Dragon Age: Inquisition Plot Analysis Part 7
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- We're on our way to Redcliffe. (Yay, brother.)
Foreshadowing? Foreshadowing! (No, it's not.)
Frostbite is now the bane of nostalgia.
And there's a time travel plot. Oh boy.
8:46 - I'm not gonna lie. As much as I love Dragon Age: Origins, hearing you refer to it as a masterpiece gives me a sense of validation.
+Ernie Velveeta Origins was literally a 10/10
DA2 was a 6 and Inquisition was a 7. I was so disappointed with DA2 and Inquisition that I legit couldn't bring myself to finish it.
g07h4xf00 As much as I love Mass Effect 1, I think Dragon Age: Origins is a better game. At the very least, I think it's a little better written.
DAO is easily one of my top 5 favorite games. Then again, I guess ME 1 is, as well.
+Ernie Velveeta
I totally agree with this and this is the first i see someone commenting this way...
Thank you for that!
Glad you touched on Bioware's constant change of art and redcliffe. Once again this is directly in contrast to how Witcher 3 reintroduced old places and they looked EXACTLY the same point for point. They had nostalgia for Witcher 1 players.
I even think Bioware changed the Citadel too much over the course of Mass Effect, but this is probably the worst example of this kind of thing, still.
When I played TW3 for the first time and saw that Kaer Morhen and the palace in Vizima were basically the same as in the first game, I simply couldn't believe it. CD Projekt earned a lot of respect from me that day.
Really glad I wasn't the only one bothered by the changes to redcliffe
+StylesisTNA Funny part is Lunar 2 Eternal Blue Complete changed things up with the geography in the hundreds of years since the previous game, but when you got to a familiar place from the prior game it felt frickin' familiar even though it wasn't a copy/paste job.
Which disorganized faction of genocidal guerrilla soldiers is your favorite? This is a complex moral dilemma, choose carefully.
Come to think about it, why ARE we forced to pick between the Mages and Templars? There is literally no plot reason why its a binary choice. The characters speculate either one of the groups could help them succeed, so why not get both so that they know they will definitely succeed? Why are these two quest lines locked off from each other? Are things just happening because the plot says so at this point?
I can't be sure exactly but my assumption was because time exists. The event happen around the same time. The face of the inquisition, you, can only be in one place at a time. As you help the Templars the Mages go through their problem and the same for the Mages.
+blackromeoKOK
Yes, I believe this is the right answer since at the same time the events of dealing with Alexius, the rest of the Templar order that hasn't been taken over the corrupted forces is being converted into the Red Templars.
This is what is left of a mechanic that I recall being mentioned in the first demos of Inquisition, that there were going to be branching paths in how you choice to deal with situations and which different physical paths you take since you only have time to do so much and deal with problems that are happening at the same time. Its one of the reasons I stayed in the Hinterlands as long as I did trying to do all the side quest since I thought that traveling between Haven and the Hinterlands would exhaust time and I would be cut off from finishing quest or being able to return the the Hinterlands due to whatever mysterious force making their next move.
Again, I gave BioWare too much credit and these "Branching Paths" only amounted to the choice between taking the mountain path (which saves a scouting party) or the direct way (which just introduces the player to Cullen earlier) when trying to get to the Temple of Sacred Ashes in the intro and this choice between choosing the Mages or Templars. Everything else in the game (side quest, main quest, war table operations, resource gathering) can be done at the player's leisure and the amount of time it takes to complete all of it has no consequence which is problematic if the player choices to do all of it between the What Pride Had Wrought quest and the Doom Upon All the World quest since that creates a major plot hole regarding the Inquisition forces.
+chapomon The problem with gaming is that in a lot of these E3/Presentation videos, they show off 'what could be in' rather than what is actually in the game. I mean as much as I love ME1, they showed off the ability for you to switch between characters, then removed it. (Will be spoilers below FYI)
There was also a lot changed, like the companions where supposed to have their own stylized armor while still 'bulking up' rather than having generic armor inter-changable like in DA:O. That got tossed out of the window.
The branching events, like we saw in the demo you had the option to take out an enemy tower, which you could select, force your soldiers to come with you, take the able or tend to the wounded and something else I forget. That. Never. Happened. Once. In my play through.
