442 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir JK]

Brockololly wrote...
But for myself at least, being able to choose what armor/gear somebody is wearing whether thats just a aesthetic choice or if I'm changing their gear for combat/tactical reasons- thats a role playing choice, IMO.

I guess that's the problem in just particularly this discussion. What is and what is not roleplaying seem largely subjective. What is roleplaying to one person is something else to another. No clear definition of what is and what is not. To some taking away the current choices limits their view of what it is, to othes keeping them in is a greater limitation.
But let's end that particular debate here or take it to pm's (that invitation is extend to any others wishing to discuss it by the way). I've gotten the impression that discussing what is and what is not roleplaying is not too popular.

But conversely, if we limit each character to only one look, then you miss out on any quests like getting into the guards diguises when sneaking into Howe's estate in Denerim.

But you could only shift in and out of the disguise through dialogue(unless my memeory is playing tricks on me), so it is in fact not a inventory/gear choice at all. I don't see how a fixed outfit system would be any different.
It is in fact also the only time in the entire game that gear is actually used narratively (barely), which I argued was one possible advantage of fixed gear. So technically... fixed outfits could give us more of the same sort of situations, no?

Sure, but about if the character's personality changes over the course of the game? While Leliana might start out as a Chantry robe wearing sister, what if she is hardened by the end of the game and embraces her rogue side? If we're stuck with one unique look, then I'd have an issue with a Chantry robe wearing Leliana when she is supposed to be someone who is embracing her rogueish side and not the Chantry- in that case sticking with one unique look would hurt my RP from a story stand point.

Hypothetically... if outfits are to depict some superficial and clear parts of their personality and the game includes the ability to allow the characters to change. I'd argue that the fixed outfit should change (as to symbolize the changed personality) or alternatively tht it doesn't change but this is bears a meaning of it's own.
But basically... fixed oufits doesn't mean there's only one possible look ever. Just that they're outfitted as fits their character best. If sufficient reason is give, then a change might be warranted in such a system.
So in your example above, assuming Leliana is (while pious) stuck with her chantry robe. Hardening her might change her outfit to a suit of appropriate armour. But it would happen as part of a narrative and not replacing her gear in an inventory system.

That said, before anyone jumps to conclusions, I'm not arguing that the DAO system should be changed (unless Bioware has a better idea how to solve it). Just to make that clear. Merely discussing the viewpoint.

[Marionetten]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Stop trying to ruin party-based games.

I don't think Bioware wants to design party-based games. Their model seems to have been quite "anti-party" so-to-speak, since BG.

Bioware does not seem to "buy in" fundamentally into the idea that the player is the party as opposed to the PC. In BG/BG II, it was game over when the PC died. In every game after, dialogue was the state-of-mind of the PC.

Unfortunately, I'm going to have to agree with this.

BioWare just doesn't have it in them anymore. A lot of inane design decisions like regenerating health completely ruined the dungeon crawler aspect of Dragon Age: Origins. Maybe it's for the better if they just stop trying to make these games and instead focus on what they do well.

Modifié par Marionetten, 30 octobre 2010 - 04:29 .

[tmp7704]

Sir JK wrote...

But you could only shift in and out of the disguise through dialogue(unless my memeory is playing tricks on me), so it is in fact not a inventory/gear choice at all.

This is only due to the way the developers chose to implement these particular sequences. There's no actual limitation to the game engine in this regard -- the NPCs could be just as well scripted to take into account what outfits the characters are wearing, and the act of equipping these outfits could be left to the player as part of regular inventory management.

In fact when you approach it from this angle, then it could be utilized to larger degree throughout entire game. It's just the way DAO plot goes, there doesn't seem to be much use for that. But potentially, it's there.

[Sir JK]

tmp7704 wrote...
This is only due to the way the developers chose to implement these particular sequences. There's no actual limitation to the game engine in this regard -- the NPCs could be just as well scripted to take into account what outfits the characters are wearing, and the act of equipping these outfits could be left to the player as part of regular inventory management.

