Talk:Dragon Age: Inquisition

Dragon Age 3 races?
Does any one know if in this 3rd game youll be able to have different races like in DA Origins? Rather than just being human? -Jon
 * If that were known, it would have been posted in the article. It is not, therefore it is unknown to public at this point of time. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 08:57, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Today more was revealed. The Return of Flemeth. More on customization. No different races, just a human with varied backgrounds. Gaining control of a castle. Well it was on the IGN site. See for yourself http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/10/22/dragon-age-iii-inquisition-adds-castles-customization-huge-levels -- Altaïr 12:17, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time resisting this
No one expects the Dragon Age III: Inquisition!




 * I would've gone with "NOBODY EXPECTS THE ANTIVAN INQUISITION!"
 * Especially given that Antiva is pretty much Spain. xD LordSchmee (talk) 07:29, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I believe Antivans seem more Italian if you listen to the accents. Especially when Zevran said Isabela's name. Or rather, the 'bela' part of her name. That's just how it seems to me. And several other people whose fanfics I've read involving him. Maybe if Antiva has more involvement in Inquisition it'll be a little clearer.
 * Antivan Crows go everywhere they smell business. They can work for the Inquisitor or be hired again Their Eminence. The crows don't really care what someone has to anyone else, they want only profits. Besides nothing stops artists from giving own imagined things to fictional countries they base on real ones, they can even write a story about hybrid inspired places. So many compare Qunari to Turcks, but I see more Japanese in them.78.8.149.9 (talk) 21:24, October 22, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer
 * Uhm, no. If the Warden impresses them more, they decide to help the Wardens end the Blight, instead of the hero of River Dane. They get involved with Howe's men, connect you to a noble who may vote for your cause at the Landsmeet. Lastly, they do not accept any contracts on the Warden for as long as the Blight lasts, because it is in their best interests that the Blight is ended quickly. Sure, they are about profit, but are not blinded by it. Henio0 (talk) 08:17, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

What does any of that have to do with Antivans being more Italian and not Spanish? The accents suggest a Dragon Age version of Italian. Just like Ferelden is English (England English), Orlesian is French, Starkhaven is Irish and so forth. But Antivan Inquisition wouldn't work because Antiva isn't like the Spain of Dragon Age.


 * Starkhaven (if you're talking about Sebastian) is Scottish, not Irish. Other than that, (not that it matters at all), I agree. Antivan accents (from what little we hear) sound Italian, not Spanish. 72.196.14.33 (talk) 14:49, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Hero Speculation
I think its entirely possible that the hero in dragon age 3 will be morrigans child from dragon age origins or that he/she will play a large role in the story. ````
 * Morrigan's child would be 9 years old in Dragon 9:40. I'd give him a couple more games before he begins to play a larger role (like, in Dragon Age V). --Koveras Alvane (talk) 06:41, December 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Dude, this isn't a JRPG where you run around with a bunch of kids in your party! ;) Mercoledi (talk) 05:22, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

Most likely he'll play a role, but I'm not so sure about him being the main hero. Even with the soul of an Old God he'd still be just a child, and he wouldn't have many choices as far as backgrounds go. The hero's background plays a part in shaping the story, and everyone already knows the origin of Morrigan's child. And you won't get to choose a gender, Morrigan reveals that the child is a boy in Witch Hunt. Plus romancing him would be illegal. I think. Things were a little different back in those times, but even in a video game that sort of thing would be very controversial and the creators probably wouldn't risk the negative attention it would bring. But my original point is: playing a role, yes. Being the main hero, maybe not. Of course, this is all just speculation. We'll have to wait and see how things turn out. --CrimsonRaine (talk) 20:28, December 25, 2012 (UTC)CrimsonRaine

Granting the usual speculations, it's quit possible for a couple of plots.