I mean consider that we were supposed to be having an actual demon invasion (and so many people thought it was Flemeth's doing, just because saw *A* dragon) from the trailers and all we get is a Darkspawn dude with a few half naked gladiators.
Oh boy, time travel magic...
Time travel is one of the most dangerous fantastical plot devices in a writer's arsenal. It's way too easy to fuck yourself over with inconsistencies (see: Bioshock Infinite). I could have forgiven Inquisition's use of it, but I can't because no one cares about it. It rivals Mass Effect's disinterest in explaining Shepard's resurrection with how little anyone cares about it's existence. It's used for one plot quest and then completely dropped.
Bioware doesn't use foreshadowing. They can't. They've even admitted they write by the seat of their pants, which in fairness, if done carefully, isn't a bad thing...so long as you're consistent. But, again, it's Bioware.
And for the millionth time, *where the fuck is the King?*
+Professor Fate But Bioshock Infinite didn't use time travel. It did something even dumber.
+Special Rabbit You mean apart from when Booker traveled to the 1980s New York?
+Jason Clark Because it's not explained. It's that simple. You do not introduce something as powerful as resurrection from death and not explain how it was done, especially in what was a hard science fiction setting.
The only thing Mass Effect said about the resurrection was that it cost a lot and took 2 years, which is utterly meaningless. To put this in context, it would be like trying to explain how the a-bomb was made by saying the Manhattan Project took billions of dollars and four years. It doesn't actually explain how the bomb was made or the process behind it.
You're theory that Shepard would serve as a template is wrong. ME2 made it very clear that the Lazarus Project was for Shepard and Shepard alone. After that, the process, whatever it was, is dropped and never brought up again, despite how much of a long term interest it should be for Cerberus.
That doesn't cover how blase everyone is about Shepard being alive after he was killed. No one in the entire damn galaxy gives a shit that someone was resurrected from death, no one questions it or wants to know how it was done.
+Professor Fate God I hated that, he pulled a jesus and everyone is like "oh that's cool bro." Ashley/kaiden had the most(only kind of because they still easily accepted Shepard) realistic reaction to Shepard coming back from the dead and even then it was set up to make them look like stubborn jackasses.
+john gun Considering how casual everyone is about the resurrection of Shepard it's more of a question which character is the most blasé about it! I nominate Anderson. He really takes the cake at how casual he is upon meeting the "resurrected" Shepard.
*Bioware brings in fucking time travel of all things*
Oh my lord why
smudboy doesn't do his usual line by line analysis in the video. Rather, he summarizes scenes a lot more often. Can't really blame him though. This game is boring as hell, both game play and storytelling wise.
+Trafalgar Lawn Unfortunately, a lot of scenes here were meaningless, as there was nothing to comment on.
+smudboy That's what happens when you have bad writing and try to create a single player MMORPG. *:* D
+Trafalgar Lawn I like this game in a weird self harming way. Crappy dialogue, crappy storyline, crappy gameplay, I'm betting Smudboy will be faceplanting his desk before long. The game does not stand up to analysis without removing your own brain and ramming it in a jar of pickles. It's a game full of boring fetch quests...... same as Mass Effect 3. Best not to think about it if you wish to retain your sanity.
So I’m gathering that BioWare made their own version of TES Oblivion? Except somehow less of an enjoyable experience? Impressive.
Did...red shirt spy dude just basically say NOBODY EXPECTS THE INQUISITION?
Oh those random dialogue trees just popping out in the middle of gameplay where you can easily go through it. I understand they were trying to blend game play and dialogue but when one can easily interrupt the other by simply moving, there is no point, and makes the whole purpose feel redundant or tacked on.
And yes we do still have to keep asking the question of 'where the hell is the King/Queen' in all of this. Keep in mind the Templars aren't really an army, more of a defensive force and to anyone else (who isn't a mage) to remember what Alistair said "I'm just another guy in a suit of armor." So why doesn't the local lord/knight/king just issue a call to arms, gather the banner men (all of them! :3) build up an army and help sort this mess out.