In fact when you approach it from this angle, then it could be utilized to larger degree throughout entire game. It's just the way DAO plot goes, there doesn't seem to be much use for that. But potentially, it's there.

My point was that since it was a dialogue-based change, it would be no different in a fixed-outfit version. It probably even got more in common with a fixed-outfit system than with the regular equipment system (since the outfit only changed during very specific circumstances: when you chose to don the uniform, when discovered or when chosing to remove it).
However: yes, you are right. In theory the normal system could have done the same (even if I suspect the change dialogue was to allow the game engine to replace hostile guards with non-hostile guards) and the npc could in theory be programmed to react to specific outfits and outfit types.

Modifié par Sir JK, 30 octobre 2010 - 04:45 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Marionetten wrote...

Maybe it's for the better if they just stop trying to make these games and instead focus on what they do well.

Don't they do most things well?  Every RPG they've made has been a critical success, and most have been big commercial successes, as well.

The evidence suggests that if BioWare wanted to make a particular kind of RPG, they'd do a terrific job.  The problem is, they're choosing to make the sort of RPG that I don't particularly want to play.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I wish this forum had the ability to search topics by thread starter. I would love to pop up the thread I started in January when ME 2 came out, where I suggested that companion outfits in DA 2 get the same treatment as those in ME 2.

Yeah, that thread inspired mad rage if memory serves me correctly. 

[Archereon]

Beerfish wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...


Exactly, stripping out all the elements that make an RPG an RPG, to "streamline" it for the masses. AKA MassEffect 2.

What sheer and utter nonsense.  Hey I have no problem with people being displeased with any aspect of a game that they do not like.  Some of these comments about what constitutes the big elements of an rpg being an rpg however are absurd.

The problem here is the lack of a distinction between the "actual" defenition of an RPG, a game in which you take up the role of the character (a condition which pretty much every modern game could fill), and, for lack of a better term, the "Old School" term for RPG: Inventory and item managment, heavy in inventory and strategic decisions over raw "twitch" skill, and generally having an elaborate, hopefully well written story. (not that other games can't have good stories, it's just that Old School style RPGers have higher story expectations than other groups)

Mass Effect 2 fufills only one of those conditions (the third, barely, in my opinion).

[MisterMonkeyBanana]

I didn't read the last two pages of discussion buuut perhaps they're going for a hybrid of ME2's system and a more traditional RPG system? Like in Torchlight. You still get that piece of Awesome Plate of Awesomeness, but when you put it on Hawke it becomes his/her signature slightly scrapped together mix of fur chain and plate. While if you put it on your loincloth wearing barbarian it barely covers him but he gets a massive shoulder guard and an armoured loincloth?



Each character gets their unique identity and appearance kept intact, but at the same time you get to customize them as well.



Also on the whole "what is a RPG" discussion, I think some people need to remember that it's very easy to simplify genre boundaries, both Call of Duty and Far Cry are FPSs, but they're both very different beasts when you get to grips with them. It's pretty much a staple of a western RPG that we get to pick our combat specialization and how we interact with other characters in the world, while the majority of jRPG's don't let us choose the character, class and how we act within the narrative. Yet a lot of people still consider them RPGs.

[Sir JK]

BrotherWarth wrote...

One thing that most people in favor of less customization seem to forget while stating "Making them unique in design makes them unique in personality" is that you can change the character's personalities. It's called hardening. You can make Allistair colder and less hopeful. You can make Leliana amoral again. So why is it alright to change the character's personalities but not their shirts?