One - the PC is tasked with getting the child to readiness for his destiny. That is to say the PC, like Hawke, is someone with skill and reputation; to make sure the child survives the coming events so as to fulfill role laid out for him. Nothing wrong with a glorified babysitter. Letters from mom saying you must go "here" and do/acquire "this" or some such garble. In this case, I'd like to see the PC die in the end; call me cliche and sentimental, but whatever. Like DA2, this could go over the course of several years, with the lad leaving as a young man.

Two - the setting is some years after the Kirkwall incident. This isn't so farfetched, as Varric has been captured and interrogated some years after anyhow. I don't think the child would be the PC, that's a little... limiting; the child is a boy, and probably a mage, and probably has a name. I think if the child is to be involved in this situation, he will fill the role Morrigan did in DAO, a powerful and dangerous mage supporting the PC's party.

Of course both of these imply sympathy for mages; but even if you side with the Templars, the basis is still workable. Stories circulating of a powerful young mage wandering the lands visiting ancient powerful sites and obtaining blasphemous levels of power unchecked. Several battles between the two groups, rather than meeting once at the end for a single showdown. Keeping in mind, the Eluvians make for a convenient cutscene escape. Shadizar666 (Ruck Rules) 21:28, February 24, 2013 (UTC)

ooh ooh .... for all those saying it cant be the child for its a child... 1.)do we know the plane morrigan took it to goes at the same rate as the regular plane... i very much doubt she used the mirror just to move somewhere else in the world as that would of been a ridiculous amount of effort compared to just going their by ship or something.... likely she and baby god are in a realm of the fade 2.) its an old god soul... is there a reason it has to age like a human, or could morrigon have used power to speed growth....3.) that said its looking to be a member of the inquisition so i doubt it... a apostate mage/old god working with the chantry seems not so likely ... especially one raised by morrigan --66.30.99.230 (talk) 04:31, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

~characters
Do you know if morrigan comes back?? Like in DA 1 you do the ritual and stuff so what happened, what happened to the child and her??
 * Check out the comment section directly above yours. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 18:14, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

Yes she does... but apparently bearing an old god involves being beaten to near death with an ugly stick --66.30.99.230 (talk) 04:32, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

News embargo
BW seems to be under some kind of news embargo about DA3 at the moment (AFAIK Gaider commented in an interview that he is not allowed to talk about it). Does anyone know when it's gonna be lifted? E3 2013 in June? --Koveras Alvane (talk) 18:14, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

....no one knows but it is reasonable to assume no one at bioware will be allowed to speak on it but for tailored interviews until the game releases... ea likely weary of info leaks which are plauging many aaa titles recently --66.30.99.230 (talk) 04:34, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Any confirmed informations about companions?
Some time ago I read in DA3 Cole from DA:Asunder will be a companion along with a qunari nicknamed Iron Bull, a magister and an elven female archer, but later I read that's a fanfiction. Are there any real info about DA3 companions?78.8.140.88 (talk) 17:38, May 12, 2013 (UTC) No, going by bioware though.... 1 at least from each major race (i can almost guarentee there will be a dwarf/human/elf the qunarri is questionable though)... at least 1 same sex option for each gender.... at least 2 females...--66.30.99.230 (talk) 04:38, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

So many rumors about Cullen, anybody know why ? Elnawawi (talk) 19:12, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Renaming the page
A quick look over of the official website seems to show that BioWare's drooped the "III" from the game's title. Perhaps we should as well?. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 21:07, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

DA3 Trailer
Dragon Age: Inquisition

Will you save the world, or tear it apart?

