861 réponses à ce sujet

[Gleym]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

What is it with these people who think they represent some hardcore gaming ideal?  I'm especially entertained by their asseertions that anyone who could have a different opinion than them must not be thinking.  It's fascinating.

No wait, what's that word I'm thinking of.  Oh yeah, tiresome.

Yeah, really. What's with people acting like their opinions are superior to everyone else's? I mean, seriously, what's their problem, telling everyone else that they have to like something no matter what, just because they said so? Although I will agree that it IS entertaining, seeing them insist that people who have different opinions than them are somehow disillusioned into believing that they're part of some hardcore ideal clique. I mean, how insecure do you have to be to call someone elitist, right? Hahaha-- yeah, no.

Don't like what I think? Tough. How about rather than act like what you're accusing me of being, you go posture elsewhere.

[upsettingshorts]

DusK- wrote...

If you want a rational, logical debate then you havecome to the right Chicken , anything you may want to agree to disagree about im your Chick

Do you work at an argument clinic?

[Leonia]

Wasn't what I was trying to say, Addai, but it's sort of moot at this point.

Hey Shorts, I think you just made a friend.

Modifié par leonia42, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:42 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Sir JK wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Sir JK im fairly sure its not about "body language", as most animations will be reused like DAo. But more about "body type" meaning isabela will be slighly taller and bustier then female companion 2, and carver will be more muscular then male companion 2.

Its the body sizes that make generic armor incompatable

That too, but a unique model needs it's own animations and if it is unique then they can put that character's touch on every action. Mimicing body language.

I hear ya but a unique model does not need its own animations, remember alistair making love to Genlock video or Ogre dancing video in collectors edition?  google them if not. Body types are textures and meshes that go over an animated skeleton. They can be interchanged

I hope your right but I doubt that is the case. Unique animations are expensive to create. They will be reused alot.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:43 .

[Aermas]

Oh, wise chicken why does no one want to debate the game, & instead they debate the gamers?

Must one be casual to like something or a pro to like it? Why must some pretend to use logic but when they just can't understand they leave the thread?

[AlanC9]

Man... it's people like Gleym who give self-described hardcore gamers a bad name.

I shouldn't take this seriously, but....

Gleym wrote...
-The people who are happy about it are the same ones who liked it in Mass Effect 2.

Maybe. I was happy enough with the ME2 concept; didn't like the execution all that much

-The people who liked it in Mass Effect 2 are casual gamers.

False, and obviously so. Plenty of non-casual gamers like ME2 just fine. And plenty of longterm Bio customers too.

-Bioware caters to the casual gamer by alienating longterm customers in favor of appealing to the much larger, casual gamer market.

False, but can be fixed. How about "by alienating a small fraction of longterm customers"? I don't think there's anything wrong with saying that Bio wants the casuals business too, depending on how one defines a casual gamer.

And the stuff about casual gamers feeling superior is so hilarious I won't embarrass you by quoting it.

[Sir JK]

Addai67 wrote...
Well it's the same deal with restricting the weapon choices- I'll take customization, being able to shape my game the way I want to shape it, over the hot-rod samurai unique animations.

To be honest, the animations I'm thinking of are the ones that'd show in dialogue. Crossing arms, leaning the head to the side, expressing thinsg with the hands, changing stance, resting on one leg and things for special conversations. I'm not thinking about the combat animations here but the personal communicative ones.

Similarly, being able to play the game I want to play is more important to me than some minor modification some artist thinks is cool  (as in Isabela's ridiculous outfit and Bethany's chainmail bra).  Also having companions look the same all the time, the entire game, every playthrough, rather cuts down on the "cool and unique" factor.  I accept that not everyone agrees with me.

A good argument. Yes, I do understand your position and wish one didn't have to choose between characterisation and customisation. I just don't see how that is possible with the current engine. I hope the game will be enjoyable for you regardless though.

I suspect that these changes are geared towards the person who plays the game once, maybe even doesn't finish it, wants to see a few cool things and then tosses it aside for the next thing.

No, I don't think so. Most of the benefits of the system are of the more subtle kind, the kind you won't actually notice directly. So it's not aimed at any particular marketing group as such, but rather for all groups. It boils down to a preference between more customisation and more characterisation. You prefer the former, I'm more of the latter. Both of us wants to be able to replay the game.

It's $60 for BW whether you ever replay the game or not, but to me it definitely figures in on the negative side of the cost-benefit calculation.  There's just not very much on the positive side at this point.

Anythbing experienced several times over is beneficial for both customer and developer. But yes, I do think you do the right thing by factoring this in your calculations if the game is worth it or not. It's a very important question everyone should think hard about.

