1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Russalka]

crimzontearz wrote...

yes and that's why "let them wear what they want" does not work because sometimes the devs' idea of what they want makes no sense with the situation or even the skillset of a character

But if you noticed the quotes whom I directed that towards, I never argued against or denied what you said after my post. Again, relevance please. Or better not, this is pointless.

As is arguing about Jack, which has the potential of being explained properly, but never truly was. I was baffled by them only getting a gas mask as well, but who is to say emergency shields would not trigger when they fall unconscious? And I imagine Jack had enough power to avoid horrible injuries until that.

All that I want with companion outfits is a dignified appearance, and a clarification on why exactly it is so. If Mass Effect 2 must be thrown into this, even Miranda was joked about in the game, even Jack or Samara can be stretched to an explanation.

Isabela is a duelist, one who is in control of the battle situation with her daggers, she decides to not wear much. Varric has a crossbow, and he is a leader, he would expect his bolts or someone else to cut the enemy off before getting to near. He probably eventually gets more armour than his fancy coat. Who knows what kind of a fighter the elf is, but perhaps one similar to Isabela, and we have not seen enough of his armour and outfit in combat to know IF he needs huge defensive paddings everywhere or not. And Avenline gets armour.
Everything can be explained. It is a world of healing magic and advanced herbalism, perhaps they are not THAT afraid of injuries?

Modifié par Russalka, 13 décembre 2010 - 07:07 .

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

And the Morrigan example is nonsensical - you can't do this with anyone expect Morrigain in DA:O. This is the complain.

More to the point, I would always be against allowing Morrigain in either leather or heavy armour.

The point with Morrigan is that she had a unique outfit, but you were not bound to keep her in it.  You could put her in one of the other ugly mage robes, or make her an arcane warrior and put her in armor.

Excuse me if I don't care what you "allow" in my playthrough of a single-player game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I don't understand what you're talking about.

First, you said there was no way removing visual customization could please more people.

I pointed out that this is not the case.

You said you could not understand how less visual customization could somehow be good.

I brought up that people who prefer unique appearances would be intrinsically pleased, and this was not possible in DA:O. DA2 is outright superior.

If what you're trying to say is that a fixed apperance might still displease people because it isn't the fixed appearance they want, that's shifting the goalpost. We don't know whether people prefer a unique apperance to a good apperance.

Not to mention that this is a criticism I can apply to DA:O. If I think all the armour designs suck, why does it matter if I can pick between them.

And the Morrigan example is nonsensical - you can't do this with anyone expect Morrigain in DA:O. This is the complain.

More to the point, I would always be against allowing Morrigain in either leather or heavy armour.

Based on this, are you be annoyed that Hawke can change his appearance?

Or will you be annoyed if he can't maintain a static appearance throughout the game (like the other characters)?

[Liablecocksman]

Addai67 wrote...

The point with Morrigan is that she had a unique outfit, but you were not bound to keep her in it.  You could put her in one of the other ugly mage robes, or make her an arcane warrior and put her in armor.

Excuse me if I don't care what you "allow" in my playthrough of a single-player game.

I agree. Well put.

I sincerely hope this isn't turning into a JRPG, when looking at the item-character-development. When I'm playing Waka: Revenge of the Waka, I'm not looking to see if their armour changes, when I change "Chain mail" to "Plate mail", because I know it won't.
When I'm playing Dragon Age: Revenge of the Dragon, I AM looking to see if their appearance change, because that is what I have become used to, playing a western RPG.

It's not that it makes a whole lot of difference in my playthrough, and I'm not looking to see Morrigan become another character when I interact with her... It simply offers me, as a player, more options as to how to go about things. I changed Morrigan into a spirit healer in one of my playthroughs, because I went for an evil PC, and as a result of that, I had to kill Wynne. I needed a healer.
That is out of character, isn't it? Morrigan the shapeshifter, to be a spirit-healer. Sure - and that's why they're also cutting that out of the sequel! Only one specialization now, and that's it!

That's a little off-topic, here, since we are talking about outfits.
My point is, basically, that it brings me satisfaction, to know that I am in control of who are what my characters/companion wear.
Look at Baldur's Gate. Look at Imoen. You wanted her to be locked in her initial outfit? Even when I found "Awesome Leather Armour of the Shadow"? It brought, and brings, me satisfaction to know that my progression through the game, allows me to upgrade my companions around me.

Hell, to me this is even worse than a JRPG. From what I can gather, we can upgrade the weapons of our companions, but not their outfit. Even if their looks do not change in a JRPG, at least they have the improved stats.

Again, from what I gather, it appears the armour of our companions will grow/become better over the course of the story. That would mean it's not dependent on my choices then, of my playstyle? That the companions just get better without any involvement from the player? I don't think that's a good change. Not at all.

[AlanC9]

tmp7704 wrote...

