1080 réponses à ce sujet

[Maconbar]

addiction21 wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

I may have missed this but with the changes to companion body models will that eliminate the bolted on head look?

I would assume that since the companions will be keeping their body models thruout that  wont be a problem. Just a guess.



P.S.
I juggle Kittens, Puppies, and chainsaws. It occasionally gets messy but thats part of the fun.

I would give up flexibility in armor choices for individual body types and heads that aren't bolted on.

[Nighteye2]

errant_knight wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
So, the main reason is to cut costs by saving on animation?

No, that's not what he said. They wanted to have different body-types, so rather than implementing different body types across the board with changeable body type for every character in the game, they gave the companions their own meshes. Me, I prefer the one-body-fits-all to the removal of clothing choice, at least the way it's done here. Thye could have made meshes for each of the companions for each piece of clothing, as they did for elves, humans, etc, but with so many possible companions, that would be a lot. I can see why they went this way, I just don't prefer it. They might not have to stick with it in the next game, either. With a more 'normal' number of companions, not appearing over ten years, a larger number of meshes for each would be possible. Can't say I really cared about the single body, though. Not enough to want to mostly remove clothing choices, taking yet another aspect of player control from the game..

It is what he said - they wanted different body types, which would normally require more meshes to be made for each companion. But they thought that was too expensive so instead they removed the costume choice so that the number of meshes required per companion would be reduced to one.
It makes sense in that way, even if it detracts from the enjoyment of people playing the game. <_<

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

In Exile wrote...

FellowerOfOdin wrote...


"Core gamer" does not mean "sticking around with something for a while", "core gamer" means people who are into complex games, willing to spend time on them whereas "casual gamers" are the opposite - they need someone who holds their hands because they are unwilling to learn stuff.

The problem is that a casual gamer, by your definition, can switch into a core gamer depending on the game. It depends on how interested you are in the game at hand. 

And you will go to hell for saying that BG was not awesome!

The absence of lynching so far is a positive, I think.

tmp7704 wrote...
To put it differently -- Planescape
being good game as it is doesn't mean it couldn't be even better (or to
use your wording "even more of an RPG" if it wasn't limited in
this particular regard. At least in the eyes of these who do see
companion customization as a plus when it comes to RPG experience.

Certainly. What the example of PS:T is designed to illustrate is that a game can be considered an excellent RPG ( a true RPG) without this ability, and so the mere fact that DA2 excludes it does not make it an not an RPG, nor does it mean that Bioware is dumbing the product down or with this one feature trying to appeal to the masses.

This is the argument the example wants to cut off, I think.

Finally,
there's another factor here and that's visual fidelity -- ability to
tweak the appearances matters less when you can barely
tell general outlines of the characters to begin with. As such, this
particular limitation can matter less for Planescape than it may matter
for game where characters are featured close and personal.

Still had to tolerate their portraits, and the fixed and ugly mug of the Nameless One, so to me this isn't much less of a sore spot.

BG was awesome but I'm not going to attack you InExile for having bad taste.

On topic, what this whole thing boils down to is sacraficing customization to save the art team some work on having their "cinematic movie experience" work without having to account for various types of visual representation on armor/gear. The game really doesn't gain much of anything from it, aside for allowing those that need to have some "unique" look for companions in order to relate to them or gague their personalities.

A better way to do it would be making companions unique through their input into the world/story/coversations and quests, but apparently clothing trumps those factors.

[tmp7704]

Maconbar wrote...

I would give up flexibility in armor choices for individual body types and heads that aren't bolted on.

It kind of depends on how you view it, though -- technically having custom outfit doesn't eliminate the "bolted on" head because it's still how the game puts models together. Hence Isabela's large necklace, Bethany's scarf and other such accessories to mask the seam between the parts.

[ClonePatrol]

How many good looking armors were their in Origins? I mean really, how many of you didn't have those favorites that you always wore even if they weren't the most powerful set available? Ancient Elven Armor, Juggernaut Armor, etc.
Did the option to make your character where either chainmail, scalemail, or splintmail really make all of the difference? I'd bet most of you chose the splintmail every time anyway.

