177 réponses à ce sujet

[blothulfur]

Nah gets old after the first dozen times, besides the scars still haven't fully healed.

[Onyx Jaguar]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

blothulfur wrote...

The haircut's have got worse and my knee's creak more but other than that not much has changed, oh and you're probably right it may have been a sub species or smarter wolves that began following human tribes as scavengers and slowly developed a symbiotic relationship.

Hm. Can't say I'm too surprised to hear that.

Indeed it may have been. Especially considering how easy it is to tame wolves... am I right? Who here has tried to tame a wolf? *raises hand* Anybody?

We should test this, see what happens

Are you volunteering? =D

Practically a suicide mission

I volunteer



CHECKMATE

*backflips out of thread*

[ShrinkingFish]

Fair enough. My right hand never grew back either... shame that.

[blothulfur]

ShrinkingFish the blood wolf likes the way you think, awoooooooooooo.

[MDarwin]

ReconTeam wrote...

And doesn't killing wolves get boring after awhile? If you want to kill wolves you can play WoW and kill wolves at level 80 that are slightly bigger and different colored than the wolves you killed at level 1.

Werewolves are a different matter however, those are fun to fight.

I agree with you.
It is "extremly" boring. No challenge really. Bears are usaly solitary animals as well. Just no fun in fighting/killing them. That is my opinion anyway.

[Jenova65]

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)  
There are skills that could be learned, say 'friend to animals', that would cause wild wolves and bears not to attack, experience could be given for avoiding unnecessary wildlife death, for those of a sensitive nature. One of the reasons I can't play Red Dead Redemption is killing for pelts etc. Yes, I am aware it happened/happens IRL, BUT I am playing to get away from real life not to indulge in it, iyswim? 
You can't help the way you are wired up, and some people can deal with killing humans and not animals in games because humans are usually being killed for that fact that from the PC point of view they are evil/the bad guy/the enemy and are acting with the ability to reason, animals are ALL about instinct food/territory and are not bound by the same thought process as humans. In FFXII the creatures had a red or green health bar above their head, red were aggressive and would attack on sight, green passive and would ONLY attack if the player attacked first, something like this is easy to implement and the result is everyone is happy 

Modifié par Jenova65, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:44 .

[ShrinkingFish]

Jenova65 wrote...

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)

Have you seen the character's teeth in game?! Rotted to the CORE!

Plus... everyone is making references constantly to how much people stink... especially Alistair!

And Morrigan even references syphilis if you have her in your party when you sleep with Isabella!!

I see your point not at all.

Edit: Well... maybe not syphilis directly. But she does refer to some sort of sexually transmitted disease.

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:47 .

[BroBear Berbil]

ReconTeam wrote...

OnionXI wrote...
Recored Bear attacks
http://en.wikipedia....ca#Brown_bear_2

Wolf Attacks - it seems wolves are particularly fond of Russians.
http://en.wikipedia....s#North_America

They're predators and if they're hungry then they'd probably try to kill you. Obviously, you're not going to run into wild animals with the frequency or in the numbers (6+ bears just hanging out?) that you would in Dragon Age but you wouldn't need to in order to be killed.

It's Wikipedia so I am surprised the bears aren't armed with lasers and jetpacks. Also, in a continent with over 300 million people on it, a handful of bear and wolf attacks don't seem to indicate that every bear or wolf you will run across will proceed to eat your face.

Snyde remark about wikipedia aside, all of those cases have cited sources.

The page about wolf attacks covers more than North America and goes back 3+ centuries. Of course in modern America it's not going to be that common. Wolves were hunted nearly to extinction and people don't live on the frontiers of the wilderness. Funny enough, the ones who do seem to meet unfortunate ends are the people who *gasp* go into woods. If you do go walking into the woods alone and unarmed and come out unscathed it's probably not because bears are just total bros; you probably didn't encounter a predator - that simple.

Dragon Age, however, isn't based on modern America. Thedas is more like medieval Europe. One would expect there to be far more wilderness than civilization in such a world and by extension more encounters with wild animals. If wolves, bears, big cats, and whatever else see humans as prey then they will feed on them repeatedly. It seems a really odd thing to be having this debate about whether or not wild predators would want to kill you.

