150 réponses à ce sujet

[Andraste_Reborn]

Bring on the rivalry romance! I'd have loved to have that option in the first game. (Especially with Morrigan, as others have said.) Slap-slap-kiss is awesome.



*does happy dance*

[SelphieSK]

Dave of Canada wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

I thought the murder knife wasn't going to be in-game?

It's not. But I used it anyway and now my Varric avatar is dead.

He got better, I see.

[HighMoon]

Oooh! So each person has their own little (or not so little?) domain hey? I really like the sound of that, being spread across the city instead of all crammed into one area.



You could have a house where Bethany and momma and papa stayed, as well as other family members. Then Aveline's home down the road... then Varric's seedy hideout nestled somewhere in the dark alleyways... then Pirate girl's personal ship at the docks of Kirkwall... and Flemeth's haunted mansion on the borders of the city, where no man or woman dare to tread.

[Pritos]

Hmmm... This smells like BDSM to me...

[Dr. wonderful]

Mary Kirby wrote...


Part two: You'll get to know followers just as well whether you get positive approval or negative approval. You get offered quests and you can start a romance (if a romance is an option) no matter which side of the scale you are on. You just get a different sort of flavor to the interactions depending on which side you're on.

Woah wait a second... full on tsundere Interaction?

"I'm not giving you this Lyruim potion -because I like you anything...You too important to lose!

[Dave of Canada]

SelphieSK wrote...

He got better, I see.

Varric cannot die for good.

[Dr. wonderful]

Dave of Canada wrote...

SelphieSK wrote...

He got better, I see.

Varric cannot die for good.

B-But I like your old one! It lool like he was about to drink some beer!

[Minxie]

SirOccam wrote...

I just have to say this "full rivalry romance" idea is one of the best things I've heard about DA2. It would be interesting if that mechanic had been part of DAO...one can only speculate how the Morrigan romance would have gone.

Seriously. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie] I can't wait to try this out.

[Bryy_Miller]

Dave of Canada wrote...

SelphieSK wrote...

Didn't he say that it was neither?

I thought he said it was a mix of both. That it won't be like Origins or Awakening because they don't want the systems to be the same as they were.

Yeah, he said it was a mix.

Now, this may be showing my age, but what is the murder knife? Just to be clear, I know what/who the God of Murder is.

[Coyote Hunter]

Mary Kirby wrote...

Part three: Yeah, there's still no benefit to being neutral with a follower. You shouldn't lose out on as much dialogue and content, though. If you do their quests, you'll more than likely get to know them, even if you somehow don't hit maximum approval.

I kind of get it, but I don't know whether to be happy or disappointed about this.  It sounds like you addressed one of the biggest problems I had with DAO, but I can't tell if you fixed it the way I had hoped.

For example, I hated Zevran, but I found him interesting.  With the approvalometer tugging at both ends, disapproval in conversations and approval in quest related actions, I'd miss out on huge chunks of what he'd tell me if I did game the conversation system and just chose dialogue choices based on what he wanted to hear.

To clarify, I'm wondering, if the Warden/Zevran storyline and interactions were in DA2, using the new approval/disapproval system, and I still followed my same dialogue choices with my derision of his love of violence and rotting cow hide smells, but I still went out of my way to free the city elves and do some other things that he approved of, would I still be in neutral or very low approval territory with Zevran?

IMO, if I'm coming around to a character and striking up conversation with them at the party camp, it's because I'm interested in hearing what you wrote, regardless of whether I think the character is my best friend, a lovable jerk, or a facetious sociopath.  A character should have a neutral, uninterested opinion of my character only if I completely ignore them, because that would infer that I'm likewise neutral towards them, and that I just don't care enough to pay attention to them.

Modifié par Coyote Hunter, 09 septembre 2010 - 07:22 .

[Collider]

I have to agree with Coyote in that neutral approval shouldn't severely stunt the amount of conversations the player can have with the party member in question. For neutral approval, I can point to KOTOR - even if you did selected conversation choices with the party members that they disagreed with, there was still a progression of conversations that the player could go through.

[Dave of Canada]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Now, this may be showing my age, but what is the murder knife? Just to be clear, I know what/who the God of Murder is.

The Murder Knife.

[lv12medic]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Now, this may be showing my age, but what is the murder knife? Just to be clear, I know what/who the God of Murder is.

The Murder Knife.

Ahhhh... the insta-death kitchen knife.  Better than any magical weapon in Thedas.

[Dave of Canada]

lv12medic wrote...

Ahhhh... the insta-death kitchen knife.  Better than any magical weapon in Thedas.

Should've had it been the weapon that was used to kill the Archdemon. The Archdemon runs away of fear from the Warden and the Warden throws the knife into it's tail and the Archdemon explodes into guts and light.

[Lucy Glitter]

Mary Kirby wrote...

Man, it's like you read the dialogue file, or something... eerie.

David Gaider wrote...

I hate you! *slap*

Are you as turned on as I am?

More!

*kiss*

...oddly enough, it makes for a more interesting entry into a romance than we customarily have in these parts. 

SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE
SQUEE<3

[nightcobra]

as long as party members don't act out of character doing it, i'm fine with it



example: zevran, an assassin who has been with lots of women suddenly gets angry at the warden for doing the same thing, the only time he actually acted in character romance wise was at the scene with isabella.

[Saibh]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

as long as party members don't act out of character doing it, i'm fine with it

example: zevran, an assassin who has been with lots of women suddenly gets angry at the warden for doing the same thing, the only time he actually acted in character romance wise was at the scene with isabella.

