Originally Posted by Surge90sf
Originally Posted by Cawyden
They replaced Daisy at last minute because they thought it didn't worked out. So why would they add her in again? They can (and should) fix the Guardian/Emperor - no wonder he has plot holes and issues when he was a late rewrite.

Daisy was obvious tempting and evil (burning baldurs gate). If you not playing evil, why would anyone be tempted by her? But with the Guardian you might have doubts, especially if he is trying to get you to eat tadpoles, but still helpful and protecting you. So in my opinion more interesting then Daisy.

Maybe if they add Daisy as 2nd figure along the Guardian and both are trying to get Tav on their side, but then Daisy needs a rewrite too because as it was in EA I would always choose the Guardian as Daisy just screams evil to me.

This is a strange way of thinking about it.

That's like saying the tiefling party did not work. In EA it did not work because any and all living things that could walk and crawl would offer to have sex with you, and that was all there was to it, I remember I almost had to stop playing right there. BUT IT WAS EA. They still kept it, and made it better.

And naturally, Daisy would not be exactly like she was on EA, she would be way more fleshed out, just like everything else compared to early access.

The thing is, they did change Daisy. They changed them into the guardian. I'd say your example is illustrative of the fact they clearly felt Daisy just did not work for their purposes on a fundamental level. Whatever it is you and other people liked about Daisy, Larian clearly felt that they did not work and thought the change was simply better. And importantly, we don't know how Daisy would have turned out, we only have theories and guesswork.

I think the guardian probably needed a few more months to cook, but I think that on a conceptual level hey work far better than Daisy did. Daisy was just red flags from minute one. They pushed too hard and were just so obviously sinister that you knew you couldn't trust them. They were encouraging you to give into the tadpole just as much as the guardian, even if the whole tadpole power up mechanic of consuming more is pretty dumb. But Daisy encouraged you to saying that you were becoming something greater, making it really hard for you or your character to not think she meant full transformation. Meanwhile Meanwhile guardian explicitly says they're protecting you from changing. They're supporting your efforts to defeat the absolute and want to stop it as well. Immediately more trustworthy, but still with some red flags. Just not ALL the red flags like Daisy. I think it would be far easier to make the guardian work and feel better than it would have been to make Daisy work and feel better, as evidenced by the fact they turned Daisy into the guardian to try try fix them.