very interested in. They seemed far more interested in the ongoing issues between races, and of course with Cerberus who swallowed up practically all the screentime from ME2 onwards. The Reapers continually feel like an afterthought, a narrative nuisance to the writers that they had to account for. Because full scale warfare scenarios don't seem to suit the ME writers. Casey Hudson was a hard science concepts kind of guy, Mac Walters likes hard boiled Cops and Robbers on the Mean Streets and Patrick Weekes probably dresses up as James Bond every night, he seems so head in heels in love with spies and espionage agents.

[Nefla]

I stopped caring about this but then all my shows ended, I ran out of games to play, and have nothing better to do so I decided to come back and take a look at some of the threads here and now I'm depressed and disgruntled about DA:I again -_-'

[straykat]

 

 

For this scene to really have impact, we needed to see something major that made our blood boil for vengeance. If Samson had engaged Cullen in combat and used his Red Lyrium enhancements to severely injure Cullen (not saying kill him, but give him a lasting wound). Instead of being able to save all the minor NPCs, make sure only *some* of them can be saved, have some shots of the Venatori or Templars tearing down Inquisition banners and killing innocent people trying to escape or surrender. Its not good enough for stuff like this to happen in visions or flashbacks which are then nullified by the reset button (as In Hushed Whispers and Champions of the Just do). No reason to discount those missions of course, as they are IMO the best in the game, but we need real world victories on screen for the villains.

 

 

 

I had an idea that it'd have been cool if Hawke actually was the Inquisitor and you were only an agent up to this point. And they combined something like Haven and Here Lies the Abyss. That would be the blood boiling bit...

 

If not that, then Cullen like you said.. or Cass.

 

I might've even liked that damn song afterwards. I'd want to start believing in the Inquisitor too. Suddenly everyone puts all of their hope in you at your worst moment. But as it is, it never feels like I deserve anything. I just resent it.

[Qis]

They should just continue with Darkspawn, Archdemon the Dragon, Grey Warden and The Blight story arc that being already established in DA:O, just that and the franchise will be fine.

 

The game might not always be about defeating The Blight, but something that related, and as a Grey Warden we handle the threat.

 

Like Star Wars, each episode is not always about Jedi defeating The Sith, but things are related with the Sith, and the Jedi are going into adventures and face the threat.

 

DA is not like TES where each TES game stand on it's own, there are no cameos in TES, things happen far into the future each time, so they're free to make whatever crap they want on each game. The mistake of DA:O is want to tie the previous game in the new one while making new one stand on it's own. It become a mess....Not only the premise is different, the story are different, game mechanic are different, the whole things are different...

 

It is like sailing with no compass...

[PhroXenGold]

It's kinda odd, as I find myself agreeing with the vast majority of what Marshal Moriarty says with regards the issues of DA:I, yet I still find myself thoroughly enjoying this game and it's story. Ah well. I suppose it's one of those things I can overlook the flaws of while actually playing it, yet when I sit back and think about it they become clear (ME3 on the other hand, doesn't keep me entertained the way DAI does...).

 

 

They should just continue with Darkspawn, Archdemon the Dragon, Grey Warden and The Blight story arc that being already established in DA:O, just that and the franchise will be fine.

 

Unfortunately, they ruined that story arc by ending the Blight in a single game, pretty much trivialising the whole thing compared to how the lore describes past Blights. For me, that's still the biggest mistake BW has made with Dragon Age story wise.

[Qis]

Unfortunately, they ruined that story arc by ending the Blight in a single game, pretty much trivialising the whole thing compared to how the lore describes past Blights. For me, that's still the biggest mistake BW has made with Dragon Age story wise.

 

It is fine because there are two more Blights and the recent one is actually a set up, the next game might not be about defeating The Blight, just make it something else related, as we know Mages have something to do with it in history, and Tevinter, and Deep Roads. 

 

The problem in DA2 is they jumble up stories about Mage vs Templar and Qunari invasion, while these two should be sub plots, not the main plot. DA2 and DA:I story should be sub plots. DA:O handle it well, we have many sub plots while the main plot is The Blight.

 

We have experience the awesomeness of being a Grey Warden during The Blight, we do everything above the law, so why not experience what it is like to be a Grey Warden not during The Blight? That could be interesting. Focus on how a Grey Warden want to handle the politic, the religion, the sentiment, it is easier during The Blight because Grey Warden above any other, but how about not during The Blight?

