206 réponses à ce sujet

[haberman13]

Maria Caliban wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

RPGs don't need gear choice

Totally. Role-playing has nothing to do with 'loot.' I've played PnP RPGs where my character never wore anything but regular clothing and never carried a weapon.

Sigh ...

OK fine, but that doesn't mean less choice > more choice.

Again, baby out with the bathwater.  How about we argue for what is the best/better solution, instead of justifying BWs decisions.

Or, are you honestly telling me that a game with unique weapons (that look cool) which you use to upgrade your character is worse than predefined setups?

Seriously, are you arguing that?

[haberman13]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

ziggehunderslash wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

If this trend continues DA3 will be a pure hack-n-slash, with no gear, and no story choice; and the community will have allowed it to happen with preposterously limited opinions like yours.

Ahh, the slippery slope.

It works both ways. They're adding further customisation to individual items and even spells. It's only a matter of time before everything in the game is modifiable.

Let people choose for themselves!!!!  And that is bad how?

OK, so let me get this straight:

more choice is bad
more customization is bad
Does not compute, are you a communist by chance?  (I jest :innocent: )

Unfortunately society as a whole has bought into the idea that "less is more" when less == easier on the brain.

I'm not sure how that is a response to me pointing out that your slippery slope argument is nonsensical.

Also I'm not sure the central tenet of communism involved diminishing customisation.

It was an effect of communism (no competition creates an environment of stagnation), but primarily a joke.

You said be cautious of the slippery slope in the other direction, which I invite as a good thing.  By your negative connotation I have to assume you are saying that choice/customization is a bad thing.

[Maria Caliban]

haberman13 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

RPGs don't need gear choice

Totally. Role-playing has nothing to do with 'loot.' I've played PnP RPGs where my character never wore anything but regular clothing and never carried a weapon.

Sigh ...

OK fine

Glad you agree.

but that doesn't mean less choice > more choice.

Thankfully, that has jack all to do with what I just said, so I don't have to involve myself this particular argument.

[upsettingshorts]

I've already grown tired of the straw men. Let haberman13 build them, I don't see the use in tearing them down.

[haberman13]

Maria Caliban wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

RPGs don't need gear choice

Totally. Role-playing has nothing to do with 'loot.' I've played PnP RPGs where my character never wore anything but regular clothing and never carried a weapon.

Sigh ...

OK fine

Glad you agree.

but that doesn't mean less choice > more choice.

Thankfully, that has jack all to do with what I just said, so I don't have to involve myself this particular argument.

By agreeing that RPGs don't necessarily need gear you were in fact supporting the argument that gear choice is optional, and means nothing to you.  In other words, you don't want more choice, you are fine with whatever BW gives you.  (which is OK too)

I on the otherhand am arguing that BW is making a bad decision to streamline their games.

[Ziggeh]

haberman13 wrote...

Your logic is mystifying.

I can imagine.

haberman13 wrote...
Bioware chooses the story, that isn't in contention, nor is it programmatically possible to make an adaptive story that isn't at least partially defined by BW.

What is in contention is:  removing gear choice in leiu of predefined setups

Right, and I'm saying, literally, that the two are related. You're looking at them disconnected, of course it makes no sense.

haberman13 wrote...
Why can't "generic crossbow #4" look awesome too?

It certainly could. I would hope that most weapons don't look quite so elaborate mind, it would start to look a bit odd. But also, again, it's a storytelling thing. The weapon has sentimental value as well as aesthetic.

haberman13 wrote...
Why can't we get a bunch of cool looking gear, including rares/uniques that look especially cool?  Wouldn't that be better than predefined choicelessness?

Sure, what do you think they should drop to cover that? "Delay release" is only an option if you can explain why the march deadline was placed to begin with.

[henkez3]

I think that the original and one of a kind clothes your companions wear is pretty cool, and that you can change the stats on them/upgrade them. My only problem is that its clothes, not armour, I think it'll look silly when Aveline and Carver only wear clothes despite the fact that they are warriors, this bothers me quite alot, as it simply makes no sense at all.



And yes, I am aware of the fact that I haven't played the game yet, and as the game progresses, Carver and Aveline might procure some actual armour.

[medievalmiss]

Addai67 wrote...

medievalmiss wrote...

