934 réponses à ce sujet

[Qset]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Companions clothing:
Does not effect companion statistics or performance.
Does not effect choices that effect the progression of the game.

Gameplay:
Mechanics/actions/options which progress the game through it's paces/goals/plot points/way points and eventually get you to the end of the game.

Simple. Some folks earlier implied that "Compnaions clothing" had an effect on "Gameplay" which it concretely does not.

As I stated earlier - this has not been proven yet if we use DAO as a benchmark of companion stat customisation ability. We have only been told some level of customisation is possible via the following mechanics:

1. some sort of rune customisation mechanic - details not defined but indicated that has some similarity to DAO.
2. companion outfits upgrade by themselves over game world time duration
3. all other inventory slots (not outfit slot) can have equipment changes as per DAO.

You might want to reinforce that concrete with some dev quotes but I have been unable to find one that says there will be an equivalent level of stat customisation possible.

[Archereon]

[quote]AlanC9 wrote...

[quote]Archereon wrote...

[quote]
While Diablo is an RPG as well as a Hack and Slash, its interesting, to say the least how we associate "actiony" combat with streamlined, simplistic inventory.
[/quote]

What do you mean "we," kemo sabe?

[/quote]

Many of the doomsayers who are saying that "simplified inventory"=hack and slash, hack and slash= casual newb game.

Now, Diablo on normal isn't particularly difficult, at all, but its not casual light sandbox game I assure you.
[/quote]

So we're talking about a position that neither one of us holds, and that nobody else in the thread is talking about?

I just find Diablo boring - it's never occurred to me to care if it's simple or not.

[/quote]

"We" as in the collective forum, which has a tendency to see streamlining as the devil.  (Now I don't like streamlining, since its often a term that could be used interchangebly with "dumbing down", but there's nothing wrong with it in certain places, like interfaces).

[Ryzaki]

On topic: Frankly I wish we had the old armor system because Hawke doesn't seem to have a good iconic unique look either. Why should my PC have to wear armor to get the same stat bonus that Isabela has in her rags?

Modifié par Ryzaki, 30 novembre 2010 - 10:17 .

[Drasanil]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...
It does, having Zevran run around in a full set of heavy armor, such as the Diligence (IIRC) set, as opposed to decking him out in light armor affected gameplay in a substancial manner given that it fundementally required different stat builds and therefore also changed Zevran's "function" with in the party.

That's in DA:O, in which case I agree with you. It is not the case in DA][, which is why this discussion came up.

Yes, but you're entire argument is that the decision to have fixed clothing/armor in DA2 for party memebers doesn't effect gameplay and as such Bioware hasn't really cut anything out. I just proved (you did agree with my previous statement) that varied clothing/armor can most definitely have an effect on gameplay, as such Bioware did cut out important gmeplay elements with their descision.

[the_one_54321]

Qset wrote...
As I stated earlier - this has not been proven yet if we use DAO as a benchmark of companion stat customisation ability. We have only been told some level of customisation is possible via the following mechanics:

1. some sort of rune customisation mechanic - details not defined but indicated that has some similarity to DAO.
2. companion outfits upgrade by themselves over game world time duration
3. all other inventory slots (not outfit slot) can have equipment changes as per DAO.

You might want to reinforce that concrete with some dev quotes but I have been unable to find one that says there will be an equivalent level of stat customisation possible.

Right, right. I'm being reactionary when I say that it doesn't effect it, because I'm responding to the statement "it does effect it." There is still the potential that it will have an effect on gameplay. But as of yet there is no proof that it has any effect at all.

[Blastback]

Ryzaki wrote...

On topic: Frankly I wish we had the old armor system because Hawke doesn't seem to have a good iconic unique look either. Why should my PC have to wear armor to get the same stat bonus that Isabela has in her rags?

While I'm one of those people who wishes that the old armor system was still in place, let's be fair here.  It's hard for one charater to have an iconic unique look that works for all three classes.  And I doubt that you'll have to wear heavy armor to get the same stat bonuses.  Obviously that won't work for mages and rogues.

[the_one_54321]

Drasanil wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...
It does, having Zevran run around in a full set of heavy armor, such as the Diligence (IIRC) set, as opposed to decking him out in light armor affected gameplay in a substancial manner given that it fundementally required different stat builds and therefore also changed Zevran's "function" with in the party.

That's in DA:O, in which case I agree with you. It is not the case in DA][, which is why this discussion came up.

Yes, but you're entire argument is that the decision to have fixed clothing/armor in DA2 for party memebers doesn't effect gameplay and as such Bioware hasn't really cut anything out. I just proved (you did agree with my previous statement) that varied clothing/armor can most definitely have an effect on gameplay, as such Bioware did cut out important gmeplay elements with their descision.

Yes but, presumably, the same thing has no effect in DA][. However we, again presumably, still are able to effect the gameplay through the equipment, just not through the companions clothing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Qset wrote...

but but, we haven't even come close to Exile/Sylvius quoting guidelines yet

Yes, but ours are consecutive point-by-point quotes, rather than deep nested quotes.