[DraftiestTrash]

Cory's final boss battle was a huge let down, I had expected a showdown in Skyhold due to all the upgrading and war table missions I had to go through. Instead I ended up fighting Cory for awhile then his dragon and once again Cory with no danger to my teammates or my character. For all his talk of being a new God to the world he really jumped back to his old religion of the Old Gods when he realized he wasn't gonna make it, so much for his fanatic loyalist who basically abandon him once team good activated the Eluvian in the Temple of Mythal. Cory was the weakest part in the entire game, all bark and no bite.

[ShadowLordXII]

Everything that Moriarty says hits the nail.

 

I'd word things differently, but I agree that Inquisition lacks tension and any sense of urgency, challenge and danger to your mission. This is part of the overall problem with generally whitewashing Dragon Age that I've touched on in multiple posts and topics in the past.

 

Now while it's true that the Warden could come out of Origins as basically the most powerful character in all of Thedas, it's also clear that the Warden has at least earned that title. Revan Cousland started out as an exiled noble who watched his family, friends and home get destroyed by betrayal; went to Ostagar to join the Grey Wardens, an irrevocable sacrifice for the greater good; faced the Darkspawn horde head-on alongside the Royal army and lost; Had his ethics and morals challenged in various situations where the right choice wasn't as easy and hard choices seemed necessary to stop the Blight; and at the end of his journey, he had to make a choice with lasting consequences for himself: Sacrifice himself or Alistair/Loghain to save Ferelden or Save yourself at the cost of letting Morrigan give birth to an old god baby with no idea about what Morrigan intends to do with the boy.

 

So even if the Warden is seen as detractors as a demi-god, it can't be denied that he earned that reputation. He earned his place as Warden-Commander and de facto Arl of Amaranthine; He earned his title as Hero of Ferelden; He earned whatever boon that Alistair/Anora asks of him; and he earned the respect of the people following him.

 

With Inquisition on the other hand, it spends more time handing stuff to you and then taking them away while telling you who you are rather than letting you the player experience who your character is.

 

That's why the lack of an origins-like prologue is disappointing along with being unable to experience the Conclave. That would give you the chance to mold your player as you see fit. Is your Human Mage pro-chantry? How does she feel about the mage-templar war? Whose side is she on? Did she pick a side? Why? What did you do during the War? Do you believe the Conclave has a chance? These are questions whose answers can be explained and explored in a prologue section. 

 

As explained in another active topic, it also doesn't help that Bioware is backtracking away from letting the player be critical of or even antithetical of the Chantry or Andrastianism despite being more than happy to slap around the Qunari, Dalish and Dwarven beliefs and faiths. Despite the fact that there is plenty in-universe that demonstrates that the Chantry has problems that need more than a new paint job and that there's no reason for the player to not be able to discuss these things Socrates' style other than...they can't.

[Marshal Moriarty]

Bioware have recycled the 'serious meeting to debate the issues that is immediately broken up before any of that actually happens' in their last 2 games. ME3 and DAI have almost the same exact intro. Big meeting of authority figures, big bad comes along and kills them all leaving your character alive. About 10 minutes later it seems, someone says 'I know! We'll get... you to lead us!' pointing at you. You say 'What, really?' and the other person shrugs and says 'Can't find anyone else, literally everyone who knew anything got killed. The rest of us are all a bunch of dopes. Help us out, eh?'.

 

And Tresspasser also has much the same thing. Big meeting followed immediately by big crisis. Its just an easy narrative excuse to say either 'Wow, these guys were incompetant, so we'd better make you Space Emperor' or (if like in Trespasser, you already are in charge), 'Wow, how thick are these guys trying to remove you from power? What if something like THIS happened and you weren't around? Go show 'em what an awesome Space Emperor you are, and how you need to stay in charge. Forever.'

 

And when the armies and forces converge for the final battle, they always make time to remind you (for the 700th time that hour) that its all because of you. When Anderson says the galaxy came together to fight, he is instantly corrected by one of your team mates with a somewhat hostile 'They came together because of Shepard'. Its this idea that even though people like Anderson and Hackett are technically in charge, the forces are all here for their bellisimo Space Emperor Shepard the Stupendously Strengthy and Sagacilicious'. They're not here for you, old man! Its the same in Dragon Age, with Alistair or Anora taking time at the start of the battle of Denerim (whilst people are actually being slaughtered just a few hundred yards away), to remind everyone how universe meltingly awesome you are.