SirShreK wrote...

Anarya wrote...

You know, this "save the environment"
thing is an attitude of the modern world. In medieval times, nature was
a dangerous enemy. If you went out into the wild you were fighting for
your own survival just as much as a wolf would be.

So killing wild animals in a fantasy game makes total sense.

I
myself am an animal lover and I probably couldn't kill a wolf or a bear
unless my life depended on it, I'm just saying. If you were a person in
a medieval setting, all bets were off.

So is Equal Opportunities.

And one has nothing to do with the other.

Modifié par OnionXI, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:47 .

[SirShreK]

OnionXI wrote...

SirShreK wrote...

Anarya wrote...

You know, this "save the environment"
thing is an attitude of the modern world. In medieval times, nature was
a dangerous enemy. If you went out into the wild you were fighting for
your own survival just as much as a wolf would be.

So killing wild animals in a fantasy game makes total sense.

I
myself am an animal lover and I probably couldn't kill a wolf or a bear
unless my life depended on it, I'm just saying. If you were a person in
a medieval setting, all bets were off.

So is Equal Opportunities.

And one has nothing to do with the other.

O'R'ly?

[blothulfur]

You want to make dragon age like sodding final bloody fantasy, BURN THE WITCH.

[ShrinkingFish]

SirShreK wrote...

OnionXI wrote...

SirShreK wrote...

Anarya wrote...

You know, this "save the environment"
thing is an attitude of the modern world. In medieval times, nature was
a dangerous enemy. If you went out into the wild you were fighting for
your own survival just as much as a wolf would be.

So killing wild animals in a fantasy game makes total sense.

I
myself am an animal lover and I probably couldn't kill a wolf or a bear
unless my life depended on it, I'm just saying. If you were a person in
a medieval setting, all bets were off.

So is Equal Opportunities.

And one has nothing to do with the other.

O'R'ly?

Edit: Was that obnoxious enough?

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:53 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

blothulfur wrote...

You want to make dragon age like sodding final bloody fantasy, BURN THE WITCH.

I'd prefer it to be a rock and roll fantasy

[21121313]

Anarya wrote...

You know, this "save the environment" thing is an attitude of the modern world. In medieval times, nature was a dangerous enemy. If you went out into the wild you were fighting for your own survival just as much as a wolf would be.

So killing wild animals in a fantasy game makes total sense.

I myself am an animal lover and I probably couldn't kill a wolf or a bear unless my life depended on it, I'm just saying. If you were a person in a medieval setting, all bets were off.

Not necessarily the best attitude, either, due to the fact of what some of those "save the environment" people are willing to give up in exchange. I love animals as well, but this pity party some groups of people have for others things isn't always natural.

I wouldn't be surprised if this has already come up, but i expect eventually someone will be complaining about how "uncomfortable" they feel seeing DA2 character in their undies.

It's wonderful what some people will try to do and say to get people to change the way the game is developed, isn't it?

[ShrinkingFish]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

blothulfur wrote...

You want to make dragon age like sodding final bloody fantasy, BURN THE WITCH.

I'd prefer it to be a rock and roll fantasy

Like Brutal Legend?

I'm down.

Edit: Only ixnay on the RTS bits.

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:55 .

[Jenova65]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)

Have you seen the character's teeth in game?! Rotted to the CORE!

Plus... everyone is making references constantly to how much people stink... especially Alistair!

And Morrigan even references syphilis if you have her in your party when you sleep with Isabella!!

I see your point not at all.

Edit: Well... maybe not syphilis directly. But she does refer to some sort of sexually transmitted disease.

I don't need you to see my point, it makes it no less relevant  Whatever references are made, many of the characters are enjoying far more robust health than they did back then. And that bit was merely a joke, as indicated by the winky face...............
My point is that we are NOT dealing with reality, we are playing a fantasy game where serious head wounds can always be fixed at camp and magic and Dragons exist, we have already suspended our disbelief and if tweaks were made so that you could still kill, but I don't have to, would that really keep you awake at night?  < Light hearted comment. 
I hope this clarifies my view for you 

ETA - Some of the teeth in ME and ME2 are not that nice, so lord knows how they are dealing with oral hygiene in the future, methinks more a graphical unpleasantness than a realistic one, lol!