Hmm... if I may impart my view on the issue? It's not that less customisation as such is better nor that it is unacceptable to change outfits. But rather that the gear system is a very impersonal, stat-driven thing. It imparts nothing on the narrative and adds nothing to the character beyond a basic arbitrary, abstract bonus for combat purposes. There's essentially no connection beyond the narrative character and the gear worn, except of course for the starting gear sometimes. But sticking with the basic gear means that the character is less optimised and thus if you feel that you wish to use it you also have to accept that it will make the game more difficult. A rather unpalatable choice...
With a fixed outfit, the gear would be personal and carry some narrative weight. Perhaps even possible to use for plot purposes. It tells one something about the character at a glance. Connected to the character under it. Unlike the changing of gear the changing of personality is a narrative choice, a interaction with the story of that character (roleplaying, if you will).
Of course ideally the gear would be customisable and personal. The best of two worlds. That one can choose between gears that have a narrative connection to the character and provides different bonuses. But that does not exist yet. So the choice becomes between fixed outfits á la ME or the classical customisable but impersonal and narratively neutral stat-bonus gear, and thus it's just down to preferences as to what one enjoys the most.

Does that clarify the issue?

[Onyx Jaguar]

I would be disappointed if it used ME 2's system as that was mainly just one outfit with one pallet swap unless you were Miranda. But if it had say 3 to 4 actual variances per person than I would not be upset. I always found it lame that the light armor or whatever it was called that the rogues would wear would essentially just be a set of pallet swaps even if they were special items. But I did like that special models were designed for the different races.

So in essence the models for some of those should still be in place for a generic model anyway, I believe one of the issues ME 2 had was that the models for the characters were different per case so they went with the fitting of a unique clothing option on them.  That could very well be the case for DA 2 however and that would be disapointing. Not that the models were different but that the outfits were not compensated since we had 3 X 2 different compensations per model set (Heavy Chainmail, Robes, Leather Armor, the rest that I cannot recall atm)

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 31 octobre 2010 - 11:58 .

[KennethAFTopp]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Hmmm.. now I could say something snarky like how maybe you should start over and have DA2 be a sequel in the vein of BG2, involving the silent PC Warden and dealing with Morrigan and Old God Baby and Flemeth, but I'll hold my tongue:P

Why start now?

You could just rehash the plot from BG1 and 2 for DA3 just change Bhaalspawn with Warden/Old God Spawn.

[Sir JK]

BrotherWarth wrote...
But when does gameplay, and the aspect of strategy, enter in? You can't just remove any and all features that don't enhance the narrative and replace them with features that also don't enhance the narrative, but in a different way. Dragon Age is not a hack 'n slash, so strategy and gear are important. OK, maybe the best armor in the game looks wrong for a certain character. Well you put it on a character that it works with and find the next best alternative for the first character. For instance, I always make Morrigan an Arcane Warrior, but anything above medium armor looks wrong on her IMO so I give her the best medium armor I can find.

I dare say it's not really an easy issue. You're right that not all features that adds nothing to the narrative can just be removed or replaced (allthough ideally everything would add to the narrative.. but that's a lofty dream). As I said... it all boils down to a preference. Given a choice between fixed personal outfits or customisable but narratively detached outfits then one will choose what one thinks is preferable.

I admit that strategy is important, and so is the classical stat+gear system (I lump them together because they're more or less intertwined completely these days) in the classic strategy system associated with roleplaying games in the Bioware tradition (let's call it rpg combat for simplicity's sake). However the gear bonuses of armour makes it such of such paramount importance.

I am, as you no doubt already can guess by now, not the most enthustiastic about the combat aspect in the game (but to clarify: I don't want it removed. Far from it. And I certainly don't want it to turned to hack and slash). I more or less want to be done with combat as quickly and smoothly as possible to get to the fantastic bits of the game (the interactive narrative), I still enjoy a good elite or boss fight mind (yep, you guessed it, especially if they're narratively involved).
However... if I want the personal outfits for the characters like the chantry robe for Leliana (assuming i don't harden her) I have to limit myself. Increase the challenge in the combat aspect to improve my narrative experience. Not much perhaps... but enough to notice it (probably completely imagined).