I have a hard time understanding why having companions who keep their unique appearance negates roleplaying. In fact, it seems that it would even make more sense from a roleplaying perspective, because most companions are following you because they choose to, not because they are ordered to. They are not in the army, forced to follow orders and wear what you say. I personally didn't care for Morrigan's outfit, but I can't see a roleplayed Morrigan actually saying "sure, I'll change my outfit just because you say so." She'd more likely say "I'll wear what I want and there's nothing you can do about it!" So, it seems those who are decrying this change as taking away roleplay really prefer to have multiple semi-PC's, more than companions with their own personalities, likes and dislikes.
Notice I said "seems", since I really am not trying to state that I know what other players want.
This change, to me, actually enhances roleplay for the reasons I stated above.

I understand that, but then it makes no sense to have a tactical party.  If I'm playing WoW or whatever, where I'm encountering unique NPCs in the world and then go my own way, I can see this.  When I'm controlling my party members, IMO they are "semi-PCs" as you put it.

Less control over your party members' setup, to my mind, reduces the uniqueness of BioWare games to other games where NPCs are doing their own thing on their AI and you have to either react, or sometimes just avoid them if the AI is being stupid or you don't like what they're doing.  If I'm forced to cart around an NPC in my team, I want to be able to participate in how that character responds in the world.

Okay, I see your point. When I used to play DnD, I would have characters other than my main PC, and I would completely control them as well. In my mind, they each had a personality that I had determined, and I knew just how they would act. However, now with computer roleplay games, the writers have decided how my companion will act, what they will say, and now, even what they will wear. That appearance choice (by the writers) seems reasonable, since I have no control over what else my characters do, except tactics (that any leader would control) and whether or not to take them into my party. I guess it just seems like if I'm going to let the writers control their personalities and what they say, then it's not that much of a stretch to extend that to what they wear, other than accessories, like rings, etc.

[nightcobra]

haberman13 wrote...


By agreeing that RPGs don't necessarily need gear you were in fact supporting the argument that gear choice is optional, and means nothing to you.  In other words, you don't want more choice, you are fine with whatever BW gives you.  (which is OK too)

I on the otherhand am arguing that BW is making a bad decision to streamline their games.

visual streamlining to be more precise, that can allow them for more choice of different upgrades to the outfits without having to create a new texture for each upgrade in armor.
this way actually gives us more choices in upgrades such as different effects/ elemental resistances and other traits. you don't get to see them reflected in the characters but you'd have more to choose from for gameplay purposes

[the_one_54321]

Which other HD games give you a laundry list of awesome looking items to choose between? Seriously, I want to know which games.

[Brockololly]

DavidSims wrote...
From a gameplay perspective, you can still customize and upgrade a lot of the companions gear. The only thing you're really losing is the appearance change from swapping out the main pieces. That's not a gameplay concern, except for visually identifying your companions in battle.

Its a gameplay concern insofar as I'm playing an RPG, where maybe I want my party roaming around like a badass army in matching armor.

DavidSims wrote...
You couldn't tell who was who at a glance. Now you can.

Really? This was an issue? 

DavidSims wrote...
What I don't get is how this is in any way negatively effecting gameplay. And in the absence of that, why shouldn't alluring appearances win out?

Because not everyone thinks the appearances are "alluring." At least with Morrigan, if I thought her robes looked ridiculous, I could swap her into something else. Can't do that now.  Its like Jack or Miranda trolling around in the vacuum of space or on a supposedly sterile Quarian ship in next to no clothing. Its about choice. And it would seem we have a whole lot less of it in DA2.

[Ziggeh]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

visual streamlining to be more precise, that can allow them for more choice of different upgrades to the outfits without having to create a new texture for each upgrade in armor.
this way actually gives us more choices in upgrades such as different effects/ elemental resistances and other traits. you don't get to see them reflected in the characters but you'd have more to choose from for gameplay purposes

Right, the system has potentially more customisation. It could have less, but we can't say either way. It's not inherent to the system in place, it's a case of implementation.

[Addai]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

visual streamlining to be more precise, that can allow them for more choice of different upgrades to the outfits without having to create a new texture for each upgrade in armor.
this way actually gives us more choices in upgrades such as different effects/ elemental resistances and other traits. you don't get to see them reflected in the characters but you'd have more to choose from for gameplay purposes

How does this represent more choice than we had in DAO where you had rune slots on a companion's weapon(s)?  As it is, I can give my dual-wielding Alistair 6-8 different elementals and resistances based on runes alone.

[Ziggeh]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Which other HD games give you a laundry list of awesome looking items to choose between? Seriously, I want to know which games.