[Aermas]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Sir JK im fairly sure its not about "body language", as most animations will be reused like DAo. But more about "body type" meaning isabela will be slighly taller and bustier then female companion 2, and carver will be more muscular then male companion 2.

Its the body sizes that make generic armor incompatable

That too, but a unique model needs it's own animations and if it is unique then they can put that character's touch on every action. Mimicing body language.

I hear ya but a unique model does not need its own animations, remember alistair making love to Genlock video or Ogre dancing video in collectors edition?  google them if not. Body types are textures and meshes that go over an animated skeleton. They can be interchanged

I hope your right but I doubt that is the case. Unique animations are expensive to create. They will be reused alot.

Tiax is right, all they have to do is tell the animation to turn this at 33% or that at 54% & boom, you are killing darkspawn just like anyone else

[upsettingshorts]

Gleym wrote...

Don't like what I think? Tough. How about rather than act like what you're accusing me of being, you go posture elsewhere.

Yeah, I'm not buying it.  If you wanted to be reasonable, that's the approach you would have started with.  But instead you simply insulted a group of people whose attributes and preferences you invented out of thin air to advance your agenda. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:49 .

[Yrkoon]

I have a question for somebody who's been following the press releases more than I have: Will DA2 still be using the same Aggro/threat system...ie. where wearing heavier armor draws more threat?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:49 .

[Sir JK]

Aermas wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Sir JK im fairly sure its not about "body language", as most animations will be reused like DAo. But more about "body type" meaning isabela will be slighly taller and bustier then female companion 2, and carver will be more muscular then male companion 2.

Its the body sizes that make generic armor incompatable

That too, but a unique model needs it's own animations and if it is unique then they can put that character's touch on every action. Mimicing body language.

I hear ya but a unique model does not need its own animations, remember alistair making love to Genlock video or Ogre dancing video in collectors edition?  google them if not. Body types are textures and meshes that go over an animated skeleton. They can be interchanged

I hope your right but I doubt that is the case. Unique animations are expensive to create. They will be reused alot.

Tiax is right, all they have to do is tell the animation to turn this at 33% or that at 54% & boom, you are killing darkspawn just like anyone else

Perhaps. I'm just saying that with unique bodies they have the potential to do so, not that they will. This will be one of them wait and see issues I think. Something we cannot know until we sit there with the game.

In the mean time I'll remain tentatively positive and optimistic, it's more fun that way

[upsettingshorts]

Yrkoon wrote...

I have a question for somebody who's been following the press releases more than I have: Will DA2 still be using the same Aggro/threat system (ie. where wearing heavier armor draws more threat)?

I don't think they've said anything on the subject as of yet.

Tiax Rules All wrote...

I hear ya but a unique model does not need its own animations, remember alistair making love to Genlock video or Ogre dancing video in collectors edition?  google them if not. Body types are textures and meshes that go over an animated skeleton. They can be interchanged

Need? Not necessarily.  But can it lead to clipping issues and occasionally odd body language and the like?  Sure, just ask the really observant FemShep fans in the Mass Effect subforums.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:50 .

[Aermas]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Gleym wrote...

Don't like what I think? Tough. How about rather than act like what you're accusing me of being, you go posture elsewhere.

Yeah, I'm not buying it.  If you wanted to be reasonable, that's the approach you would have started with.  But instead you simply insulted a group of people whose attributes and preferences you invented out of thin air to advance your agenda. 

I don't want to start anything, I am looking to end it, but you have done the same thing before, someone makes an argument & you start posting about what an RPG is or what kind of gamer does what.

[snfonseka]

I am happy with what they have done to the "abilities/ skills" section.

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

I don't want to start anything, I am looking to end it, but you have done the same thing before, someone makes an argument & you start posting about what an RPG is or what kind of gamer does what.

I have never once invented some category called "casual gamers" and then collectively dismissed their opinions as those of sheep.  And I actively try to avoid "what is an RPG" discussions because those threads get locked.  If I attack anyone with any regularity, it's posters like that one, and I'm not going to apologize for it.

In this thread for example I've disputed the assertion that traditional RPG mechanics need to stick around simply because they're traditional, and tried to say that players can't reasonably expect developers to construct an answer to the issue of companion appearance that allows them to have their cake and eat it too.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 novembre 2010 - 08:55 .

[Dave of Canada]

Aermas wrote...

I don't want to start anything, I am looking to end it, but you have done the same thing before, someone makes an argument & you start posting about what an RPG is or what kind of gamer does what.

I don't remember Upsetting dismissing everybody's opinion or insulting people.