So the ME2 way of handling it seem tempting. There I get a personal outfit. Is it a perfect solution? No, far from it. But does the gain in my opinion outweigh the loss? That's the key question.
Now... to clarify one thing: I don't want ME2's system in DA2 personally. I am torn on it but think that ultimately he cost does outweigh the benefit. But I understand that some people do. I see the value in personal outfits. I like them in ME2. But I don't want it in DA2 (if it massively improved upon on the other hand... that'd tip me over...).

That's sort of how my mind tackles the issue. I don't pretend to speak for everyone, but I assume some people feel something similar.

[FellowerOfOdin]

I highly highly doubt that you will not be able to change your follower's equipment. Doing so would be a declaration of bankruptcy for any RPG.

REAL RPG folks. ME2 was NOT a RPG.

Modifié par FellowerOfOdin, 31 octobre 2010 - 02:05 .

[Cutlasskiwi]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

I highly highly doubt that you will not be able to change your follower's equipment. Doing so would be a declaration of bankruptcy for any RPG.

REAL RPG folks. ME2 was NOT a RPG.

I'm sorry for taking this more off topic.
It's your opinion that ME2 isn't a RPG just as it's my opinion that it is. ME2 had leveling, experience, classes, emphasis on story, choices and so on..

To break it down a bit more:

Role: You take on the role as your version of Shepard just like you would take on the role as a City Elf or Human Nobel in DAO. You make choices that change the story.
Play: You play out the character as you want to. How to build the character and how you evolve the character throughout the game.
Game: It has game mechanics such as skills, guns, battle. It's not just a roleplaying experience. 

That's just my take on it 

[Silent 1]

I think there should be just an unique armor for each companion that you can replace with generic plate-mail or leather armor, as long as they don't repeat Morrigan's "Wonder-Bra Fiasco"

[ShrinkingFish]

Silent 1 wrote...

I think there should be just an unique armor for each companion that you can replace with generic plate-mail or leather armor, as long as they don't repeat Morrigan's "Wonder-Bra Fiasco"

That'd be cool.... but unfortunetly I'd likely just leave them in their unique armor the entire game and take a serious stats hit. Like I did with Morrigan. And with Sten's sword.

[Harid]

filaminstrel wrote...

I wouldn't mind if doing different things got you access to different smithies/materials to upgrade character-unique armor for each character. It would allow for progression, keep characters visually distinct, and make more sense than taking a suit of armor off of Oghren and putting it on Sten.

I can't think of a game that has ever done this (while having gear change on a character model) ever.  It's nice to want things, but there is no basis in reality here, because it generally requires too much work, and too much development time.

People would not have all looked the same if everyone didn't have a default male and female body type in the game, that was the issue in origins.

The plug and play armor situation is a game play one.  Do you seriously want to find a new piece of armor in a dungeon, then have to leave that dungeon and find a tailor to equip that armor on a character?   Do you want to find an awesome armor for your character that is Dwarf only, when you aren't rolling with any dwarves?  It would be a pain in the neck.  What about dungeons that lock you in like the silverite mine.  Hey, you just found the blackblade set, gotta go to town to get it fit, would be nice if I could put it on before this boss fight, too bad!  It would pretty much kill the point of finding treasure altogether, because you couldn't do squat about it till you got back to a hub.  Hey, nice magic ring, gotta go to a jeweler and get the band extended!  It would be an immersion breaking pain in the neck, it wouldn't work.

Modifié par Harid, 31 octobre 2010 - 10:57 .

[Bogan Queen]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I wish this forum had the ability to search topics by thread starter. I would love to pop up the thread I started in January when ME 2 came out, where I suggested that companion outfits in DA 2 get the same treatment as those in ME 2.

This one, Maria?

[Ryzaki]

Eh. I don't care what they have on at first as long as I can change their clothing. Wearing the same outfit for 3+ years will be ridiculous.

[ENolan]

Ryzaki wrote...

Eh. I don't care what they have on at first as long as I can change their clothing. Wearing the same outfit for 3+ years will be ridiculous.

And awfully dirty, mind you....