If anything this is more work for the art team since they can't just slap generic armors on main characters because everyones going to be that one armor later on anyway.

Modifié par ClonePatrol, 06 novembre 2010 - 09:06 .

[AlanC9]

Wyndham711 wrote...
Yeah, it probably just comes down to the fact that I'm willing to sacriface virtually any amount of progress on the visual/graphical side of things if it helps in freeing resources for designing and implementing more complex and choice-oriented gameplay systems. I wouldn't at all mind if the game looked 'a little incompetent', if it meant that the gear/loot system was more involved and awarded me with more choices and possibilities for in depth tinkering. 

I know that other people give more weight on the visual side of things, and such graphical aspects concern them more. I understand their and my desires aren't compatible in this case with the given resources. And when push comes to shove, I guess most of the time the visual side of things will end up winning over gameplay in situations like this.

Yeah, this is about how I see it.

My personal tastes put me in an odd position here. I've never liked how CRPGs rely on inventory, but I'm not particularly concerned with graphics, animations, and whatnot. So Bio's taking zots out of a feature I don't like to improve stuff I'm not interested in. 

Can't remember ever needing that emoticon before. 

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

I would give up flexibility in armor choices for individual body types and heads that aren't bolted on.

It kind of depends on how you view it, though -- technically having custom outfit doesn't eliminate the "bolted on" head because it's still how the game puts models together. Hence Isabela's large necklace, Bethany's scarf and other such accessories to mask the seam between the parts.

Which makes me wonder if those are band aid type of fixes because Eclipse is already outdated as an engine considering how long DA:O was in development.

[Nighteye2]

grregg wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...

(...)

So, the main reason is to cut costs by saving on animation?

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Honestly, right now, with all the comments and info we got on that case, I only see one reason for that change:

It saves time for the coders.

That's it. And that's a pretty sad reason.

Guys, somehow I thought that the fact that games are made with a finite budget and, as a consequence, a deadline is widely known. You never heard of that?

I'm sure BioWare would love to do full armor customization with unique body models but the realities of software development are such that you have to compromise somewhere. It's not like DA:O was free of these compromises. We did get full armor customization at the price of limited body models.

I can understand if you prefer 'full customization' side of the this trade off, but I think it is a valid compromise to make and not an abomination unto RPG as some people make it out to be.

I understand that, but it would be much easier to accept if they just admitted that that was the reason, instead of trying to argue that it's better this way. If they just said 'sorry, we know this is worse than DA:O but we cut some costs here to make other parts of the game better'

[AlanC9]

Nighteye2 wrote...
It makes sense in that way, even if it detracts from the enjoyment of some people playing the game. <_<

Fixed

[Phate Phoenix]

AlanC9 wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
It makes sense in that way, even if it detracts from the enjoyment of some people playing the game. <_<

Fixed

I only barely resisted doing this myself.

[tmp7704]

ClonePatrol wrote...

Did the option to make your character where either chainmail, scalemail, or splintmail really make all of the difference? I'd bet most of you chose the splintmail every time anyway.

Can only speak for myself, but yes, the ability to have Alistair wear heavy armour for the large part of game and then at some point switch to massive in one playthrough, while wearing templar armour in another and medium armour in yet another etc... did have quite an impact on how the game would feel. As was simple ability to have the team walk around in chasind/archon similar "casual" outfits in places like Ferelden, to emulate they're hiding armour under some sort of cloaks to appear less conscpicious.

Modifié par tmp7704, 06 novembre 2010 - 09:12 .

[Maconbar]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

I would give up flexibility in armor choices for individual body types and heads that aren't bolted on.

It kind of depends on how you view it, though -- technically having custom outfit doesn't eliminate the "bolted on" head because it's still how the game puts models together. Hence Isabela's large necklace, Bethany's scarf and other such accessories to mask the seam between the parts.

Okies.

I figured with a distinct body type that the transition from head to body could become seamless. I was under the impression that heads were bolted on in DA:O because there weren't distinct body types.

[AlanC9]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
On topic, what this whole thing boils down to is sacraficing customization to save the art team some work on having their "cinematic movie experience" work without having to account for various types of visual representation on armor/gear. The game really doesn't gain much of anything from it, aside for allowing those that need to have some "unique" look for companions in order to relate to them or gague their personalities. 