The Inquisitor
I believe 'tis time to start a page on the protagonist. I believe so because in Spike TV's interview with Aaryn Flynn, he mentions the plot, and that you do in fact play as the Inquisitor, which is a pretty solid confirmation, I'd say. watch it here Henio0 (talk) 23:49, June 11, 2013 (UTC) It's at 4:50. Henio0 (talk) 00:00, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it is pretty much certain now, but I would wait until some actual info on the Inquisitor surfaces (like the possible backgrounds) before making an article that isn't just "Inquisitor is the player character of DAI". --Koveras Alvane (talk) 06:13, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, someone just went ahead and made one. :/ No point in talk pages, is there? :( The Inquisitor. Henio0 (talk) 06:19, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's wikis for you. :) --Koveras Alvane (talk) 18:14, June 12, 2013 (UTC)

PS3 or PS4???
I haven't heard hide nor hair of this yet!!! The PS4 comes out by the end of the year, while DA3 comes out next year. I am NOT buying a PS4 just to play this game. Shadizar666 (Ruck Rules) 00:51, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Both, actually. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 06:48, June 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well that'll be a first; I usually see a dead stop, than a pick up on the next console. Shadizar666 (Ruck Rules) 16:37, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

Characters vs Characters appearing in the trailer
I don't think there is any reason to say "Characters appearing in the trailer" instead of just "Characters", it seems like unnecessary nitpicking. What has been confirmed: 08:37, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * you play as Inquisitor ("It falls to you to restore order as you lead the Inquisition and hunt down the agents of chaos", dragonage.com);
 * Morrigan is in the game ("Morrigan is in DAI to be part of DAI's plot first, not to spend all her time referencing two games ago.", David Gaider);
 * assets in the trailer are in-game assets ("That IS Varric's model, that is how Morrigan looks in game", Allan Schumacher; "It's in-game assets and in-engine.", David Gaider);
 * characters were shown instead of gameplay because there will be less changes to them ("I expect significantly less changes to Morrigan and Varric than a lot of gameplay systems", Allan Schumacher).

Well, assumptions are a slippery slope. As long as a developers confirms that these characters will actually be in the game, I don't mind at all stating so. But not purely on the basis that because they are in the trailer, they must be in the game. In one of the trailers for Origins there was an introduction to the origin I believe of a human commoner from Redcliffe or something like that. Didn't make it to final game content, and thus is not on the wiki.

In other words, if we have confirmation other than someone saying who is and who isn't in the trailer, they can be listed as characters fine. Otherwise they are only part of the video. Henio0 (talk) 08:51, June 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * My main beef with "Characters appearing in the trailer" is that it is twice as long as the rest of the section titles. How about we simply call the section "Characters", with the first paragraph saying "Following characters have appeared in the Fires Above trailer:"? --Koveras Alvane (talk) 16:49, June 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * This is simply a case of Henio0 nitpicking. The source I provided clearly says that these characters are in the game.
 * Question: "You shared just a few of the first details about the game during the conference, but for those that weren’t able to watch, could you leave us with a refresher?"
 * Answer: Dragon Age: Inquisition will launch in the Fall of 2014 on PC, PS4, Xbox One, PS3, and Xbox 360. We’ve shown Varric, a Qunari (who has a name, we’re just not releasing it yet!), Cassandra, and Morrigan.
 * Now the question explicitly mentions the 'details' of the Game, not the trailer, which the answer doesn't despute. The answer goes on to say which consoles it will launch on, when it will launch and the characters that have thus far been revealed, included are all the characters listed, and a Qunari who's name will be revealed at a later date.
 * Now, it is entirely possible for any of that to change by release, but there isn't evidence to suggest that it will. If characters are later removed from the game, then they can be removed from the list, as and when. Until an outcome of this dispute has been settled upon I am going to revert it to how it was prior to this edit conflict, status quo ante bellum as it were. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 18:10, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * I prefer attention to details to nitpicking. I just want the wiki to contain factual information.
 * Now, per the question and answer. The answer does not clearly state that they will be in the game. Yes, he's talking about the game in the first sentence, but then about E3 in the next. The connection is there because you want it there, but the fact is that as of yet there isn't a hard proof of who will or who will not appear in the game, other than the Inquisitor. Yes, I know they probably be in the game, as companions too, but why I argue, see my first sentence.
 * I shall add a note that these characters appeared in the trailer and 'tis why we list them here. Henio0 (talk) 22:28, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's nitpicking. I recall this article also saying Dragon Age Inquistion would be called Dragon Age III: Inquistion, and be released in Fall 2013. That information changed, and the article changed to reflect it. That is how thin your argument is.
 * As it currently is, there are several sources that say that the characters will be in the game, including the one that I offered, and the ones that Mostlyautumn offered. Now, you say the "connection is there because you [I] want it there", this is blatantly not true, in fact the opposite is true; you are deliberately trying to interpret in way that supports your argument. He is asked about game details, and he talks about game details. For now at least, these are confirmed details. They may change, but as it currently is we have no evidence to say it will. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 23:00, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Gentlemen, please stop fighting in the war room. The current state of the section is factually accurate and succinct, and that's all that matters. If you want to continue the discussion about nitpicking, please use your respective user talk pages, because here, it bothers other people. :) --Koveras Alvane (talk) 14:36, June 18, 2013 (UTC)

