1080 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Not accepting the challenge - either because it isn't fun or isn't possible to win - does not mean the challenge does not exist.

And just to clarify, my point isn't "pause and play vs. reaction timing" it's:

Thinking + Acting > Thinking
and
Thinking + Acting > Acting

The specific mechanics aren't part of my argument. It's a conceptual point I'm making.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:01 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Calla S wrote...

filaminstrel wrote...

Calla S wrote...

The fact that they're making party members (read: NOT HAWKE) more static is, in my opinion, not a bad thing. It makes them more fluid. Not having the freedom to raise Leliana's strength up to obscene levels and have her charge in with two daggers for some of the old slice and dice isn't a bad thing. That is more like playing dress up with your little dolls and having them fight. Having a character with a set skill set that they actually stay true to? That's a role. That's the character. The NPCs are not yours. Hawke is.

Couldn't you make that same argument to remove player talent/attribute selection for companions, or even direct control over them during battle?

For the first, perhaps, but not the second. They're part of your party. Being such, you - as the leader of said party - give them orders. Not an incredibly difficult concept to grasp. For the talent/attributes thing, sure, whatever. I'd rather have a certain theme in which to level them up (like Isabela's "Swashbuckler") with individual attacks than the "hey, you hit this like this with this weapon you probably never touched before we ran into each other" scheme.

What part of its a party based game do you not understand Calla? At that point why not just remove companions altogether since choice is such this "evil crappy thing"?

[upsettingshorts]

filaminstrel wrote...

I've lost what this argument about the definition of difficulty has to do with companion equipment again.

Nothing.  But I can't resist responding to challenges of my argument.  It's a character flaw.

My position on the companion equipment thing is pretty simple.  I'm not a fan, but if the outfits are at least less silly than those in Mass Effect 2 I won't hate it that much.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:05 .

[Kileyan]

The Masked Rog wrote...

Khayness wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Honestly, maybe it's just me but I don't see why there's such an outcry. You can't put Chainmail instead of Splintmail on a companion, it's the end of the world?

The player csutomisation was hindered. Let's imagine if this inventory management was in DA:O aswell.

What if I wanted to play Zevran as a frontline DPS Momentum/Dual Strike one-sword-in-each-hand, but his designed outfit supports crit/backstab damage only?

BioWare's vision substitues your own.

Zevran decides he is not that and he won't wear that armor. I'd say that you shouldn't even be able to decide what abilities the character gains as it levels up.

I would say this is a proof positive example of why choices are great. In your roleplay mind, you have an idea of what Zev wants to wear, what abilities he should have. None of them are bases upon actual in game conversations, but to you, Zev is this character who would use THESE stats and abilities.

What do you know, you can choose the stats you think Zev should have.

If someone else thinks differently than you, or even if they are an evil min maxer, they can choose differently.

No one loses with choices, someone loses when you take away choices.

[jbell2825]

Maybe this has been brought up, its related to the topic so I will ask here. Will we always be able to chose our companions once they are unlocked, or will we be more restricted on who we can take with up for certain missions? Has Bioware also taken away that choice as well?

[MerinTB]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Not accepting the challenge - either because it isn't fun or isn't possible to win - does not mean the challenge does not exist.

And just to clarify, my point isn't "pause and play vs. reaction timing" it's:

Thinking + Acting > Thinking
and
Thinking + Acting > Acting

The specific mechanics aren't part of my argument. It's a conceptual point I'm making.

Again, difficulty version challenging.

When it comes to games, I consider challenging to be using this definition -

http://www.thefreedi...com/challenging

challenging - stimulating interest or thought

you are considering challenging to be -

challenging - requiring full use of your abilities or resources

The former is what I care about for games - for entertainment.
The latter is unimportant to me.

What you mean by challenging is a "who cares" for me.

---

I think that ends it as, again, I'd rather you used the word "difficulty" because, to me, you are misusing what I consider the game definition of challenging to be.

