Dragon Age: Inquisition

[octavian123]

I agree, but seeing as you are an Inquisitor and the supposed Thedasian second Jesus, your choices must have larger consequences than let's say a companion dying or not, I know it is too much to hope for, but I have been spoiled too much by the Witcher series, choices that actually matter.

Eeeeh, not so sure about that. TW2 shits over your romance choices for instance. I also get the feeling that CDPR chose the neutral path in TW1 as the "canon" one. I wrote a few posts about this in this very thread a few hundred pages ago. Basically, TW2 treats TW1 ALMOST as if it never existed, sure the part where Foltest dies is directly linked with the ending of TW1 but what about everything else? If you helped Yaevinn, Roche doesn't even mention it, even as he reads your personal file... and you know how he feels about elves For this reason TW2 is like a soft reboot to me.

It's surprising how I didn't notice this until after a few playthroughs and some players never do. Kind of strange.

 

[ReptilePZ]

Eeeeh, not so sure about that. TW2 shits over your romance choices for instance. I also get the feeling that CDPR chose the neutral path in TW1 as the "canon" one. I wrote a few posts about this in this very thread a few hundred pages ago. Basically, TW2 treats TW1 ALMOST as if it never existed, sure the part where Foltest dies is directly linked with the ending of TW1 but what about everything else? If you helped Yaevinn, Roche doesn't even mention it, even as he reads your personal file... and you know how he feels about elves For this reason TW2 is like a soft reboot to me.

It's surprising how I didn't notice this until after a few playthroughs and some players never do. Kind of strange.

You're talking about 2 completely different things, however. Hoch's referring to the choices you make being difficult at that time, in that game, because there is no easy way out of a bad situation. You're talking about choice reflection from one title to the next. Not reflecting those choices in the next game, while unsatisfying, does not invalidate them, change them or turn them into easy ones, they still matter and remain difficult to make. It is something CDPR really needs to handle better though, I agree.

I've rarely felt challenged by a choice offered to me by a BioWare game. There are definitely a few, but those are the exceptions. I'd like to see them improve on that just as much I'd like to see CDPR do save imports properly.

 

[KingHochmeister]

Eeeeh, not so sure about that. TW2 shits over your romance choices for instance. I also get the feeling that CDPR chose the neutral path in TW1 as the "canon" one. I wrote a few posts about this in this very thread a few hundred pages ago. Basically, TW2 treats TW1 ALMOST as if it never existed, sure the part where Foltest dies is directly linked with the ending of TW1 but what about everything else? If you helped Yaevinn, Roche doesn't even mention it, even as he reads your personal file... and you know how he feels about elves For this reason TW2 is like a soft reboot to me.

It's surprising how I didn't notice this until after a few playthroughs and some players never do. Kind of strange.

True, but what @ReptilePZ has said, it didn't make those choices less easy to make, and I actually thought about those choices long after I finished the game, which is weird considering that it is virtual media and not actually real.

That is what I am talking about, choices that make you really think about them, because there is no cheap way out of them.

And trust me, you were not the only one who noticed that, hahahaha



But I have to say, those parts in ME3

Spoiler

like in Tuchanka for example

were storylines extended over 3 games that were perfectly melded together, and I applaud that, and I want more of it, hahaha

 

[octavian123]

You're talking about 2 completely different things, however. Hoch's referring to the choices you make being difficult at that time, in that game, because there is no easy way out of a bad situation. You're talking about choice reflection from one title to the next. Not reflecting those choices in the next game, while unsatisfying, does not invalidate them, change them or turn them into easy ones, they still matter and remain difficult to make. It is something CDPR really needs to handle better though, I agree.

I've rarely felt challenged by a choice offered to me by a BioWare game. There are definitely a few, but those are the exceptions. I'd like to see them improve on that just as much I'd like to see CDPR do save imports properly.

Ah, I see. I think the Henselt choice was the best one in TW2 because he had just raped Ves and the player felt the need to take revenge on him. However, killing Henselt is probably the most idiotic and selfish thing you can do in the game...and I like the game for it. Judging from what we could see in Temeria, the sudden death of a king means strife and poverty for simple folk as it creates a power vacuum. Moreover, Henselt had just taken Vergen, his soldiers were everywhere, and you were with alone with Roche and Henselt, Roche being the only person capable to clear your name. If Henselt's soldiers saw Roche and Geralt after having done the deed it would have made Geralt's situation much hairier because it would also make Roche completely useless to Geralt. It would have been very beneficial for the Kaedweni to make Roche an accomplice not only for Henselt but also for Foltest and people would have believed it.

Killing Henselt not only made Letho's job a lot easier but also made the player look like a complete idiot.

 

[KingHochmeister]

Ah, I see. I think the Henselt choice was the best one in TW2 because he had just raped Ves and the player felt the need to take revenge on him. However, killing Henselt is probably the most idiotic and selfish thing you can do in the game...and I like the situation for it. Judging from what we could see in Temeria, the sudden death of a king means strife and poverty for simple folk as it creates a power vacuum. Moreover, Henselt had just taken Vergen, his soldiers were everywhere, and you were with alone with Roche and Henselt, Roche being the only person capable to clear your name. If Henselt's soldiers saw Roche and Geralt after having done the deed it would have made Geralt's situation much hairier because it would also make Roche completely useless to Geralt. It would have been very beneficial for the Kaedweni to make Roche an accomplice not only for Henselt but also for Foltest and people would have believed it.