Koveras Alvane, we were using this talk page for it's intended purpose, discussing the state of the article in question. It was neither personal, nor inflammatory. I can't think why it would bother anybody, given that you think the discussion was "about nitpicking", I would suggest you have not actually taken in the discussion.

Henio0, I maintain that the characters have been confirmed to be in game as cited, and you have been unable to depute this. Thus mention of the appearance in the trailer is necessary. Alexsau1991 (talk page) 16:12, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * The citation you provide says "We have shown", and that means only that they have shown us some characters. "We have shown you the characters that will appear in the game" is reading nine words too many into it. Moreover, without further differentiation, posting a list of characters under a characters section heading suggest that it contains the full roster of characters that will appear in the final game. Therefore, differentiation by referring to the trailer is necessary, but that differentiation itself can be worded in such way that confirms the likelihood of the characters appearing in the final game, based on the circumstance that the trailer runs on its own engine. I have worded that as best as I can in my recent edit. Tell me what you think about how to improve it. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 17:45, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it certainly isn't "reading nine words too many into it", they were asked about the details of the game, and they answered regarding the release date, the consoles it will be released on, and the characters they have revealed so far. Perhaps you could explain why they would consider the characters "game details" worthy of mention, if they were not intending them to be included in the final product?
 * Posting a list of characters does indeed suggest that it contains a list of characters set to appear in Dragon Age Inquisition, and the characters that are listed are the characters those set to appear. My citation supports this, as does the ones provided by Mostlyautumn. Issues with this are, as I've said before, just unnecessary nitpicking. I maintain that differentiation is not necessary, it should be left as it was. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 18:49, June 18, 2013 (UTC)

To paraphrase the question and answer session I read above, it is esentially Q:"Could you remind us of the first details of the game, for those who missed the confrence". A:"We've shown Varric, a Qunari, Cassandra and Morrigan." Why are some of you guys interpriting it in such a perverse way? Are they saying 'we've shown Varic, Morrigan etc, but thats just in trailer'.. Erm no. 31.131.30.161 (talk) 22:55, June 18, 2013 (UTC)

I am happy with Henio0's most recent edit. :) --Koveras Alvane (talk) 15:17, June 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * From his edit summary, I gather it wasn't offered as a compromise, just as a temporary measure until the dispute is settled. Regardless, it is no solution. Either disprove my argument, or I will restore it to it's state prior to the dispute. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 18:00, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone dispute that the Inquisitor and Morrigan are confirmed characters in DAI? 21:51, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