The only ones I can think of are either built around item acquisition (MMOs and dungeon crawlers) or the appearance is completely detached from any statistics.

[Apollo Starflare]

haberman13 wrote...

Why can't we have both consequence and choice ... you know, like with 99% of other RPGs you can alter the appearance of the character AND upgrade their skills with various boosts to stats on the gear.

How does that apply? Not all RPGs even have controllable parties, some of them are very well regarded. We know for a fact that Hawke has all the old customisation and choice, you still have control over the appearence and skills of your character. The companion outfits thing is hardly worth all this fuss, regardless of whether you agree with it (I'm not 100% sold on it either by the way).

Eh, I've seen similar opinions floating around and I just don't get them. People argue as if it effects DA2's status as an RPG, when at most it takes away from it's party based RPG-ness.

[nightcobra]

Addai67 wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

visual streamlining to be more precise, that can allow them for more choice of different upgrades to the outfits without having to create a new texture for each upgrade in armor.
this way actually gives us more choices in upgrades such as different effects/ elemental resistances and other traits. you don't get to see them reflected in the characters but you'd have more to choose from for gameplay purposes

How does this represent more choice than we had in DAO where you had rune slots on a companion's weapon(s)?  As it is, I can give my dual-wielding Alistair 6-8 different elementals and resistances based on runes alone.

elemental resistances were just one small side of the equation.

i'm talking about more traits, like less cooldown times, more/less threat towards enemies, damage absorption from enemies, basically more resources allocated into creating more upgradable effects rather than allocating them into making new armor models for each party member.

of course if they had unlimited resources i'd want both and more.

[Ziggeh]

Addai67 wrote...

How does this represent more choice than we had in DAO where you had rune slots on a companion's weapon(s)?  As it is, I can give my dual-wielding Alistair 6-8 different elementals and resistances based on runes alone.

The statistics and slots on the weapon prior to you adding runes was fixed. You could swap it to another weapon, but you had to choose between predefined sets of statistics. The DA2 companion armour would seemingly allow you to arrange the statistics themselves, giving you much more flexibility.

How much will depend on implentation of course, but the potential is there.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 30 novembre 2010 - 07:03 .

[the_one_54321]

I am also seeing the loss of visual customization as the only real loss. And that is... unimportant. When it comes down to "I just don't like the visuals" you enter into an arena of pure subjectivity which is utterly pointless to argue.

Choice is not part of the issue here. There is no choice lost. Changing companion's cloths is not "choice."

[Maria Caliban]

haberman13 wrote...

By agreeing that RPGs don't necessarily need gear you were in fact supporting the argument that gear choice is optional, and means nothing to you. 

Yes.

In other words, you don't want more choice, you are fine with whatever BW gives you.  (which is OK too)

Indeed. I don't see gear as being an important part of role-playing. In fact, I worry the emphasis on gear leads to neglect of other aspects.

If the game didn't feel the need to constantly give you new armor and weapons, would the game still be 80% combat? I understand that Diablo is a fun game but it's also an outgrowth of that mentality. Why bother with story, characters, and consequences at all, if you can just shove 500 weapon variations in the player's face and have them spend all their time bashing heads in?

I don't think it's a coincidence that games like Planescape: Torment and the Witcher - which I thought were very good when it came to choices and consequences - limited the amount of 'stuff' it gave you.

I on the otherhand am arguing that BW is making a bad decision to streamline their games.

Possibly. Mass Effect never felt like a 'traditional' RPG to me. ME 2 seemed to just drop the pretense that it was just as much an RPG as other BioWare games.

[nightcobra]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I am also seeing the loss of visual customization as the only real loss. And that is... unimportant. When it comes down to "I just don't like the visuals" you enter into an arena of pure subjectivity which is utterly pointless to argue.
Choice is not part of the issue here. There is no choice lost. Changing companion's cloths is not "choice."

it is choice, only an aesthetic one.

[the_one_54321]

Aesthetic choice is only a choice based on semantics. It does nothing for the play in the game. The issue with it is inside your head and you can dismiss it with as much ease or difficulty as you can dismiss any other idea in your own head.

[nightcobra]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Aesthetic choice is only a choice based on semantics. It does nothing for the play in the game. The issue with it is inside your head and you can dismiss it with as much ease or difficulty as you can dismiss any other idea in your own head.

i'm not haberman13, i really couldn't care less if outfits are static or not.

i'm into dragon age for the plot/characters and lore.