Again in DA:O despite being in a civil war we had an army large enough to take on and defeat the blight. A few mages and templars dicking around the country side and everyone just loses their shit. Oh and some random holes that don't really do anything, like here I was thinking (as the game trailers were suggesting) an actual demonic invasion from beyond the veil. Nope!
+UltimateDeliciousPie It's a fair point.
I believe the Arl of Redcliffe -- and his strange absence -- represents that ambiguity. Which is strange, since he was around for the Siege of Redcliffe, with a darkspawn army attacking. Eh, new management? A King would get involved, but not so early, as responsibility would go to the Arl first. Maybe he ran off to warn the king? And, maybe considering the Imperium putting roots down into (apparently) one of Ferelden's largest cities happened so quickly? Even Cassandra thinks Fiona mad for wanting to get all of Ferelden to be her enemy.
So there's definitely something fishy going on. It's just handled so poorly. Political intrigue is removed; even the negotiation is cut short, because someone's son fainted. Not even the introduction of Dorian can save this scenario. (Time travel!)
One thing I will have to ask, or even root around for, but in one of the DA:O endings the Circle Mages can be given autonomy. What would of come of that given the events we see right now? That would be interesting in a way of maybe being a refuge point for mages fleeing the conflict.
UltimateDeliciousPie That would be something. Some DAO DLC, and even DA2, did away with the endings of DAO, as Cullen (regardless of what happened to the mages), ends up becoming Knight-Captain of Kirkwall (also, despite being slain in Darkspawn Chronicles, and possibly killed along with Wynne in DAO.) Seems Bioware writers just aren't the right guys to figure out consistency in their own lore.
The Fraternities of Enchanters were always an interesting history of the politics of mages in Dragon Age, and it's a shame Bioware never allowed us insight into it. That refuge point you're talking about, might be found with the Isolationists.
Maybe Bioware is going all biblical on us and killing the first born, some sort of serialized saga sacrifice.
+UltimateDeliciousPie Luckily they're working on a new IP. But their old ones should go the way of the dodo.
You can't have a game that revolves around something called "The Inquisition" and _not_ crowbar something about them not expecting you in there somewhere.
I won't defend In Hushed Whispers. The whole thing was an abomination. The time travel aspect was not executed well at all. I'll just point out a few other problems not included in the video.
Cutscenes would have allowed the player to convey thoughts without being cut off by NPCs.
The Redcliffe in Inquisition is a different area. A different part of the town. This is obvious from the new tavern and different Chantry. What I will grant you is that the castle looks different, and it shouldn't have been. I also agree that staging this in Redcliffe was unnecessary.
The game doesn't explain the situation with Fiona. This is BioWare's failure. This backstory should have been better explained, but this did at least give fans the opportunity to theorize as to what happened. Some fans speculate that time magic changed Fiona's history. Personally I have my own theory, which is that the Fiona we met in Val Royeaux was the Envy Demon. I believe Redcliffe was just a giant trap for the Herald. Corypheus' minions didn't want the Herald seeking out the templars, and Alexius stole the mages out from under the Herald by going back in time with knowledge of what the Herald would do.
One thing you forgot to point out here. Alexius doesn't really control the mages if our Inquisition just kills him on the spot, or at least makes the mages a better deal. Nothing is actually keeping the mages locked into Fiona's agreement with Alexius. They could all just abandon her and go to the Inquisition. So meeting with Alexius is pointless.
The introduction of time magic is not done well. Theoretically, if Alexius has time magic, then any plan we make to stop him will have already been experienced by him. Thus he would have a countermeasure already in place for us when we got there. This is part of the reason why I abandoned the quest for the mages and went with the templars instead.
So I wasn't the only one that didn't notice those time effects while fighting that rift in front of Redcliffe; I though it was always telling not showing until you mentioned that there is some effects. As for Redcliffe, I was also annoyed that it does look too different. Also why is the tavern not run by Lloyd or Bella? Why even give us that choice in the Dragon Age Keep if its not going to do anything in the most obvious of places?