[Aermas]

So just because you haven't done the exact actions, absolves you from doing similar actions? & no you don't debate about what an RPG is but you always drawn attention to it or say that an argument about something is an argument of what an RPG is

[upsettingshorts]

Dave of Canada wrote...
I don't remember Upsetting dismissing everybody's opinion or insulting people.

I do insult some people.

[Aermas]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Aermas wrote...

I don't want to start anything, I am looking to end it, but you have done the same thing before, someone makes an argument & you start posting about what an RPG is or what kind of gamer does what.

I don't remember Upsetting dismissing everybody's opinion or insulting people.

I did not mean for my post to allude that he insulted anyone

[Fortlowe]

Gleym wrote...

Why is everyone so happy about the new inventory system?

The short of it is a quite simple case of connecting the dots:
-The people who are happy about it are the same ones who liked it in Mass Effect 2.
-The people who liked it in Mass Effect 2 are casual gamers.
-Casual gamers don't like RPGs because they require putting time and effort into the game.
-Bioware caters to the casual gamer by alienating longterm customers in favor of appealing to the much larger, casual gamer market.
-Casual gamers love this, as it makes them feel superior in some form, as well as validated as gamers.
-Casual gamers thus praise Bioware and act like anyone who is unhappy is an ungrateful schmuck.

So why is everyone so happy about the new inventory system? Because they're sheep.

Everyone who isn't paid to play videogames is a casual gamer. Beyond that, there is simply the amount of commitment an individual gamer chooses to devote to that past time, and that is individually relative.

[Dave of Canada]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I do insult some people.

I meant more people as in a general stance, like "casuals" or "sheep" rather than individuals.

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

So just because you haven't done the exact actions, absolves you from doing similar actions? & no you don't debate about what an RPG is but you always drawn attention to it or say that an argument about something is an argument of what an RPG is

The most similar thing I can think I've done is trying to construct labels that more accurately describe people on this forum than "BDF/fanboy/sheep" and "hater/troll/moron."  And people didn't tend to respond angrily to that. 

I do draw attention to it, for one reason usually:  To point out if debate continues on that road the thread will get locked.  I do it so that threads will stay active and on-topic.  A lot of debates actually do boil down to how different everyone's take on precisely what an RPG is, but Bioware's moderating policy means that we have to police ourselves into not letting it get that far.  That's what I do.

Threads also get locked for devolving into a series of personal sidetracks, as well.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 novembre 2010 - 09:00 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

I hear ya but a unique model does not need its own animations, remember alistair making love to Genlock video or Ogre dancing video in collectors edition?  google them if not. Body types are textures and meshes that go over an animated skeleton. They can be interchanged

Need? Not necessarily.  But can it lead to clipping issues and occasionally odd body language and the like?  Sure, just ask the really observant FemShep fans in the Mass Effect subforums.

Im simply just trying to explain how these games are made. So that expectation are real. There are a pool of animations and a pool of body textures. You choose one from each list put them together and presto there is your character. While there may be a pool of specific Dwarf animation seperate from human animations because of the wild differences in skeleton. Most animations WILL be reused alot.

In DAo logains conversational gestures came from the same pool as alistair's, leliana's, Marjolain's.. its just the way of things. I'm not trying to burst anybodies ballons but each NPC moving and gesturing in their own completely different animations all the time is very unrealistic.

[Aermas]

But bring that matter to light makes everyone focus on that & now every argument is now about RPGs,

seeing as this is now turning into an argument about arguing let's turn back to inventory.



What is so wrong with the equipment suggestion that I proposed?

[upsettingshorts]

To change things up a bit, I'll state my position on the actual thread topic:

It strikes me as arbitrary and I don't really like it. In a most basic sense, I would prefer that an RPG give me total God-like control over my protagonist's companions (thus making them all PCs, and non-party members remaining NPCs) or, and this is more ideal to me, almost no control at all (thus making the protagonist the only PC). Removing the ability to customize their equipment strikes me as fairly arbitrary and a sideways move. I freely admit something is lost - player agency. Something is potentially gained, in that the companions will be given more unique outfits and appearances. However, that opens Bioware up to judgment on aesthetic grounds that I otherwise would not have judged them on given my own ability to dictate how those characters appeared. For example, in Mass Effect 1 I didn't like Ashley's pink armor, so I gave her something else and forgot about it. If she had been in it permanently, like another appearance I disliked (say, Miranda's catsuit) then guess what, I'm going to love or hate it based on the choices of Bioware's art department and not my own.

So in short, I'm mostly against it for a couple of reasons, but won't mind it as much if all or most of the companions fixed outfits are ones I end up liking.

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