Killing Henselt not only made Letho's job a lot easier but also made the player look like a complete idiot.

On the other hand, the bastard deserved to die, and after a temporary while of this short vaccum (considering we didn't know about the Nilfgaardian legions coming) there would have been another king eventually, and the cycle of medieval society would repeat itself.

But yes, it was a selfish choice, but it made sense both ways, even though the book Geralt would not let Roche kill Henselt, on the other hand you wanted that bastard to die, unfortunately one stab was too much for Henselt, hahahaha



And we are talking about a choice in a videogame, I want that in a modern Bioware game at this scale at least, hahahahah

 

[ReptilePZ]

Yep, that one's definitely up there. Another example of what type of C&C I'd prefer to see in DA:I and future BioWare titles, is the Orzammar one from DA:O. Do you support a dictator that is willing to sacrifice his own family to gain power, but who is also a visionary that is willing to bring the dwarves to a brighter future, or do you support the person with noble intentions, who sticks with tradition - good and bad - and is not a capable ruler? That one "tickled" me in all the right places.

 

[KingHochmeister]

Yep, that one's definitely up there. Another example of what type of C&C I'd prefer to see in DA:I and future BioWare titles, is the Orzammar one from DA:O. Do you support a dictator that is willing to sacrifice his own family to gain power, but who is also a visionary that is willing to bring the dwarves to a brighter future, or do you support the person with noble intentions, who sticks with tradition - good and bad - and is not a capable ruler? That one "tickled" me in all the right places.

Exactly.

 

[octavian123]

On the other hand, the bastard deserved to die, and after a temporary while of this short vaccum (considering we didn't know about the Nilfgaardian legions coming) there would have been another king eventually, and the cycle of medieval society would repeat itself.

But yes, it was a selfish choice, but it made sense both ways, even though the book Geralt would not let Roche kill Henselt, on the other hand you wanted that bastard to die, unfortunately one stab was too much for Henselt, hahahaha

It's not about what Henselt deserves, it's about all the suffering his sudden death would trigger, remember that he was the last of his line, he had no heirs. This is not some small fry like Loredo, this is a KING. Moreover, killing Henselt is beneficial to the kingslayer in every way, imagine how funny the news was to Letho when he found out. If I were Geralt I would demand Henselt to vouch for his innocence at Loc Muinne not only because I had him by the balls but also because I let him live, which would prove that I have no interest in killing kings. Remember that GERALT'S whole purpose in the second game was to clear his name, his involvement in politics didn't interest him at all and was merely caught in the middle. Killing Henselt had the potential to undo the entirety of Geralt's progress.

 

[KingHochmeister]

It's not about what Henselt deserves, it's about all the suffering his sudden death would trigger, remember that he was the last of his line, he had no heirs. This is not some small fry like Loredo, this is a KING. Moreover, killing Henselt is beneficial to the kingslayer in every way, imagine how funny the news was to Letho when he found out. If I were Geralt I would demand Henselt to vouch for his innocence at Loc Muinne not only because I had him by the balls but also because I let him live. Remember that GERALT'S whole purpose in the second game was to clear his name, his involvement in politics didn't interest him at all and was merely caught in the middle. Killing Henselt had the potential to undo the entirety of Geralt's progress.

And like I said, after killing this vile bastard of a king, when all Kaedwaenis start killing, pillaging and raping each other, there will eventually be another king and a new dynasty, but is the price worth it for killing that vile whoreson? And besides, it brings you another perspective similar to Letho's, are those kings really worth to save or not, even if their deaths bring chaos?

That is why I am saying the book Geralt would never allow Roche to kill Henselt, and if I was playing Roche's path for a save file import for Witcher 3, I would also choose the choice not to kill him, as it is the choice that makes sense and the actual correct one to make, but making correct choices is not always the good one, that is what I want in DAI, although it may never happen.


Apologies for talking too much about Witcher 2 in a DAI thread, hehehehehe


Edit: Thread, my bad

 

[octavian123]

And like I said, after killing this vile bastard of a king, when all Kaedwaenis start killing, pillaging and raping each other, there will eventually be another king and a new dynasty, but is the price worth it for killing that vile whoreson?

And do you really want to be the one responsible for this? You, who are a witcher and considered to be a kingslayer? Besides, Kaedwen is the remaining power in the North and the Black Ones are coming. The North will need to be united to withstand the Black Ones and Henselt has to power to do so, especially with the other kingdoms so weak. Of course, Geralt doesn't care about politics but this is not necessarily about politics, rather all the pandemonium that would ensue once the Black Ones trampled all over the weakened North.

 

[ReptilePZ]

Okay, how about you guys continue this in PMs, as it's off-topic.

 

[octavian123]

Oops, sorry, got a bit carried away.