 

The narrative in their games exists to celebrate how awesome the player's character is. Voices of sanity have been calling for reduction in this pandering nonsense for years, but they never seem to listen. Hawke was the one exception to this rule, and was sensibly written for a change. And of course, the public rewarded that with praise... in a dream maybe. No, they were pissed that their character wasn't the usual invincible God of everything that has ever been invented or hasn't yet been invented or will never be invented, but they'd be the best at it if it ever was'.

 

I rue the day that DA2's budget was announced. If that game had been given enough money to make unique environments for the quests and pretty things up a bit, I'm sure it wouldn't have been trashed the way it was. Because from a writing standpoint and narrative structive angle (ignoring the rushed Act 3 anyway, but that too was down to budget and constrained dev time), it was streets ahead of Bioware's other offerings. But in typical fashion, Bioware decided that criticism demands that everything be changed - including all the many good things that DA2 did.

 

So we're back at playing Space Emperor Awesome McMighty again...

[ShadowLordXII]

snip

 

Point taken, that said, the RP aspect of Inquisition would improve if we had a prologue where we could mold our own Inquisitor before they become the Inquisitor. Much like Origins let us mold our character before he became The Warden or 2/3rds of DA2 is spent where Hawke lives, learns, loves and breathes as a character before ever being acknowledged as the Champion.

 

Then, the Inquisitor would start out as a lieutenant to Cassandra or another Inquisition "leader" until he earns his way towards Lord Inquisitor after the first 3rd through his actions and missions. The Herald of Andraste thing can be a character challenge rather than an excuse for quick and easy respect that the Inquisitor can either run with whole-heartedly; vehemently deny and distance himself from at every step; or use as a ploy to amass power for himself and manipulate the masses.

 

As for Trespasser, this is a classic case of what happens when you try too hard to be "Realistic". Fighting the Qunari and the revelations concerning Arlathan and Solas are the highlights of that story. The Exalted Council has far too many missed opportunities within it. The potential was great for a send-off story where you decide the fate of your Inquisition in a world where it's not needed any more.

 

Even the arguments weren't baseless, it's just that the evidence and argumentation involved were wildly out of context and nonsensical. And the Inquisition can't defend itself or even argue against the accusations placed against them or display why it's more beneficial to keep the Inquisition around than for it to disband or get integrated into the Orlesian army. There's nothing dramatic or engaging about a situation where you can't win even though there's no reason that you shouldn't have a chance to win other than the plot/writers are contriving things for you to lose. IE, it's Kai Leng all over again.

 

That said, what would be your idea Dragon Age 3, Moriarty?

 

I envision that many of the problems with Inquisition would vanish or become marginalized if the following were implemented in one form or another:

 

1) Bring back dual-wielding warriors and the ability to diversify character class roles and abilities rather than leaving them as strict and linear both in progression and in class role; the other magic schools; attribute allocation; and more than 8 action slots.

 

I never understood why these were removed in the first place.

 

2) Prologue Section where the Player can feel out and start to shape their PC as they see fit.

 

Example: Let's say that the PC is part of a caravan escorting people to the Conclave. After some exposition, discussions with other npcs and some minor role-playing, the Caravan is attacked by unmarked raiders who kill the other potential Inquisitors with the PC's chosen Inquisitor surviving through combat skill, cunning, ruthlessness or diplomacy. The raiders are killed by templars and loyalist mages led by Greagoir and Irving from Origins. Two raiders are captured and the PC is given his first real choice on how to make them talk. He can use persuasion, torture (exp: kill one raider to scare the other into talking), or mercifully set them free in exchange for information.

 

Then we get to the Conclave where the meeting is set to begin. But before the peace talks can talk, the camera zooms out and shows the Conclave explode. Unspecified hours later, Cassandra comes to the ruins and finds the PC alone and unharmed. She immediately suspects him as the culprit and has the PC arrested. Later on, the PC learns about the Breach and is interrogated by Leliana. The PC is initially going to be escorted to Haven, demons attack and separate the PC from the Chantry. The PC finds some weapons and stumbles on a Veil Breach and learns about the Anchor via closing said Rift. This act is witnessed by Solas who joins the PC and they fight through the valley until they stumble on Cassandra and Varric fighting more demons. Cassandra at first wants the PC arrested again, but the PC uses this opportunity to persuade Cassandra to back down or threaten her that you're not going to jail. Varric points out that there's bigger problems and the party makes their way into the Temple where the PC is advised to try and close the Breach.