"Not that Dragon Age Inquisition will be 100% completely new. As you saw in the trailer, Morrigan, Varric & Cassandra play a role in the game." Chris Priestly Seriously, this discussion is ridiculous. 16:23, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * I wholeheartedly Agree Mostlyautumn. They rejected my citation, despite utterly failing to give an explanation as to why. This source you have just provided is indisputable. Thank you. I will restore the section to it's form prior to the debate, and we can put this subject to rest. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 16:57, June 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Now this citation is fine. It clearly mentions the game, as opposed to E3 from the previous citation. Henio0 (talk) 18:09, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * The prior citation was absolutely fine, which is why you were unable to dispute it. This one however, is just harder for you nitpickers dispute. Alexsau1991 (talk page) Goddammit.svg 19:39, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, whatever keeps you going. Henio0 (talk) 07:06, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * What Henio said. :) --Koveras Alvane (talk) 08:54, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Lelliana
based on her being with cassandra and the seekers at the end of 2... you being in charge of inquisition (includes the seekers and Templars historically)... cassandra definitely being in inquisition ... i have to say i am feeling pretty confident she will be in it... anyone have thoughts on the matter? --66.30.99.230 (talk) 05:11, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Talk pages are to be used to discuss the article. Use the forums for discussions about the object in the article. Henio0 (talk) 06:30, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

well considering the article has a character section figuring out if she will be in the game, thus the section could prove useful


 * It could only prove useful if you have official announcements of certain characters' presence in the game, not idle speculations. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 10:48, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Qunari a playable race in Inquisition
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/31/the-beauty-and-brutality-of-dragon-age-inquisition

Means that all four races are playable now. ---Phil00t

Red Templars
So, apparently rogue templars who use Red lyrium to augment their powers to attack the Inquisitor are a faction in DA:I. I wonder if we should create a new page on them, or expand the Templar Order page? I think a new page would be more fitting, but I am not sure about having enough info on them. I would not advise to expand existing templars, as the order is more or less no more after the templars and seekers broke off from the Chantry. Now there are Red Templars )who may or may not be the ones following Lambert) and those remaining loyal to Divine - if the loyalists get their own name in DA:I I think it would be a good idea to have the two ex-templar organisations seperate. Henio0 (talk) 08:29, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Where did you read about the "Red templars" that you mention them?
 * In the new gameplay videos the party fights Red Templars and their pet Behemot, and also the articles about the gameplay outright call them Red Templars, so it is not a conjecture. Henio0 (talk) 10:22, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw them, there are also those armored guys with bare chests and bubble helmets. We have too few informations to create anything new, even about the behemoth.78.8.135.173 (talk) 12:15, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, that's not them. The Red Templars are actual templars wearing templar armour, but glowing red. Henio0 (talk) 12:43, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * And the have red lyrium swords, like Meredith. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 05:42, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw them, they looks like templars who followed Meredith way, using red lyrium swords which they draw power from it that make them glow red, they most likely not loyal to chantry and might even not loyal to lord seeker (or his successor). Elnawawi (talk) 19:11, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Golf Clubs
I'm sorry, but can we have a citation somewhere for this "golf clubs" faction that's been added to the page? I seriously have a hard time believing it's anything more than vandalism. Or do you expect me to believe the intro to Inquisition will go something like this?

"The templars viciously hunt down rogue mages, who, driven to the brink of insanity, have been seduced by the darkest black magicks in order to defend their freedom. Meanwhile, perhaps an even greater threat has arisen - golf has taken over as the majority past time of many Fereldens. Golf Clubs continue to spring up across Thedas, spreading evil and corruption wherever they may be. Will no one stop them before things truly get out of hand? How many windows must be broken by careless golfers before the Inquisition takes note of this impressive force of nature?"

But hey, perhaps I'm completely misunderstanding the term "golf" in the Dragon Age Universe. LordSchmee (talk) 11:55, September 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * It was vandalism. Please feel free to remove anything you see like that in the future.

New Images in Gallery
The warrior, mage, and rogue images of the Inquisitor images that recently got uploaded to the gallery may not be labeled correctly. All three of them were taken from a GameInformer video, and none of them were identified within the video. The one labeled here as a "mage" is actually wearing a set of lockpicks.