Anyway, I can't wait to see what Flemeth is up to. Have you guys noticed something strange about Morrigan's voice in the last video? It almost sounded like Morrigan AND Flemeth at the same time.

 

[KingHochmeister]

Oops, sorry, got a bit carried away.

Anyway, I can't wait to see what Flemeth is up to. Have you guys noticed something strange about Morrigan's voice in the last video? It almost sounded like Morrigan AND Flemeth at the same time.

You are right.

 

[Unkindled]

Yep, that one's definitely up there. Another example of what type of C&C I'd prefer to see in DA:I and future BioWare titles, is the Orzammar one from DA:O. Do you support a dictator that is willing to sacrifice his own family to gain power, but who is also a visionary that is willing to bring the dwarves to a brighter future, or do you support the person with noble intentions, who sticks with tradition - good and bad - and is not a capable ruler? That one "tickled" me in all the right places.

Dictator easily. Morality takes a side seat with me to what is best. When it comes to ruling, anyway.

 

[ReptilePZ]

Dictator easily. Morality takes a side seat with me to what is best. When it comes to ruling, anyway.

I'd say it's very much debatable, it may feel like the right choice for you, but somebody who disagrees can bring up equally valid points, meaningthere is no right answer. Discussing why you think one option is right leads to discovering and talking about something much deeper about your beliefs in general, about your background etc. And that's the type of stuff that makes such choices fascinating and why I think it's worth having them.

Anyway, I'm not really going to go into details about this one particular choice, as it is, again, off-topic.

 

[Unkindled]

I'd say it's very much debatable, it may feel like the right choice for you, but somebody who disagrees can bring up equally valid points, meaningthere is no right answer. Discussing why you think one option is right leads to discovering and talking about something much deeper about your beliefs in general, about your background etc. And that's the type of stuff that makes such choices fascinating and why I think it's worth having them.

Anyway, I'm not really going to go into details about this one particular choice, as it is, again, off-topic.

Oh that was in relation to dragon age, not the Witcher The same thing can of course apply though. But I wasn't making an opening statement for a debate. Just to me, the end result of Harrowmont made it seem like he was the wrong choice, locking of the Dwarves and such. He seemed like a pansy ass, so I went with the guy who had some bollocks to sit on. But anyway, yea I do hope there's more stuff like this to think over. Just more gray than one guy nice but leads to bad results, and one guy's a dick, but leads to good results. I think they can do better than that.

 

[ReptilePZ]

Oh that was in relation to dragon age, not the Witcher

I was talking about the DA choice, too. It's not DA:I, so it's still off-topic.

Just to me, the end result of Harrowmont made it seem like he was the wrong choice, locking of the Dwarves and such. He seemed like a pansy ass, so I went with the guy who had some bollocks to sit on. But anyway, yea I do hope there's more stuff like this to think over. Just more gray than one guy nice but leads to bad results, and one guy's a dick, but leads to good results. I think they can do better than that.

There's a bit more to it than that, which, again, how you see this depends on the person. This is how you justify that choice, but there are other details to be taken into account, which may lead you to pick the other option. Anyway, tough choices - there should be more of those in DA:I, especially when your character is supposed to be in a position with a lot of power.

 

[PrincessCiri]

Ah, I see. I think the Henselt choice was the best one in TW2 because he had just raped Ves and the player felt the need to take revenge on him. However, killing Henselt is probably the most idiotic and selfish thing you can do in the game...and I like the game for it. Judging from what we could see in Temeria, the sudden death of a king means strife and poverty for simple folk as it creates a power vacuum. Moreover, Henselt had just taken Vergen, his soldiers were everywhere, and you were with alone with Roche and Henselt, Roche being the only person capable to clear your name. If Henselt's soldiers saw Roche and Geralt after having done the deed it would have made Geralt's situation much hairier because it would also make Roche completely useless to Geralt. It would have been very beneficial for the Kaedweni to make Roche an accomplice not only for Henselt but also for Foltest and people would have believed it.

Killing Henselt not only made Letho's job a lot easier but also made the player look like a complete idiot.

Despite all this, I have never played the game on Roche's side and not killed Henselt. I don't care about the suffering of people I don't know (in this virtual world) and Henselt is a stupid dickface and I decided he needed to die.


edit: errrr but on the topic of Dragon Age, do we know if they've kept the 'rivalry/friendship' style of DA2 or did they go back to simple approval like in DA:O?

 

[ReptilePZ]

If you guys wish to discuss the Henselt choice in more detail, I would recommend this thread: http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/7740-King-Henselt-SPOILER

Or PMs, if you wish to talk about it with someone in particular.

 

[Luxorek]

edit: errrr but on the topic of Dragon Age, do we know if they've kept the 'rivalry/friendship' style of DA2 or did they go back to simple approval like in DA:O?

We don't know the details, but they said they are not going back to the DA:O system of approval... ever.

In that santa Qunari video I linked you can see a short conversation between PC and Cassandra. You pay her sort of a compliment and a text appears saying that she 'slightly approves'. I do recall reading that you can finish the game with only one companion - the rest can leave if their dissaproval of your actions grows too much.