Very different.

[Piecake]

Drasanil wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...
It does, having Zevran run around in a full set of heavy armor, such as the Diligence (IIRC) set, as opposed to decking him out in light armor affected gameplay in a substancial manner given that it fundementally required different stat builds and therefore also changed Zevran's "function" with in the party.

That's in DA:O, in which case I agree with you. It is not the case in DA][, which is why this discussion came up.

Yes, but you're entire argument is that the decision to have fixed clothing/armor in DA2 for party memebers doesn't effect gameplay and as such Bioware hasn't really cut anything out. I just proved (you did agree with my previous statement) that varied clothing/armor can most definitely have an effect on gameplay, as such Bioware did cut out important gmeplay elements with their descision.

He agreed with it because there is you cant alter the armor's stats in DAO.  In DA2 you can(to what degree, we dont know)

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Qset wrote...
but but, we haven't even come close to Exile/Sylvius quoting guidelines yet

Yes, but ours are consecutive point-by-point quotes, rather than deep nested quotes.
Very different.

He's right. They don't quote back 5 or 6 posts. Just a list from the last post.

[Ryzaki]

Blastback wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

On topic: Frankly I wish we had the old armor system because Hawke doesn't seem to have a good iconic unique look either. Why should my PC have to wear armor to get the same stat bonus that Isabela has in her rags?

While I'm one of those people who wishes that the old armor system was still in place, let's be fair here.  It's hard for one charater to have an iconic unique look that works for all three classes.  And I doubt that you'll have to wear heavy armor to get the same stat bonuses.  Obviously that won't work for mages and rogues.

Armor is different from heavy armor. I doubt Hawke is going to be allowed to wear clothing like Isabela or Varric have on (well past the prologue anyways). and have the same stats that those two have.

Mages obviously have magic and rogues don't need high defense. Just high dex and cun if it works anywhere near the way it did in DAO.

Edit: On the Sims not being a game discussion. If you played doctor or house as a kid were you or were you not playing a game? 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 30 novembre 2010 - 10:32 .

[AlanC9]

the_one_54321 wrote...

soteria wrote...
Actually, I think goals are covered under structured activity. Rules and goals comprise the structure of a game. Even the original Sims game had goals, even if it didn't have a "win" condition. Thing is, "tag" doesn't have a win condition, either. I think the breakdown here is that the_one doesn't think The Sims is a *fun* game. Games are fun, ergo, if it's not fun its not a game. I think his logic is faulty.

The original The Sims had goals in only the loosest of interpretations. It was more like it had warning signs that flashed if you weren't paying enough attention. Tag is more comparable to MMOs. Conflict, imidiate goals, but the game never ends.

Note that Will Wright called The Sims a toy, not a game. I think he was following Chris Crawford's definition of game, which is described on the Wikipedia page that Aermas quoted without apparently reading.

Edit: since I did read it -- and I remember this stuff from college anyway -- I'm going to go with Wittgenstein. There simply isn't any single way to define "game." There are various types of games, and they have family resemblances, but that's it.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 novembre 2010 - 10:33 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Note that Will Wright called The Sims a toy, not a game. I think he was following Chris Crawford's definition of game, which is described on the Wikipedia page that Aermas quoted without apparently reading.

Will Wright is absolutely correct.  Not all videogames are games.

I certainly don't think CRPGs are games.  I've explained why at great length.

[soteria]

the_one_54321 wrote...

soteria wrote...
Actually, I think goals are covered under structured activity. Rules and goals comprise the structure of a game. Even the original Sims game had goals, even if it didn't have a "win" condition. Thing is, "tag" doesn't have a win condition, either. I think the breakdown here is that the_one doesn't think The Sims is a *fun* game. Games are fun, ergo, if it's not fun its not a game. I think his logic is faulty.

The original The Sims had goals in only the loosest of interpretations. It was more like it had warning signs that flashed if you weren't paying enough attention. Tag is more comparable to MMOs. Conflict, imidiate goals, but the game never ends.

Right.  There's no win condition.  I'm saying a game doesn't need one.  Whether or not a game needs a hard-coded win condition to be fun is another question.  I don't think The Sims was a very good game, but I do think it was a game.  My guess is you don't consider anything that falls under the "simulation" genre a game.

[Qset]

fchopin wrote...

Qset wrote...

fchopin

there has been some confirmation that the bolded mechanics do exist - but as mokponobi rightly points out we have no details on mechanics.

here is a Q&A thread by Peter Thomas (Bioware dev)that does provide some good insights on some of the mechanics
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/4715441/14&lf=8

its long, but well worth an hour to plough through it.

Other information that was confirmed by Mike Laidlaw and David Gaider/Luke  was that:
1. companion outfits can change appearance over time - trigger event and extent visually and stats wise was not defined
2. Aveline will get a change in outfit from her current starter gear to armor  - extent visually and stats wise was not defined

other folks might have seen otehr dev posts I possibly missed.

One of the reasons i was asking is to find out how easy it would be to mod garments.
If like you said we are able to remove the garment and then select it again then the functionality will already be in place and it would be very easy to mod a new garment for the game.
 