I think we should remove them or relabel them (and rename the files if that's possible) to just "Inquisitor" until we get actual confirmation. Kelcat (talk) 16:55, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Sex Scenes to be "mature and tasteful"

 * I do not always agree with Jim Sterling's arguments, but he has a point in this video regarding the announcement above. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 14:52, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

I think bioware should just focus on the emotion and development of the romance. when it comes to the sex scenes just act like a traction to the li story.Thehumaneldar (talk) 03:03, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

Unregistered users
I'm protecting this page from unregistered edits because of the high volume of repetitive information that is being added. If you wish to add content to this page in the meantime, please leave a message here and any registered can review that content before adding it. -- 09:35, November 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Then I suggest to change release date to TBA, because we all received informations from VengeancefulTemplar's blog [].78.10.82.201 (talk) 17:27, November 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen a single link to a reliable source in that blog entry, so it pretty much stands as idle speculation right now. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 06:48, November 4, 2013 (UTC)

Images
The number of images being added to this page are getting out of hand. Guidelines say 15 images per gallery, and while I'm not opposed to having a little more than that, currently an average of 5 new images are being added every time a new video or trailer comes out. Seeing as how there is still a year to go before the game is even released, and that BioWare is going to keep pumping this stuff out to keep people interested, the issue of too many images is going to get even worse. Kelcat (talk) 18:02, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Which ones do you propose we get rid of? At the moment there is one video, 13 images under Promotional Media and 28 under concept art, should we have 15 total or a maximum of 15 in each category. Perhaps some sort of rotation of images, particularly if there are as many new images as you say there are each day, whereby 15 total are shown on the page and they are randomly selected from all the images stored, would be useful. (BTW I'm not sure if this is possible, nor would I know how to go about programming it) FesteringDoubt (talk) 18:58, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe this page could be an exception, for now? Once the game comes out, most of the images would likely be moved to relevant articles rather than remaining under the main game article. As long as there isn't repetition of images, I think perhaps having lots of them for the time being is a good thing. People will come here to see them, and will find them all in one place. It's a good thing for the community and for fostering discussion, no? -Sophia (talk) 19:10, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * at the moment it is an exception and your right about it being a necessary evil, but with a large number of images, particularly since the game is not yet released, there is a chance that images are outdated/no longer relevant etc. as such ensuring that the information remains current will be more difficult with a larger number of images. so yes Sophia you're right but we can't allow to much leeway, or ensuring accuracy would become much more difficult.FesteringDoubt (talk) 19:15, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * But is there really a need for every single image that applies to Inquisition to be here? I'm fine with having it as an exception, so long as it's not excessive, which is the direction that it's heading in. There have been plenty of times when there were repetitive images and they have to keep being cut down. It'd be much easier for editors to use some discretion when adding them. The mainspace of the wiki is for gathering and disseminating information rather than discussion, in my opinion. Forums and blogs seem better places to have discussions. And it's just as easy to create a forum or blog with 20 new images that just came out and let people talk about it there. The issue of leaving it be "for now" is that, again, the game won't be out for another year.