 

He fails.

 

In fact, the PC wakes up at Haven and sees mixed reaction from the people. Some people are awed by him, some fear him, some hate him and others are cautious of him. The PC learns that some people are calling him the Herald of Andraste because they think Andraste protected him from the Breach. As you have no memory of a woman, you can either lie and say that you were saved; you can say that you don't remember; or deny that Andraste did anything to help you. You meet up with Cassandra, Leliana and Solas and they explain that the Breach is still open and spreading. However, they latch onto your Mark as the only potential hope for closing the Breach once it gains power by closing smaller rifts. They then induct you into the Inquisition as a lieutenant/captain/commander/whatever and the Game starts from there.

 

3) Directly address the Mage-Templar Conflict

 

Don't skirt around things by only picking one side and leaving the other to the dogs. Lets have some opportunity for real conflict and drama. Let the Inquisition be able to recruit factions of mages and templars and then deal with resulting tension as they see fit. Either pick a side; stay neutral; or force both to work together through power or diplomacy.

 

4) Corypheus should be more of a threat.

 

Let's say that after the Warden and Orlais missions, Corypheus launches an assault on Skyhold and the Inquisitor's preparations and choice of where to place companions in positions of command determines Skyhold's fate. Good choices means that the Inquisitor arrives to see Skyhold holding its ground whereas bad decisions can lead to the enemy breaking into key parts of the citadel and companions dying.

 

This would make Corypheus into a closer enemy and would give the PC a personal reason to want to stop him.

 

And instead of throwing the darkspawn to the side, let's have Corypheus use darkspawn to make people lose hope and truly believe that the world's coming to an end. He already has the Red Lyrium Dragon posing as an Archdemon, having small armies of darkspawn attack the people would increase people's fears and that in turn would make them easier to manipulate and it would also be more food for the Nightmare Demon.

 

Speaking of Which.

 

5) Have the Nightmare Demon play a larger role in the story.

 

The concept of an enemy that embodies fear and gets stronger from it is so cool that I'm sad it was wasted. 

 

I'm even partial to a proposed idea someone posted that the Nightmare Demon should've been the true antagonist of the game. https://johnswriters...sition-ending1/

 

I'd go as far as to suggest that the Nightmare Demon tried to possess Corypheus, but failed miserably and Corypheus "ate" Fear, thereby making Corypheus into a Nightmare Abomination.

 

The Nightmare Demon you encounter in the Fade would just be a projection of Corypheus' power set in place as a way of anchoring his control over people's dreams and putting himself closer to being a god. This would make Corypheus more of an urgent threat as he can now freely attack anyone he wants in their dreams and distort people's dreams into traps of despair. Which in turn just makes him stronger.

 

To quote Gmork from Neverending Story, "Those without hope are easy to control and whoever holds control has the power."

 

6) Allow frank and blunt criticism of the Chantry

 

This topic explains it better than I'd care to elaborate on right now: https://forum.biowar...-andrastianism/

 

7) The Inquisitor and his companions should have a risk of dying

 

The final level should be similar to the suicide mission in ME2. I know people keep referencing that mission all of the time, but it was such a well designed and well implemented mission, I'd even go as far as to all it the best mission in all of Mass Effect. It's such a great mission to where Bioware's adamant refusal to build-off of that model and do something similar or better in future games is just bafflingly disappointing.

 

Anyway, the final level should be a situation where the Breach is reaching a critical mass and the Inquisitor and friends have to fight through increasingly challenging enemies to get to Corypheus. At various points, the Inquisitor will have to trust key parts of the mission to certain squadmates and past choices made throughout the game especially those pertaining to personal missions determines if that chosen companion lives or dies.

 

Then the Inquisitor gets to Corypheus and after beating him, the Inquisitor grabs the Orb. He is now left with a choice to detonate the orb with his mark, thereby closing the Breach, but killing the Inquisitor; Give the Orb to Solas so that you can close the Breach without dying, but Solas disappears; or sacrifice a limb, friend or foe to close the Breach with the Inquisitor surviving.