Meh, their page no longer permits me to search but it's about half way through the definition of it. In any case this is quite academic given the dictionaries tend to lag behind actual use of the language. And as far as that goes the gamers seem to often enough make statements along lines of "i couldn't play it, it's just too ugly". Whether a big dictionary chooses to recognize it 10-20 years down the road... i don't think either of us will care at that point.

Good point -- gamers tend to favor overstatement a lot. FPS and console players are especially bad at this. Mostly harmless, but it's a problem when you're trying to have a serious discussion about gameplay balance and everyone keeps lying about how easily he got through a section of a game.

[Xewaka]

Liable****sman wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

The point with Morrigan is that she had a unique outfit, but you were not bound to keep her in it.  You could put her in one of the other ugly mage robes, or make her an arcane warrior and put her in armor.

Excuse me if I don't care what you "allow" in my playthrough of a single-player game.

I agree. Well put.

I sincerely hope this isn't turning into a JRPG, when looking at the item-character-development. When I'm playing Waka: Revenge of the Waka, I'm not looking to see if their armour changes, when I change "Chain mail" to "Plate mail", because I know it won't.
When I'm playing Dragon Age: Revenge of the Dragon, I AM looking to see if their appearance change, because that is what I have become used to, playing a western RPG.

It's not that it makes a whole lot of difference in my playthrough, and I'm not looking to see Morrigan become another character when I interact with her... It simply offers me, as a player, more options as to how to go about things. I changed Morrigan into a spirit healer in one of my playthroughs, because I went for an evil PC, and as a result of that, I had to kill Wynne. I needed a healer.
That is out of character, isn't it? Morrigan the shapeshifter, to be a spirit-healer. Sure - and that's why they're also cutting that out of the sequel! Only one specialization now, and that's it!

That's a little off-topic, here, since we are talking about outfits.
My point is, basically, that it brings me satisfaction, to know that I am in control of who are what my characters/companion wear.
Look at Baldur's Gate. Look at Imoen. You wanted her to be locked in her initial outfit? Even when I found "Awesome Leather Armour of the Shadow"? It brought, and brings, me satisfaction to know that my progression through the game, allows me to upgrade my companions around me.

Hell, to me this is even worse than a JRPG. From what I can gather, we can upgrade the weapons of our companions, but not their outfit. Even if their looks do not change in a JRPG, at least they have the improved stats.

Again, from what I gather, it appears the armour of our companions will grow/become better over the course of the story. That would mean it's not dependent on my choices then, of my playstyle? That the companions just get better without any involvement from the player? I don't think that's a good change. Not at all.

Let me clarify this last point. There still are slots for rings and trinkets on companions. However, instead of four armor slots like Hawke (Helm, Body, Arms, Legs), those are fused into a single one called armor, which I believe is either equippable (but doesn't change look) or the interface way of allowing runes on companions. Companion looks change (if they do) when the designers believe is an appropiate point in the story, not with gear.

Having clarified that, let me say that I agree with the rest of your post.

[Aermas]

Russalka, do you have any clue as to the uses of armor on a battlefield?



Isabela could wear armor, even plate & be more balanced & maneuverable than if she wore her horrible golden neckbrace.

[crimzontearz]

Russalka wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...


yes and that's why "let them wear what they want" does not work because sometimes the devs' idea of what they want makes no sense with the situation or even the skillset of a character

But if you noticed the quotes whom I directed that towards, I never argued against or denied what you said after my post. Again, relevance please. Or better not, this is pointless.




As is arguing about Jack, which has the potential of being explained properly, but never truly was. I was baffled by them only getting a gas mask as well, but who is to say emergency shields would not trigger when they fall unconscious? And I imagine Jack had enough power to avoid horrible injuries until that.


All that I want with companion outfits is a dignified appearance, and a clarification on why exactly it is so. If Mass Effect 2 must be thrown into this, even Miranda was joked about in the game, even Jack or Samara can be stretched to an explanation.


Isabela is a duelist, one who is in control of the battle situation with her daggers, she decides to not wear much. Varric has a crossbow, and he is a leader, he would expect his bolts or someone else to cut the enemy off before getting to near. He probably eventually gets more armour than his fancy coat. Who knows what kind of a fighter the elf is, but perhaps one similar to Isabela, and we have not seen enough of his armour and outfit in combat to know IF he needs huge defensive paddings everywhere or not. And Avenline gets armour.




Everything can be explained. It is a world of healing magic and advanced herbalism, perhaps they are not THAT afraid of injuries?

of course....everything can be explained yet people need to stop climbing mirrors to try and explain seemingly nonsensical design choices when bioware themselves do not offer any explanation.




again, I dare you to go up to a marine and ask him not to wear his vest because he seems sooooo in control of the battle just with his rifle. Sure Isabela might decide it is a good idea not to wear much because in a 1 on 1 battle she never really got harmed much...wonder what she is going to think when a lucky arrow gives her a brand new and unwanted boob piercing tho. Also.....healing magic all you want but a sword through the heart is going to kill you...healing magic has limits




no point arguing tho, you already decided that if Isabela ran into combat in just a thong in the name of unique looks it would be A-OK because one way or another through a few stretches it can be explained.