Modifié par Jenova65, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:08 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

Well, actually Dragon Age is a lot closer to a small scale RTS. At least with the tactical combat. So I'm good with that. Just don't add in the resource management. Then it all would go to ****.



**** I can see it know. Hunt for food, now you can stock more archers... meh in hindsight that setup has run its course.

[ShrinkingFish]

Jenova65 wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)

Have you seen the character's teeth in game?! Rotted to the CORE!

Plus... everyone is making references constantly to how much people stink... especially Alistair!

And Morrigan even references syphilis if you have her in your party when you sleep with Isabella!!

I see your point not at all.

Edit: Well... maybe not syphilis directly. But she does refer to some sort of sexually transmitted disease.

I don't need you to see my point, it makes it no less relevant  Whatever references are made, many of the characters are enjoying far more robust health than they did back then. And that bit was merely a joke, as indicated by the winky face...............
My point is that we are NOT dealing with reality, we are playing a fantasy game where serious head wounds can always be fixed at camp and magic and Dragons exist, we have already suspended our disbelief and if tweaks were made so that you could still kill, but I don't have would that really keep you awake at night?  < Light hearted comment. 
I hope this clarifies my view for you 

*shrug* perhaps. I feel like Bioware did a pretty good job of blurring the reality fantasy lines though. Considering the plagues, the diseases, the rotting teeth, the poverty, the starvation, the beggars, the refugees, the realities of the Blight and, of course, how these realities would affect the wildlife.

And I'm not sure how rampant you think diseases were... but there were plenty of sick people in the game as it was...

I felt like nothing was out of place. Just new stuff was inserted in. Such as magic. Though I agree that it is a bit silly that a cracked skull or shattered arm can be fixed by an "injury kit" or a return to camp... but they had to work in penalties for "dieing" somewhere...

And dragons are as much animals in this game as wolves and bears. Perhaps even more intelligent, like dolphins and elephants are said to be, perhaps even more intelligent than that! And there are no qualms about killing them. Not even about killing their young while they're still in the nest. But I can see why people wouldn't care about killing them so much.

Anyways, I feel like the way animals are portrayed in this is pretty fair. They don't just throw wolves and bears at you all the time for the sake of throwing bears and wolves at you. All the animals react to you exactly how you'd expect them to react. And for me this extra sense of reality enhances the gameplay.

I mean there are plenty of animals you cannot kill in the game. Cats, dogs (not mabari, though I don't see many people complaining about killing all those poor dogs, that was upsetting to me I must say), halla, birds, most rats and the like. And that is because these animals pose no threat to you... simple as that.

[AlexXIV]

Well this is one of the things that could work different than it does (or did). It is not new to RPGs that for example animals act different than monsters or humans, as in they go about their daily business and are rather shy or peaceful than aggressive. I don't mind killing pixel animals since, sad but true, they were not alive to begin with, but it sure adds to the general atmosphere of the game for me if animals are not all rabid maneaters. Even a pack of wolves wouldn't attack an enemy they know is too much for them be it other animals or monsters or even humanoids. Animals are smarter than it is given credit to them in most games, even those calling themselves RPGs. Well, with he exception of a certain mabari.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:13 .

[Zaros]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

The wolves area with a lot of traps in DA:O sadden me. Wolves are such great creatures. We shouldn't be forced to kill them. Bears too. 

Wolves:
http://t3.gstatic.co...svWrpmIflxeyZE=

A little about them in folklore. See Fenrir in particular. They are truly magnificent and great. I'd like one as a companion in DA2 and once again let me stress, not killing them.

ಠ_ಠ

Modifié par Zaros, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:11 .

[ShrinkingFish]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well this one one of this things that could work different than it does (or did). It is not new to RPGs that for example animals act different than monsters or humans, as in they go about their daily business and are rather shy or peaceful than aggressive. I don't mind killing pixel animals since, sad but true, they were not alive to begin with, but it sure adds to the general atmosphere of the game for me if animals are not all rabid maneaters. Even a pack of wolves wouldn't attack an enemy they know is too much for them be it other animals or monsters or even humanoids. Animals are smarter that it is given credit to them in most games, even those calling themselves RPGs. Well, with he exception of a certain mabari.