The game doesn't gain much from it if you don't value the "cinematic movie experience," you mean.

A better way to do it would be making companions unique through their input into the world/story/coversations and quests, but apparently clothing trumps those factors.

Of course, they could be doing both.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

AlanC9 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
On topic, what this whole thing boils down to is sacraficing customization to save the art team some work on having their "cinematic movie experience" work without having to account for various types of visual representation on armor/gear. The game really doesn't gain much of anything from it, aside for allowing those that need to have some "unique" look for companions in order to relate to them or gague their personalities. 

The game doesn't gain much from it if you don't value the "cinematic movie experience," you mean.

A better way to do it would be making companions unique through their input into the world/story/coversations and quests, but apparently clothing trumps those factors.

Of course, they could be doing both.

Eh,  they'll run that angle into the ground or the new target audience will eventually get bored and move on to whatever the next "it" genre flavor of the month is.

Sure they can and hopefully will do both, at the expense of those who value customization, rather than offering companion customization in the game like DA:O.

[MorseDenizen]

I'm just wondering, (I've been away since july and mobile phones are bad for staying informed, please bear with me) party inventory is to be limited to runes and accessories as far as i can understand in order to give each companion their own unique look/body, if thats the case and I can see some rage here and there, but, in theory its feasible to make custom/modded stock armour for an individual character's body isn't it? My theory hinges on the existence of a toolset but wondering if this may be the case, given that games like NWN2 and Oblivion seem to have a wealth of armour to fit particular bodies, so despite lack of inventory some armours could be made/used, sorry for being long winded, excited to be on the forum again

[The Masked Rog]

Eh, they'll run that angle into the ground or the new target audience will eventually get bored and move on to whatever the next "it" genre flavor of the month is.



Sure they can and hopefully will do both, at the expense of those who value customization, rather than offering companion customization in the game like DA:O.

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

[Wyndham711]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wyndham711 wrote...
Yeah, it probably just comes down to the fact that I'm willing to sacriface virtually any amount of progress on the visual/graphical side of things if it helps in freeing resources for designing and implementing more complex and choice-oriented gameplay systems. I wouldn't at all mind if the game looked 'a little incompetent', if it meant that the gear/loot system was more involved and awarded me with more choices and possibilities for in depth tinkering. 

I know that other people give more weight on the visual side of things, and such graphical aspects concern them more. I understand their and my desires aren't compatible in this case with the given resources. And when push comes to shove, I guess most of the time the visual side of things will end up winning over gameplay in situations like this.

Yeah, this is about how I see it.

My personal tastes put me in an odd position here. I've never liked how CRPGs rely on inventory, but I'm not particularly concerned with graphics, animations, and whatnot. So Bio's taking zots out of a feature I don't like to improve stuff I'm not interested in. 

Can't remember ever needing that emoticon before. 

Lucky you, I wish I was as indifferent about this. My great enjoyement of loot/gear systems in RPGs is really hurting me now.

[AlanC9]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
The game doesn't gain much from it if you don't value the "cinematic movie experience," you mean.

Eh,  they'll run that angle into the ground or the new target audience will eventually get bored and move on to whatever the next "it" genre flavor of the month is.

Yep. I bet the former; there's no sign that people are tiring of that approach.

[Morroian]

The Masked Rog wrote...

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

In a party based game why? Plus the extension of that is having auto levelling for your companions.

[The Masked Rog]

Morroian wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

In a party based game why? Plus the extension of that is having auto levelling for your companions.

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions? Having them depend on me for choosing equipment and skills is silly. I wouldn't see Morrigan ever accept using a plate armor or become an Arcane Warrior. It would be cool if they implemented customization through dialog, that is, you have to talk to your companions about their equipment and abilities and convince them to do any changes. The DA system always took my immersion away (but I did use auto levelling on companions) because it seemed I was the companion sometimes (like when choosing equipment) while other times it seemed they had a very distinct personality. And yes, clothing reflects your personality. People dress a certain way because they have a certain personality.