 

8) Have The Exalted Council not suck

 

You can go with the idea of the Inquisition being place on trial on whether it should disband.

 

But actually let the player be able to argue the points presented against them with reason and facts!

 

In fact, you can even have the Inquisitor try to play Ferelden and Orlais against each other through diplomacy and intrigue. Thereby convincing them that it's in their best interest to back off from the Inquisition if only to tick off the other party. 

 

You can have the Qunari attack as well, but not at the expense of the Exalted Council. Heck, you could even elect one of your more diplomatic companions like Varric or Vivienne as representatives of the Inquisition in your place. Picking a more diplomatic and smart character will go well in your absence whereas picking someone like Sera or Cole will end hilariously badly.

 

9) Bring back the gritty and unapologetic darkness and discomfort present in Origins and DA2

 

That speaks for itself, whoever there's a lot more to be said here: https://forum.biowar...and-embrace-it/

 

Long story short, Dragon Age Inquisition should distance itself from the darkness and grit that was present in previous games. If it wants to be regarded as mature, it has to embrace those aspects of the Dragon Age World and explore them. It is this aspect that made Origins such a memorable and great experience and while DA2 was inferior and made a lot of missteps, it was bold in it's ideas and there is some pay-off in-spite of major flaws. Inquisition played it safe far too often and it heavily shows.

 

And I'm going to bed. I've written way more than I initially intended.

[PhroXenGold]

It is fine because there are two more Blights and the recent one is actually a set up, the next game might not be about defeating The Blight, just make it something else related, as we know Mages have something to do with it in history, and Tevinter, and Deep Roads. 

 

The problem in DA2 is they jumble up stories about Mage vs Templar and Qunari invasion, while these two should be sub plots, not the main plot. DA2 and DA:I story should be sub plots. DA:O handle it well, we have many sub plots while the main plot is The Blight.

 

We have experience the awesomeness of being a Grey Warden during The Blight, we do everything above the law, so why not experience what it is like to be a Grey Warden not during The Blight? That could be interesting. Focus on how a Grey Warden want to handle the politic, the religion, the sentiment, it is easier during The Blight because Grey Warden above any other, but how about not during The Blight?

 

It's not fine because it makes the Blight into a trivial little thing that our gallant band of misfit heroes can beat in a couple of months. The lore describes Blights as terrible things that ravage the world for decades if not centuries. DA:O presents Blights as something a couple of novice wardens with some convenient papers can stop. Based on what the game has shown to us, if we get another Blight, so what? We can walk all over it again.

[Qis]

It's not fine because it makes the Blight into a trivial little thing that our gallant band of misfit heroes can beat in a couple of months. The lore describes Blights as terrible things that ravage the world for decades if not centuries. DA:O presents Blights as something a couple of novice wardens with some convenient papers can stop. Based on what the game has shown to us, if we get another Blight, so what? We can walk all over it again.

 

So they can make it the other two Blights are serious ones or happen at the same time, means two Archdemons maybe, one controlling the sentient Darkspawn, the other controlling regular Darkspawn, and these two not only destroy the world but also fighting each other.The sentient Darkspawn are more intelligent, diplomatic, and having their own civilization somewhere in Thedas.

 

Then make the other things as subplots, Qunari invasions/alliance, Mage and Templar conflict, war/alliance with the Imperium, war/alliance with Orlais, love and betrayals, subjugation and dominion, the rise and fall of the Grey Warden order, A New Hope, Imperium Strike Back, Return of the Grey Warden....

 

The premise of DA:O is peoples have forgotten the Grey Warden...it is a nice premise, they should keep to that

 

 

Of course these are fan made, but you know what i mean

 

None can replace the epicness of DA:O Grey Warden

 

[Nefla]

The narrative in their games exists to celebrate how awesome the player's character is. Voices of sanity have been calling for reduction in this pandering nonsense for years, but they never seem to listen. Hawke was the one exception to this rule, and was sensibly written for a change. And of course, the public rewarded that with praise... in a dream maybe. No, they were pissed that their character wasn't the usual invincible God of everything that has ever been invented or hasn't yet been invented or will never be invented, but they'd be the best at it if it ever was'.