If not then it would not be so easy.
 
But thank you for the link, will check it out.

ah yes, ok understand where you are coming from. Well if I was to guess in the absense of any dev confirmation on that specific question I would say that the companion outfit would be changeable in some way in game maybe just as a single inventory item based on the podcast 5 inventory screenshots. Hence it should be possible to change via modding, easier or more difficult depending on whether there is a toolset. I am basing this guess on the following confirmed dev answers/information:

1. Aveline will get an outfit change at some point from her starter gear to some form of armor (David G)
2. Companion outfits will change in appearance to a greater or lesser extent to at least one and likely more than one companion. (Mike Laidlaw)
3. podcast5 showed an inventory picture for isabela and hawke and hawke had the same outfit slots as DAO and isabela had a single large inventory slot for the whole outfit. The function of this single oversize slot was not discussed in detail

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think simulation games are much like RPGs, in that regard. They just provide an environment in which you can play.

[Qset]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Qset wrote...
As I stated earlier - this has not been proven yet if we use DAO as a benchmark of companion stat customisation ability. We have only been told some level of customisation is possible via the following mechanics:

1. some sort of rune customisation mechanic - details not defined but indicated that has some similarity to DAO.
2. companion outfits upgrade by themselves over game world time duration
3. all other inventory slots (not outfit slot) can have equipment changes as per DAO.

You might want to reinforce that concrete with some dev quotes but I have been unable to find one that says there will be an equivalent level of stat customisation possible.

Right, right. I'm being reactionary when I say that it doesn't effect it, because I'm responding to the statement "it does effect it." There is still the potential that it will have an effect on gameplay. But as of yet there is no proof that it has any effect at all.

agreed, we have no proof either way

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Note that Will Wright called The Sims a toy, not a game. I think he was following Chris Crawford's definition of game, which is described on the Wikipedia page that Aermas quoted without apparently reading.

Will Wright is absolutely correct.  Not all videogames are games.

I certainly don't think CRPGs are games.  I've explained why at great length.

Most CRPGs have very specific win conditions, though. Consider that.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I think simulation games are much like RPGs, in that regard. They just provide an environment in which you can play.

I'm not disagreeing with you on the criteria, I'm just pointing out that most CRPGs give you far more than just an envronment to play in. They give you goals, story progression and a concrete ending point. (though that ending point is often extended with later additions)

Modifié par the_one_54321, 30 novembre 2010 - 10:33 .

[Qset]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Qset wrote...

but but, we haven't even come close to Exile/Sylvius quoting guidelines yet

Yes, but ours are consecutive point-by-point quotes, rather than deep nested quotes.

Very different.

fair point

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Most CRPGs have very specific win conditions, though. Consider that.

I don't think those win conditions are relevant to roleplaying gameplay.

There's simply a limited scope to the game, and at some point you reach its end.

[soteria]

AlanC9 wrote...

Note that Will Wright called The Sims a toy, not a game. I think he was following Chris Crawford's definition of game, which is described on the Wikipedia page that Aermas quoted without apparently reading.

You're more charitable than I am (or just snarkier--probably). I think he deliberately ignored the rest of the page when he saw it wouldn't contribute to his point. It would have been hard to miss the very next paragraph, "Key components of games are goals..."

[Drasanil]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Yes but, presumably, the same thing has no effect in DA][. However we, again presumably, still are able to effect the gameplay through the equipment, just not through the companions clothing.

But will Varic's coat with the right combination of runes/upgrades/whatever allow you to use him in a similar manner to Zevran decked out in Juggernaught armor? I doubt it, hence it is a net gameplay loss from one game to the other no?

If not please explain how loosing the ability to have a heavily armored rogue death-squad in game and not being able to do so in the second is not a gameplay loss because otherwise I have no idea what you're trying to argue.

[the_one_54321]

Drasanil wrote...
But will Varic's coat with the right combination of runes/upgrades/whatever allow you to use him in a similar manner to Zevran decked out in Juggernaught armor? I doubt it, hence it is a net gameplay loss from one game to the other no?

Mabye you will? As of right now we do not know that you will not.

[Ryzaki]

I see nothing on the wikipedia video game page that mentions a key component being goals.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 30 novembre 2010 - 10:39 .

[Aermas]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Note that Will Wright called The Sims a toy, not a game. I think he was following Chris Crawford's definition of game, which is described on the Wikipedia page that Aermas quoted without apparently reading.

Will Wright is absolutely correct.  Not all videogames are games.

I certainly don't think CRPGs are games.  I've explained why at great length.

Most CRPGs have very specific win conditions, though. Consider that.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I think simulation games are much like RPGs, in that regard. They just provide an environment in which you can play.

I'm not disagreeing with you on the criteria, I'm just pointing out that most CRPGs give you far more than just an envronment to play in. They give you goals, story progression and a concrete ending point. (though that ending point is often extended with later additions)

Frogger. It's a game, doesn't have much else besides get across the road, Pac-Man too