 * To answer the question about which ones I think can be omitted: I think 15 or so images per section would be sufficient, though I'm honestly not sure if guidelines apply to the Concept Art section since it was actually one of the admins who added most of those. I think any images that can be (and are) added to different pages, such as the ones for The Inquisitor and Qunari don't need to be on this page as well. It's kind of redundant to have them in both places (though I agree that there should be at least one of the Inquisitor since they are the main protagonist). Other types of images would kind of be at the editor's discretion. Such as, is this type of image already represented on the page? Is the image quality poor? Is the image taken from a video that's also in the article? I think those types can be omitted as well. Kelcat (talk) 19:22, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * these are already in guidelines for submitting images, perhaps re-iterating them on the page would be helpful, although care must be taken, as some images do not fit these guidelines, perhaps a low quality image is the only image available etc. Also consider that some of these images have no other page associated with them, so this is the only place that shows them, particularly the concept art of various locations do not, I think, have pages associated with the locations. Until more information comes out that pages can be built around, this is a 'repository' of sorts of all information relating to Dragon Age: Inquisition.FesteringDoubt (talk) 19:30, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * They do exist in the guidelines, and this is an attempt at reiterating them here in a place where people who are only editing Inquisition articles can see it. I agree low-quality images can be acceptable at times, though I can't off the top of my head see an instance where a low-quality image would be necessary on this page. I also agree that not all of the images that are here can be placed on other pages instead, sorry if that wasn't clear. If this is going to be a repository for "all" images and information related to Inquisition, this is going to be a hell of a long page and I question how valuable a resource it would then be. That's not how other game articles are on this wiki such as Origins and DA2. Kelcat (talk) 19:39, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean forever, I meant while information on DA:I is so sparse which means that there are very few pages relating to it, once more information comes out, such as at press releases hands' on etc. then we can split the information into more pages, but for the moment we have very little information to work with primarily because the game isn't released yet, a key difference between DA:O, DA:2 and DA:I.FesteringDoubt (talk) 19:45, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree that an exception should be made, nor do I agree that it's necessary. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, not a image repository nor a place of discussion. The right place for that is a forum or a blog, both of which are available and active here. The sheer number of images in this article frankly looks tacky and unprofessional. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 21:15, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * then which images should we get rid of? It's not as though there are many other pages to put them, and some of them, really should be shown as part of the page, also what about a large number of images makes the page 'a place of discussion'? I agree that it can look unprofessional, but as a wiki we have to have the information the user wants, given the amount of images I have seen floating around the web this is quite a small number of images. However perhaps some of them less 'useful' images, such as the thirteenth image in promotional media, which is three bodies on a blank background could be removed, but saying that a lot of the images have to be removed defeats the purpose of collating the information.FesteringDoubt (talk) 21:21, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * As of right now, I don't think that the majority of the existing images on this page should be removed, but that's because I removed several the other day, as have others over the last couple of weeks. There are a few that could be taken out, and I have no problem doing so myself, but right now it's much better than it has been previously. My hopes in bringing this up is mainly to be peremptory in the future and perhaps make others aware that not all images released are necessary for the wiki. Just as a generic example: Does there need to be four or five images showing the Inquisitor in battle? I don't believe there does (and there was, at one time.) It's a pain to have to continually pare it down. I also agree with Alexsau that the large amounts of images makes the page tacky--besides all of the images in the gallery itself, there are several more in the body of the article. The idea of large amounts of images making this into a place of discussion, and that that is a good thing, was brought up by Sophia. Kelcat (talk) 21:41, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, it's out of control again. 20 images in the gallery. C'mon, now. Let's not add every single one available every time, or at least remove the lest important ones. Henio0 (talk) 01:56, March 7, 2014 (UTC)


 * There were almost 30 earlier. I deleted a bunch but more keep getting added. Kelcat (talk) 02:02, March 7, 2014 (UTC)

Nightmare?
So, I admit I am rather curious about the "Nightmare" in the New Creatures section. Is there a source for this?--X-Yvern (talk) 15:27, January 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Any of these will tell you ;) Henio0 (talk) 16:12, January 13, 2014 (UTC)

File:4.jpg.jpg - not Dragon age art
The isn't Dragon Age concept, from a quick search it seems to come from a game called The Dark Eye: Demonicon, I could only source the image to this website. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 15:00, January 16, 2014 (UTC)

Trailer
there are more OFFICIAL trailer for DA3 please someone add them all here - JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  15:18, February 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * There are no more official trailers at the moment. Henio0 (talk) 16:27, February 5, 2014 (UTC)

there is "gameplay" trailer and "2014" trailer both are official and have EA,frostbit and bioware sigh in start or at the end.i saw a very low quality of them. there is no link for higher quality of them here and maybe there are more trailer - JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  17:15, February 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * There is no official "gameplay trailer" to date. There are various gameplay videos, but they are not trailers. If by the 2014 one you mean this, it is fan-made. Henio0 (talk) 18:03, February 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * are you sure? they look very official!- JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  18:10, February 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * Is says so right in the description of the video. Henio0 (talk) 18:13, February 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * isn't it better to upload trailers in dragonage wiki itself instead of just pointing to youtube links???? - JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  20:13, March 7, 2014 (UTC)