[tmp7704]

The Masked Rog wrote...

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions? Having them depend on me for choosing equipment and skills is silly.

Since the companions don't have programmed logic to actually choose equipment though and do not make these decisions, there isn't really anything wrong with allowing player to fill in. (the player as opposed to player's own character -- Morrigan may not listen to the Warden's input regarding equipment, but you can have the player's mind substitute for NPC's non-existent one without bringing in-game relationships between characters into it at all)

Modifié par tmp7704, 06 novembre 2010 - 09:54 .

[Morroian]

The Masked Rog wrote...

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions?

But in a party based game why can't you roleplay your companions as well as the main character?

Modifié par Morroian, 06 novembre 2010 - 10:02 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

The Masked Rog wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

In a party based game why? Plus the extension of that is having auto levelling for your companions.

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions? Having them depend on me for choosing equipment and skills is silly. I wouldn't see Morrigan ever accept using a plate armor or become an Arcane Warrior. It would be cool if they implemented customization through dialog, that is, you have to talk to your companions about their equipment and abilities and convince them to do any changes. The DA system always took my immersion away (but I did use auto levelling on companions) because it seemed I was the companion sometimes (like when choosing equipment) while other times it seemed they had a very distinct personality. And yes, clothing reflects your personality. People dress a certain way because they have a certain personality.

Which is pretty much saying "I perfer the developers to decide for me" Which defeats the whole purpose of translating a tabletop party experience to a single player party based RPG.

[The Masked Rog]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

In a party based game why? Plus the extension of that is having auto levelling for your companions.

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions? Having them depend on me for choosing equipment and skills is silly. I wouldn't see Morrigan ever accept using a plate armor or become an Arcane Warrior. It would be cool if they implemented customization through dialog, that is, you have to talk to your companions about their equipment and abilities and convince them to do any changes. The DA system always took my immersion away (but I did use auto levelling on companions) because it seemed I was the companion sometimes (like when choosing equipment) while other times it seemed they had a very distinct personality. And yes, clothing reflects your personality. People dress a certain way because they have a certain personality.

Which is pretty much saying "I perfer the developers to decide for me" Which defeats the whole purpose of translating a tabletop party experience to a single player party based RPG.

I see no reason for me to be able to decide what companions wear. If I was Morrigan and the player tried to put me in plate armor I'd tell him to shut up, or at least I'd need a lot of convincing. If they let us convince the characters to wear other things, I'd be all for it. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind more choice about my character (give me more armor types, more weapon types more hair styles, more everything) but it breaks the RPG a bit when my companions can't seem to make their own desicions.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

The Masked Rog wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The Masked Rog wrote...

I'm quite hardcore (I've now played all BioWare RPGs) and I always thought that customizing the companions' inventories was silly because it made them less like persons and more extensions of my will. Which only the Playble Character should be.

In a party based game why? Plus the extension of that is having auto levelling for your companions.

Because party members should feel like rational beings that make their own desicions? Having them depend on me for choosing equipment and skills is silly. I wouldn't see Morrigan ever accept using a plate armor or become an Arcane Warrior. It would be cool if they implemented customization through dialog, that is, you have to talk to your companions about their equipment and abilities and convince them to do any changes. The DA system always took my immersion away (but I did use auto levelling on companions) because it seemed I was the companion sometimes (like when choosing equipment) while other times it seemed they had a very distinct personality. And yes, clothing reflects your personality. People dress a certain way because they have a certain personality.

Which is pretty much saying "I perfer the developers to decide for me" Which defeats the whole purpose of translating a tabletop party experience to a single player party based RPG.

I see no reason for me to be able to decide what companions wear. If I was Morrigan and the player tried to put me in plate armor I'd tell him to shut up, or at least I'd need a lot of convincing. If they let us convince the characters to wear other things, I'd be all for it. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind more choice about my character (give me more armor types, more weapon types more hair styles, more everything) but it breaks the RPG a bit when my companions can't seem to make their own desicions.

They're meant to be an extention of the player imo. Its the whole point of it being a "party" based CRPG. Other wise  they may as well just do an Elder Scrolls type of deal where you just control the one character.