 

I rue the day that DA2's budget was announced. If that game had been given enough money to make unique environments for the quests and pretty things up a bit, I'm sure it wouldn't have been trashed the way it was. Because from a writing standpoint and narrative structive angle (ignoring the rushed Act 3 anyway, but that too was down to budget and constrained dev time), it was streets ahead of Bioware's other offerings. But in typical fashion, Bioware decided that criticism demands that everything be changed - including all the many good things that DA2 did.

 

So we're back at playing Space Emperor Awesome McMighty again...

I agree with most of what you said, however I think most people's problem with Hawke was that he was too reactive and not proactive, that he just keeps getting sucker punched with hardly anything good happening. He starts off the game with one sibling dying, his other sibling later dies or is taken away by either the circle or the wardens, his mother is kidnapped and murdered, 3 out of 4 love interests(I don't know about Merrill) throw him through the emotional ringer by abandoning him(Fenris) betraying him (Anders) or possibly both (Isabella). Everything Hawke did was because someone came up and went "Hawke, you have to do this thing!" DA2 had a ton of potential and a lot of good parts but it was unbalanced toward the negative/failure side. DA:I was an extreme overcorrection(as BioWare does) to DA2's criticism and swung the pendulum too far in the opposite direction making the inquisitor this all powerful steam roller with no setbacks, just plowing through enemies with ease including dragons and the main villain. A good story can't be all ups and it can't be all downs, it needs both.

 

I also think the game would have been much better if the main character had been something like a squadron leader within the inquisition rather than the leader of the organization and if there had been no special mark OR if some NPC like Cassandra would have had the mark and be kept safe and out of combat at all times other than when a rift needed closing and then escorted to it by a lot of troops.

[Marshal Moriarty]

It must be said that Hawke forges deeper in the Deep Roads than anyone had at that time gone, and recovers a huge hoard of treasure that makes him/her rich. I mean that's a pretty hefty personal goal achieved there, lifting yourself from squalor to splendour through being willing to risk a really long shot to make or break. She also defeats the Arishok (potentially) in personal combat, ending the siege, saving the city and again potentially in a way that saw the Qunari leave peacefully with the tome. Yes, your companions help *but that is not a bad thing!* Its very good that DA2 gives them their moments to shine, and its handling of banter and letting us know in cutscenes that they have been up to stuff on their own is the best of any Bioware game.

 

The problems facing Hawke were largely treated sensibly for once, constantly ensuring that you can't just rock up with a greatsword and solve everything with an afternoon's violence. There is nothing proactive that she could have done. She warns the city about Petrice and her faction being fifth columnists, and without mounting round the clock surveilliance on them, what else could she do? The Qunari could only be removed by force (which the city is unwilling to do), or by returning the Tome (which Hawke could not have known about since Isabella and the Arishok don't consider it her business until the crisis actually starts). And with the Mage/Templar incident, again there is nothing they could do. She has no authority over the Mages or Templars, but she can start to apply her influence to support one side or the other. There is no silver bullet for an argument as old and bitter as this - unless you really are willing to pull the trigger on a nuclear option as Anders is.

 

As to whether they could have stopped Anders, well in a similar fashion to Merill it was a case of hoping the person could overcome their problems, The situation with Anders is unusual to say the least and nobody in the party (or even the whole city really) could claim much insight on his merging with Justice. And the thing is that Anders has wild mood swings - some days he is particularly zealous, but other days he is calm and cheerful and more like his old self. Considering all he does to help the party (particularly if he saves Carver/Bethany), and his friendship with Varric, the party hope he can eventually master himself. He's done a lot of good for a lot of people in his clinic, and took a big risk showing his face to the Wardens in the Deep Roads for Hawke's sibling. Plus do we ever really believe our close friends can be capable of such awful deeds? Others may say it was obvious, but we rarely ever see it coming from so close (look at the Warden and Morrigan for example - she was clearly up to something, Alistair continually says so, but they don't do anything about it because... they're still a team at the end of the day.