As I remember it wolves and bears only ever willfully attacked you when they had overwhelming force. Like, three wolves never tried to take you down, that would be foolish. But everytime I was jumped by wolves they outnumbered me and my party. As my party grew more powerful, more armor, better weapons and the like, the wolves numbers increased accordingly. And it is no stretch of the imagination that a hungry animal would seek to kill and eat humans who they felt they had the advantage over.

Or that a hungry animal wouldn't defend its food if threatened. And most of the animals you fight in game come at you because you're approaching their meals. This is a perfectly reasonable, animalistic reponse.

[Jenova65]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)

Have you seen the character's teeth in game?! Rotted to the CORE!

Plus... everyone is making references constantly to how much people stink... especially Alistair!

And Morrigan even references syphilis if you have her in your party when you sleep with Isabella!!

I see your point not at all.

Edit: Well... maybe not syphilis directly. But she does refer to some sort of sexually transmitted disease.

I don't need you to see my point, it makes it no less relevant  Whatever references are made, many of the characters are enjoying far more robust health than they did back then. And that bit was merely a joke, as indicated by the winky face...............
My point is that we are NOT dealing with reality, we are playing a fantasy game where serious head wounds can always be fixed at camp and magic and Dragons exist, we have already suspended our disbelief and if tweaks were made so that you could still kill, but I don't have would that really keep you awake at night?  < Light hearted comment. 
I hope this clarifies my view for you 

*shrug* perhaps. I feel like Bioware did a pretty good job of blurring the reality fantasy lines though. Considering the plagues, the diseases, the rotting teeth, the poverty, the starvation, the beggars, the refugees, the realities of the Blight and, of course, how these realities would affect the wildlife.

And I'm not sure how rampant you think diseases were... but there were plenty of sick people in the game as it was...

I felt like nothing was out of place. Just new stuff was inserted in. Such as magic. Though I agree that it is a bit silly that a cracked skull or shattered arm can be fixed by an "injury kit" or a return to camp... but they had to work in penalties for "dieing" somewhere...

And dragons are as much animals in this game as wolves and bears. Perhaps even more intelligent, like dolphins and elephants are said to be, perhaps even more intelligent than that! And there are no qualms about killing them. Not even about killing their young while they're still in the nest. But I can see why people wouldn't care about killing them so much.

Anyways, I feel like the way animals are portrayed in this is pretty fair. They don't just throw wolves and bears at you all the time for the sake of throwing bears and wolves at you. All the animals react to you exactly how you'd expect them to react. And for me this extra sense of reality enhances the gameplay.

I mean there are plenty of animals you cannot kill in the game. Cats, dogs (not mabari, though I don't see many people complaining about killing all those poor dogs, that was upsetting to me I must say), halla, birds, most rats and the like. And that is because these animals pose no threat to you... simple as that.

You are still missing a large part of my original point a little, in a fantasy game reality is not necessary and therefore immersion is not sacrificed, and I don't like killing the mabari either btw, my point was/still is - If the game were tweaked so that you could kill bears to your heart's content BUT I don't have to, it shouldn't bother you! And your sense of immersion is not affected unless you are playing thinking ''Urgh, that pansy I chatted with on BioWare isn't killing these animals it is totally ruining my experience...........'' 

Modifié par Jenova65, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:21 .

[NamiraWilhelm]

I see your point. The animals are just following their instinct, fight or flight. I would rather not kill them

[Esbatty]

But I need pelts to make Lel and Morrigan their furkinis. And a loincloth for Zev too, because, he's pretty... even though I don't swing that way.

[ShrinkingFish]

Jenova65 wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Jenova65 wrote...

 I agree with OP there are ways around it, given that we are in a fantasy setting NOT a real medieval setting (or everyone would be quite dirty and with rotten teeth, syphilis etc)

Have you seen the character's teeth in game?! Rotted to the CORE!

Plus... everyone is making references constantly to how much people stink... especially Alistair!

And Morrigan even references syphilis if you have her in your party when you sleep with Isabella!!