[upsettingshorts]

/shrug.

Then use the word you want if it allows my argument to make sense for you. It's one thing to derail a thread over a topic of actual substance but I'm not gonna continue if it's been reduced to semantics.

Anyway...

Kileyan wrote...
No one loses with choices, someone loses when you take away choices.

I wouldn't go that far. I think the problem, as Sylvius points out, is consistency. You either embody your entire party or you embody the protagonist.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:18 .

[Nefario]

jbell2825 wrote...

Maybe this has been brought up, its related to the topic so I will ask here. Will we always be able to chose our companions once they are unlocked, or will we be more restricted on who we can take with up for certain missions? Has Bioware also taken away that choice as well?

I think it was stated in some other thread by one of the developers (Gaider, I think) that there will be times when certain companions are unavailable, but it'll be obvious as to why when that happens. But otherwise, you'll be able to select who you want to take with you for missions and whatnot. And if I'm remembering correctly, you won't have to go collect them to form your party; there's a screen that'll come up, or something like that.

[Sir JK]

Yeow... these threads grow fast when you sleep. Anyways...

Overall I'm tentatively happy about what was told, I think personal outfits for companions are nothing but a good thing and that by going for it and separating visuals from stats Bioware is taking a step forward and improving the experience. Just how happy I am depends on execution of the idea of course, something that cannot be judged yet. I'd prefer several personal outfits per companion and the fewer there are the less happy with it I'll be. But still, positive about that part.

[MerinTB]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
What part of its a party based game do you not understand Calla? At that point why not just remove companions altogether since choice is such this "evil crappy thing"?

They need the NPCs for the dialog, and they need the dialog for their storytelling.  If they cut out the decision making in dialog, and the ability to choose your responses to your party members and other NPCs... well, then it'd be all the more Final Fantasy...

and just a couple years after bashing JRPGs (obstensively bashing FFXIII, as it was the big game being released and the "competition" for DA:O and ME2) that would seem a bit hypocritical.

Don't worry - remember Jade Empire?  You all but didn't have a party there, despite a camp full of "followers" (who did your laundry, I think)... they'll try that again soon.

[deuce985]

This move is fine by me as long as Bioware keeps enough items to make us happy to tinker with. I don't mean on ME's level either with the full suits and limited attribute modifying. This is a more hardcore RPG, therefore it should have more hardcore elements. Having more unique armor for each character is great. We just need plenty enough to go with all our different play styles and builds. Having a couple full suits of armor for each character would be lame.

I always felt DA needed more "character only" gear that better fit their characters/class. Lets face it, DA had a lot of flaws with its itemization. Particularly it being steered heavily towards heavy/massive armor. Plenty of loot was useless too/generic too. Inventory management also sucked. They even recyled most of the visual styles. Making it where the armor is more unique for each companion is better. But not to the point where you get 3 different armor sets in the game...

Modifié par deuce985, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:36 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Saibh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yes.  Amd I complained about that quite a lot.  I thought we should have been able to have any party member act as the party's spokesperson in conversation.

But...no matter what I do, I can't make Leliana a mage, or spec Morrigan as a rogue. I don't have full control over them. I have control only over what the devs gave me to begin with.

No but you could make her an assassin if you wanted to, or a ranger for some animal companion goodness. I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

I'd do it for consistency.  If the game made the conscious choice to only give control to the player character and make the companions truly NPCs, then telling them what to wear or how to level no longer makes sense.

But as long as the game is either fully party-based, or in the case of DA:2 picking and choosing what the player does and doesn't have control over, any removal of choice is going to strike me as arbitrary.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:39 .

[mellifera]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yes.  Amd I complained about that quite a lot.  I thought we should have been able to have any party member act as the party's spokesperson in conversation.

But...no matter what I do, I can't make Leliana a mage, or spec Morrigan as a rogue. I don't have full control over them. I have control only over what the devs gave me to begin with.