 

I'm not saying that DA2 does everything right. But Hawke is a more human protagonist who has victories and defeats, and that makes for a far more credilble story IMO. People point to the defeats, because they aren't used to having them at all. But Hawke saves the city plenty of times, uncovers plots by blood mages to infilitrate the Templar Order, foils terrorist plots to gas the populace, gets rich by risking big, winning big, becomes Champion etc etc. I felt like I lived a life, saw great and terrible things happen, and most importantly I felt like I *was* Hawke making the decisions and making them in the tone and with the personality I wanted her to have. I had good times, sad times, exciting times, and things happened in the city that I felt mattered. I can't say any of these things about DAI, and if Hawke had been allowed to return as the Inquisitor it would have made so more sense considering (as she even says herself) Corypheus is her responsibility - the Hawke bloodline is tied to Corypheus and she should have been the one to see him finally defeated. It made no sense to bring back all the major NPCs and party members from DA2 who were most closely tied to the plot, install Corypheus as the main villain and then change protagonists to someone completely different, who only says about 3 lines of conversation to Cory and who has less interesting and dramatic interaction in the whole game than Hawke did in one scene of Legacy!

 

Even if I agree that DA2 was slanted more towards the 'Take that for trying - life sucks and you lose again! Bwa ha ha!' I would argue that Bioware were becoming so reknowned for their pampering and puffing up of the player's ego, that an extreme correction was needed to bring things back down to earth and try to break people of this power trip juvenile wish to be awesome all the time. If nothing else, DA2 was different, and an experimentation to break their usual formula. Now, so was DAI in many ways, but only in the sense that it returned to familiar old themes and pampering of the player's ego but in an even more rushed and unearned way than they did before. All due to the curse of the modern lowering of attention spans and the general decline in standards of storytelling that IMO have characterised this gen.

 

There's no easy answer to my ideal DA3. I wouldn't have retconned the missing Warden and Hawke as being a red herring in the end. That plot strand and Stroud's warning that something was already happening that he couldn't talk about, were a good launching pad for any number of stories. I would have started with a mission where Varric is the main character, where he seems to be running from Cassandra, but eventually you see they are working together and at the end of it track down Hawke etc. Hawke becomes Inquisitor, and throughout the story we learn what she and the Warden have discovered is going behind the scenes, but that somebody has to solve the current crisis of Mages and Templars etc.

 

I'd be looking to make the story much longer. Build up to the Conclave, working at resolving the Mage Templar disputes. But also have plot strands where they are trying to find out who is behind unusual events behind the scenes. Basically make Act 1 of DAI into most of the game, and only reveal the true threat towards the end, have a big confrontation al la Haven to end, and whilst your forces are  buying time, have your party track the villain Corypheus to the temple of sacred ashes and have the events there happen in the finale. Have an Empire strikes back style ending where all seems lost, but see that Hawke survived, and the main goal of Corypheus was foiled, and have Skyhold be unveiled as the new base just before the To be Continued.

 

I'm not in the business as you can see of complete rewrites. The fact is that this was the narrative direction they were going in, and I think writers have to support and try to make it work. Just saying 'Oh it would have better if the game had been all about surf boarding or set in Rivain with you playing as a Qunari sex therapist' isn't helpful. I simply would have tried to write the story and structure it better, and in a way that made more sense. But all of this is off the top of my head anyway - if I actually had been writing it then I would take the time to decide exactly what to do. I'm just giving a flavour of what I'd do with the current narrative. As it stands, its too rushed, and only Act 1 is any good at all. The rest might as well not even be in the game.

[Qis]

-sip-

 

I'm not saying that DA2 does everything right. But Hawke is a more human protagonist who has victories and defeats, and that makes for a far more credilble story IMO.

 

-snip-

 

 

The warden is also human (even as Dwarf or Elf), he/she didn't always always done things "right" (in certain point of view)

 

- he/she might let Templars kill all Mages including innocent ones in the Tower

- he/she might let werewolves kill Dalish Elves and the curse never break

- he/she might support Harrowmont and leave Orzamar ruined with failed social system and economy

- he/she might take bribe and let slavers take the Elves or even sacrifice them for power

- he/she might side with a cult for power

- he/she might not help a village and let them all die

 

All the outcomes from choices is depended on his/her judgment, that is the player own judgment as HUMAN, even play as non-human. It is because of humanity in this game not just on human, humanity is for every humanoid species except Darkspawn.

 

Making a protagonist as human doesn't mean he/she always failed in everything, but about making choices, taking responsibility, consider the consequences. Of course the player just can play as evil as they want to but the game do make the player ponder about their own choice. That's human.

 

Unless the player just play for the sake of playing, then humanity that makes the protagonist human.