I see your point not at all.

Edit: Well... maybe not syphilis directly. But she does refer to some sort of sexually transmitted disease.

I don't need you to see my point, it makes it no less relevant  Whatever references are made, many of the characters are enjoying far more robust health than they did back then. And that bit was merely a joke, as indicated by the winky face...............
My point is that we are NOT dealing with reality, we are playing a fantasy game where serious head wounds can always be fixed at camp and magic and Dragons exist, we have already suspended our disbelief and if tweaks were made so that you could still kill, but I don't have would that really keep you awake at night?  < Light hearted comment. 
I hope this clarifies my view for you 

*shrug* perhaps. I feel like Bioware did a pretty good job of blurring the reality fantasy lines though. Considering the plagues, the diseases, the rotting teeth, the poverty, the starvation, the beggars, the refugees, the realities of the Blight and, of course, how these realities would affect the wildlife.

And I'm not sure how rampant you think diseases were... but there were plenty of sick people in the game as it was...

I felt like nothing was out of place. Just new stuff was inserted in. Such as magic. Though I agree that it is a bit silly that a cracked skull or shattered arm can be fixed by an "injury kit" or a return to camp... but they had to work in penalties for "dieing" somewhere...

And dragons are as much animals in this game as wolves and bears. Perhaps even more intelligent, like dolphins and elephants are said to be, perhaps even more intelligent than that! And there are no qualms about killing them. Not even about killing their young while they're still in the nest. But I can see why people wouldn't care about killing them so much.

Anyways, I feel like the way animals are portrayed in this is pretty fair. They don't just throw wolves and bears at you all the time for the sake of throwing bears and wolves at you. All the animals react to you exactly how you'd expect them to react. And for me this extra sense of reality enhances the gameplay.

I mean there are plenty of animals you cannot kill in the game. Cats, dogs (not mabari, though I don't see many people complaining about killing all those poor dogs, that was upsetting to me I must say), halla, birds, most rats and the like. And that is because these animals pose no threat to you... simple as that.

You are still missing a large part of my original point a little, in a fantasy game reality is not necessary and therefore immersion is not sacrificed, and I don't like killing the mabari either btw, my point was/still is - If the game were tweaked so that you could kill bears to your heart's content BUT I don't have to, it shouldn't bother you is my point! And your sense of immersion is not affected unless you are playing thinking ''Urgh, that pansy I chatted with on BioWare isn't killing these animals it is totally ruining my experience...........'' 

I also feel that you are missing my point.

If I walk up to a bear that is starving due to a lack of food caused by a prevading disease, the Blight, who is leaning over a carcass of something, that bear is going to attack me because it feels that I am threatening its food source. I am not. I am just walking around a tree. But that doesn't matter. The bear will kill me out of a perceived threat. And it is only natural for it to do so.

The only way to prevent this type of occurance is to take these types of encounters out of the game. In fact, you'd have to remove every encounter with any animal that would feel threatened by you enough to try to defend itself. Which for bears could very well equal walking up to it... or within sight of it... depending on the type of bear it was.

For me, these encounters enrich the story as it reveals another aspect of the Blight, that people are not the only ones affected. Removing this from the game, I feel, cheapens the experience. If I have the option to kill bears but don't have to... I wont. But bears are certainly not docile creatures. No matter how much they appear to be so in certain nature shows.

They are also deceptively fast, unreasonably strong, with incredibly thick fur that many bullets cannot even penetrate and are capable of tearing a strong man in half with barely so much as an effort. Honestly... I think they should be much much harder to kill. I think walking around a corner and seeing a bear should be much more terrifying than turning that same corner and seeing a Darkspawn.


And just because something is based in the genre of fantasy does not mean reality should not apply to as much as imaginably possible. Proper fantasies appear to be real. The more real it is the more believable it is and the more believable it the the deeper immersion you get.

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 02 octobre 2010 - 10:33 .

[ShrinkingFish]

Esbatty wrote...

But I need pelts to make Lel and Morrigan their furkinis. And a loincloth for Zev too, because, he's pretty... even though I don't swing that way.

You don't have to bat for the other team to acknowledge another man's prettiness. And I do mean that you don't have to.