No but you could make her an assassin if you wanted to, or a ranger for some animal companion goodness. I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

I don't think it's being advocated for as much as people accepting that this is what BioWare did and finding benefits in it. I don't think they're going to change this because it's not ideal. It's not my favorite, but I'll accept it.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

And I cannot fathom in the slightest why some people equate the removal of some choice with the removal of all choice-- as if hyperbole will suddenly convince everyone that it's some other game completely.

There are benefits to what we've done, just as there are drawbacks. We happen to like these benefits as they affect the game we're making (as opposed to the imaginary one some people wish we would make), and we still have plenty of choices for the player to contend with.

Not enough choices for you? That's obvious, but I'm not sure why we (or anyone) should place your opinion above everyone else's, despite your constant need to belittle them.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

yukidama wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yes.  Amd I complained about that quite a lot.  I thought we should have been able to have any party member act as the party's spokesperson in conversation.

But...no matter what I do, I can't make Leliana a mage, or spec Morrigan as a rogue. I don't have full control over them. I have control only over what the devs gave me to begin with.

No but you could make her an assassin if you wanted to, or a ranger for some animal companion goodness. I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

I don't think it's being advocated for as much as people accepting that this is what BioWare did and finding benefits in it. I don't think they're going to change this because it's not ideal. It's not my favorite, but I'll accept it.

Why accept something that didn't need changing in the first place though? The only advocates for it are a very small minority, yet Bioware had no problem at all catering to them. Most likely because it meant less work for the art department, and a chance to sucker post point of sale cash for DLC outfits.

I can't believe I'm still this pissed off about it hours later, but since Origins was prolly my most favorite game in years thats prolly a good reason why.

Ugh. 

[Collider]

Unique companion outfits give them personality. I would like that personality to remain for the entirety of the game if possible.

That, and some of the better gear statistically either look unappealing on the companion or unappealing in general.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
The only advocates for it are a very small minority, yet Bioware had no problem at all catering to them.

The only group I get the impression Bioware caters to is their own collective vision. It's got them where they are, why abandon it now?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 01:52 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

David Gaider wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I still cannot fathom in the slightest why people would encourage removal of choice from an RPG.

And I cannot fathom in the slightest why some people equate the removal of some choice with the removal of all choice-- as if hyperbole will suddenly convince everyone that it's some other game completely.

There are benefits to what we've done, just as there are drawbacks. We happen to like these benefits as they affect the game we're making (as opposed to the imaginary one some people wish we would make), and we still have plenty of choices for the player to contend with.

Not enough choices for you? That's obvious, but I'm not sure why we (or anyone) should place your opinion above everyone else's, despite your constant need to belittle them.

Explain what those benefits are then? Because I'd certainly like to hear it. Read this thread David, I'm not the only one not impressed by this by a long shot. Thanks for singling me out though.

[ErichHartmann]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Why accept something that didn't need changing in the first place though? The only advocates for it are a very small minority
Ugh. 

What are you basing this on? And don't say forum posts because nobody here reperesents everyone who bought DAO.

[Morrigans God son]

DA2 got Mass Effect'd, and don't tell me it didn't because it did. More ways than one.

[Collider]

The benefit would be maintaining the companion's personality visually.

I honestly doubt playing dress up is something so vitally important to the enjoyment of the general audience.

[Perfect-Kenshin]

Wait, so if I am to understand this correctly, they've pretty much gone all Mass Effect 2 on the equipment for companions?

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

ErichHartmann wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Why accept something that didn't need changing in the first place though? The only advocates for it are a very small minority
Ugh. 

What are you basing this on? And don't say forum posts because nobody here reperesents everyone who bought DAO.

Ya know, most people I know that are into RPG's, generally enjoy as much customization in their games as possible. I don't think I've ever heard someone I know, aside from a few people on these forums say "Hey it'd be great if they remove companion gear just so I can relate to a party member's super cool unique sleezy looking I look like a **** outfit!"