I also was annoyed as to why no one else questioned the "Fiona inviting the Inquisitor than denying it" more nor did it make them suspicious that it might be a trap set up by a third party. On top of all of this, if Alexius used time travel to negotiate with the rebel mages before Fiona invited the Inquisitor for negotiations (which is why she doesn't remember inviting the Inquisitor, I always assumed) then why does the Inquisitor and company still remember being invited? Doesn't that create a Paradox?
As for the rift in the Chantry (which I also didn't like the fact that it was remodeled), I always assumed that it conveniently spawned right before the Inquisitor's meeting with Dorian because we've gone too long without killing anything...and probably to demonstrate the Inquisitor's power to Dorian.
Love this series of videos
good god the helmets and animations for this game were bad
Pseudo-Bioware make my teeth gnash in frustration at their continuing decline in so-called storytelling!
Man, i'm so glad i found your UA-cam channel. it's 4:27 am and here i am watching your videos lol. Your videos are awesome man. I remember a cpl of years ago getting into arguments with some of my online friends over this game where i pointed that this game was so horrible story wise and i couldn't believe that it actually won game of the year award and they all were like "Noooo. DAI is a pretty good game!!!"... wish i could have had known about your videos back then so i could point them out to them.
I wanted to ask tho, what is that video game you show at 8:16 ? I know you say it in the video, but i couldn't quite catch it (sorry I'm Cuban, so not the best English). I play games for the plot and story they tell not for their graphics. In fact one of my fav video games of all time is Chrono Trigger, the Snes one which for a 1995 console game does pretty good. At least in my opinion.
That was the great Suikoden 2.
I find it interesting that you consider DA:O a masterpiece. I would love to hear your plot analysis of a game you regard to such a high standard. Any chance we'll ever see a DA:O plot analysis?
I'm still caught up on how ridiculous it is that this game removed healing spells and tied down the number of potions you can carry, it's baffling why they would do this. Maybe to make fights more challenging I guess? And to force you to return to camp and refill? I guess I'll stick to origins for now
Honestly I hope you atleast also analyse the templar mission. I found it far better than the mage one.
Smudboy will you make a Dragon Age: Origins Plot Analysis?
I liked Origins (and it's easily the best in the series), but I'm curious to know what made it "a masterpiece" as compared to its successors. DAII did some interesting things thematically but ultimately undermined itself in the same way ME2 did (and with pointless supernatural elements), but as far as narrative goes, Inquisition's biggest fault is its inability to incorporate all the plot elements previously introduced into a cohesive narrative. Or, rather it tried to (mages, templars, demons, taint, darkspawn...suddenly elves?), and that's why it was such a mess. Seems more like an overarching narrative issue (one that constantly plagues BioWare series in general--especially with the lead writer revolving door thing) than a single-game one.
I mean, as far as plot contrivances, silliness, and serious straining of suspension goes, Origins and Inquisition are probably about even.
as someone who went with the templass at lest its not made of all the bs
lol redcliffe was built at the foot of a giant RED CLIFF. I hated the changes!!! It's a tropical rainforest now. It's lazy! They didn't have any diversity in the forest bit, so just continued the trend, instead of gradually making it drier land, or even putting redcliffe near the desert area at least. So lazy.
Out of curiosity, what are some stories which you think did time travel well?
+00Boogie Video game wise or stories in general?
+00Boogie Never. Time travel has never been done well.
On a serious note, just what do you mean by that question? For instance HG Wells' wonderful The Time Machine has time travel, but isn't really ABOUT time travel, that's to say time-space mumbo jumbo isn't a focus. As a general rule, I'd say it's very hard to make a good story where one goes BACK in time, due to the inherent paradoxes
It was just a general question. smudboy said it was hardly ever done well, so I was curious about instances where he thought it was done well. No traps, no tricks, just inquiry.
@@00Boogie I know this is 3 years too late, but i just found smudboy channel and im watching his plot videos series one by one. In movie/shows, i personally liked 12 Monkeys (the tv show, never seen the movie which is by Bruce Willis). The show has a cliche ending but the overall story of all seasons is pretty good.
In video games, the only game that focus on time travel and i have actually liked it was the Snes one Chrono Trigger which for a 1995 video game for the Super Nintendo console does pretty damn good.the story is very stereotype but i did enjoyed playing it.