I was not talking about sending small squads to close the rifts, but rather, that they should handle the other jobs. Because your inquisitor is not, in fact, only closing the rifts. I didn't have the impression inquisitor was "only brought in when the situation is severe enough" when playing DAI. The maps are full of inane quests, such as "bring back my lost cattle". But no one from your inner circle, or your companions, ever questions the stupidity of such quests, or the inquisitor risking themselves doing them. Even Cassandra, who went against the chantry to establish the inquisition, doesn't care if the inquisitor wastes time picking flowers or goes to solo fight a dragon. My impression was also that, ironically, there is no reactivity towards closing the rifts; you can leave them open, and still nothing happens and no one comments on that either.
It's not a matter of gameplay odditiies; the gameplay in DAI just doesn't support the narrative it is trying to build. Companion reactions (or rather lack of) included.
Okay, yeah, I'll give you that. I just don't particularly recognize the more inane sidequests as canon, as they're obviously padding from the unfocused open world direction that DA:I took. I really hope DA:4 reins it in.
Come to think of it, Pathfinder Kingmaker had that problem too, it was just kind of less noticeable there due to the massive amount of downtime in between chapters just managing the kingdom masking it all. It must have been bad enough for the devs to take note, because I just looked at my quest log in WotR beta to compare and notice an overall distinct lack of sidequests that one would consider padding filler. Reading through it, It appears everything I've done so far has been relevant to the overall narrative or the party in some way...
I am not so much concerned whether anyone can come up with a fan theory or headcanon for any particular contradiction that will help them continue to enjoy the game. I am more concerned that fan theories and headcanon are necessary to justify really fundamental things about the characters. It does not give me any confidence that the people making the game care about who their own characters are and what drives them. Even worse, I feel like the people making the game have an attitude that telling a story that makes sense isn't important because "it's just a video game lol." I would love to be proven wrong about this.
Hm. That is something to consider.
I've noticed lately that for some characters, a lot of the discussion in regards to their appeal revolves around what they MIGHT be in the future, not what they are as of now. Like a lot of the excitement for them, Gale especially, is based on fan theories more than anything else. This is pretty dangerous, because the expectations for them are going to go through the roof. If Larian fails to deliver, we're going to end up with a lot of upset people telling Larian how they should have handled them. Kind of like what happened with Dragon Age Inquisition and Pillars of Eternity 2 in regards to how they both handled the main quest (which was VERY poorly).