Having a threesome with Isabela isn't the same as him willing to pursue a polygamist relationship with a person he likes. Besides, his reasons for asking you to pick have to do with their feelings, not his, if you're to believe him at face value.

[nightcobra]

Saibh wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

as long as party members don't act out of character doing it, i'm fine with it

example: zevran, an assassin who has been with lots of women suddenly gets angry at the warden for doing the same thing, the only time he actually acted in character romance wise was at the scene with isabella.

Having a threesome with Isabela isn't the same as him willing to pursue a polygamist relationship with a person he likes. Besides, his reasons for asking you to pick have to do with their feelings, not his, if you're to believe him at face value.

even so, it just seemed out of place...maybe that's just me

[Leonia]

What I'd like to see more of is the companions reactions to other companions. If Hawke starts picking a fight with one, shouldn't the others notice that? Like in Origins if you made one of your companions angry enough to leave and nobody in the party seems to acknowledge it..well, that never made much sense. I guess the only thing we get in Origins is recognition that the Warden is in a romance and the other companions sort of talk about it here or there. Also, I'd love to see intra-party relationships forming, that'd be awesome, though possibly complicated.

[Persephone]

CarlSpackler wrote...


http://www.examiner....er-david-gaider


Kind of short but still leads me back to one of my questions about the new aproval system which remains unanswered, so I'll give it another shot.

If I have an npc party member whom I sometimes gain aproval, sometimes lose aproval from can I still get to know that party member through quests and enter in "friendly" or "love" status with the NPC or do I have be extreme one direction or another?  If I do it would be good to know, but the problem of "gaming" the companions still exists.  I would think patience and persistence could pay off here as much either flattery or antagonism.

The "Shorter than DAO" reference has me worried. I sense a "Shiny graphics, less immersion" scenario coming up.

[Persephone]

leonia42 wrote...

What I'd like to see more of is the companions reactions to other companions. If Hawke starts picking a fight with one, shouldn't the others notice that? Like in Origins if you made one of your companions angry enough to leave and nobody in the party seems to acknowledge it..well, that never made much sense. I guess the only thing we get in Origins is recognition that the Warden is in a romance and the other companions sort of talk about it here or there. Also, I'd love to see intra-party relationships forming, that'd be awesome, though possibly complicated.

Yeah. There was almost ZERO reaction if you replace Alistair with Loghain. Even if Alistair gets EXECUTED. I'd expect Wynne and Leliana to throw a fit/confront the Warden there. But nothing. I mean, that's just not natural!

[Ulicus]

Mary Kirby wrote...

Part two: You'll get to know followers just as well whether you get positive approval or negative approval. You get offered quests and you can start a romance (if a romance is an option) no matter which side of the scale you are on. You just get a different sort of flavor to the interactions depending on which side you're on.

Yes! *applause*

David Gaider wrote...

I hate you! *slap*

Are you as turned on as I am?

More!

*kiss*

...oddly enough, it makes for a more interesting entry into a romance than we customarily have in these parts. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png

Double yes! *more applause*

It probably says bad things about me that I tried to artifically create one of these with Morrigan and my character by picking dialog options she hated but abusing the feastday gifts....

Modifié par Ulicus, 09 septembre 2010 - 12:19 .

[CarlSpackler]

Mary Kirby wrote...

CarlSpackler wrote...


http://www.examiner....er-david-gaider


Kind of short but still leads me back to one of my questions about the new aproval system which remains unanswered, so I'll give it another shot.

If I have an npc party member whom I sometimes gain aproval, sometimes lose aproval from can I still get to know that party member through quests and enter in "friendly" or "love" status with the NPC or do I have be extreme one direction or another?  If I do it would be good to know, but the problem of "gaming" the companions still exists.  I would think patience and persistence could pay off here as much either flattery or antagonism.

It's a bit hard to answer just now, since the balancing hasn't been done yet on approval. Also, I have the plague, and fever makes writing anything coherent really tricky.  So I'll do this in parts.

Part one: the general idea is that party member approval is tied more to the big things and less to the small things. You should get major amounts of approval from doing follower quests and handling big plot decisions, and small amounts from the sort of things you decide to say in casual conversations or decisions in sidequests.  So in theory, you should be able to gain approval with a character for how you do their plot, and lose approval for being mean to kittens or for taking goody-two-shoes quests all the time, and still come out with max friendship (or max rivalry). What you do with the follower matters more than what you say to other people or what you do with random questgiver #25; and hopefully, that reduces the feeling that you have to constantly pick dialogue responses a character likes (or hates) in order to get all their content.

Part two: You'll get to know followers just as well whether you get positive approval or negative approval. You get offered quests and you can start a romance (if a romance is an option) no matter which side of the scale you are on. You just get a different sort of flavor to the interactions depending on which side you're on.

Part three: Yeah, there's still no benefit to being neutral with a follower. You shouldn't lose out on as much dialogue and content, though. If you do their quests, you'll more than likely get to know them, even if you somehow don't hit maximum approval.

Finally able to catch up on this thread.

This sounds excellent.  Just about everything I've read about the new aproval system has sounded like a really good direction to go. 

[Collider]

leonia42 wrote...

What I'd like to see more of is the companions reactions to other companions. If Hawke starts picking a fight with one, shouldn't the others notice that? Like in Origins if you made one of your companions angry enough to leave and nobody in the party seems to acknowledge it..well, that never made much sense. I guess the only thing we get in Origins is recognition that the Warden is in a romance and the other companions sort of talk about it here or there. Also, I'd love to see intra-party relationships forming, that'd be awesome, though possibly complicated.

This is a good idea.