Modifié par crimzontearz, 13 décembre 2010 - 07:49 .

[AlanC9]

Xewaka wrote...
Let me clarify this last point. There still are slots for rings and trinkets on companions. However, instead of four armor slots like Hawke (Helm, Body, Arms, Legs), those are fused into a single one called armor, which I believe is either equippable (but doesn't change look) or the interface way of allowing runes on companions. Companion looks change (if they do) when the designers believe is an appropiate point in the story, not with gear.

I believe the armor slot is also there so the player can see the stats of the equipped armor. My understanding is that the armor is upgradeable at certain plot points but is never removable. There's no point in making it removable since you'll only ever have one worthwhile set of armor for a given companion at a time.

[Aermas]

AlanC9 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...
Let me clarify this last point. There still are slots for rings and trinkets on companions. However, instead of four armor slots like Hawke (Helm, Body, Arms, Legs), those are fused into a single one called armor, which I believe is either equippable (but doesn't change look) or the interface way of allowing runes on companions. Companion looks change (if they do) when the designers believe is an appropiate point in the story, not with gear.

I believe the armor slot is also there so the player can see the stats of the equipped armor. My understanding is that the armor is upgradeable at certain plot points but is never removable. There's no point in making it removable since you'll only ever have one worthwhile set of armor for a given companion at a time.

Worthwhile is highly debatable, 

*looks at forum

Oh, yeah were debating the "worth" right now!

[Russalka]

Aermas wrote...

Russalka, do you have any clue as to the uses of armor on a battlefield?

Isabela could wear armor, even plate & be more balanced & maneuverable than if she wore her horrible golden neckbrace.

And how would you know she stays that way permanently? 
Perhaps she is dressed that way at start, after her ship has been destroyed, taking along anything she needs for combat. She would gradually gain more armour as the danger increases.
But do you have any clue about the uses of armour? Especially one which a rogue needing to camouflage needs?

crimzontearz wrote...
of course....everything can be
explained yet people need to stop climbing mirrors to try and explain
seemingly nonsensical design choices when bioware themselves do not
offer any explanation.

again, I dare you to go up to a marine
and ask him not to wear his vest because he seems sooooo in control of
the battle just with his rifle. Sure Isabela might decide it is a good
idea not to wear much because in a 1 on 1 battle she never really got
harmed much...wonder what she is going to think when a lucky arrow gives
her a brand new and unwanted boob piercing tho. Also.....healing magic
all you want but a sword through the heart is going to kill
you...healing magic has limits

no point arguing tho, you already
decided that if Isabela ran into combat in just a thong in the name of
unique looks it would be A-OK because one way or another through a few
stretches it can be explained.

I guess Jack would serve my point here. She is not a marine, she is a nigh-insane prisoner who would probably kill any Cerberus person trying to force a body armour on her. Yes, she is chaotic stupid, yes it is amazing she survived or the developers expected her to survive in that skimpy armour of hers. But that is what overall speaks of her, she is a survivor. Isabela is not a marine, Isabela is a rogue, an expert in evading danger, knowing when even an archer would strike. You can refer to the first part of my post if you would like. You do not
know what is concealed under that white outfit either, besides well...
you know.

And I have not decided anything, rather weak to resort to mockery. All I am saying there are various possibilities to everything and I have accepted that these appearances already designed and put into the game.
I first argued against people finding certain companions to have too ugly outfits, but you just turned it into a battle of practicality. That is not our world, things are different. Even appearance, even what people decide to wear.

Modifié par Russalka, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:13 .

[Aermas]

Russalka wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Russalka, do you have any clue as to the uses of armor on a battlefield?

Isabela could wear armor, even plate & be more balanced & maneuverable than if she wore her horrible golden neckbrace.

And how would you know she stays that way permanently? 
Perhaps she is dressed that way at start, after her ship has been destroyed, taking along anything she needs for combat. She would gradually gain more armour as the danger increases.
But do you have any clue about the uses of armour? The plate the medieval knights wore was too heavy for anything other than very specific situations.

I see you have not browsed the other threads about armor...
Yes I know a lot about armor, I have worn it, been in combat with several different styles & crafts, I own a suit, & have made my own chainmail. I can tell you that plate is NOT overly heavy & that it is articulated as to not hinder your flexibility. & Ridged Leather would be perfect for Isabela

Modifié par Aermas, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:17 .

[Russalka]

Aermas wrote...
I see you have not browsed the other threads about armor...
Yes I know a lot about armor, I have worn it, been in combat with several different styles & crafts, I own a suit, & have made my own chainmail. I can tell you that plate is NOT overly heavy & that it is articulated as to not hinder your flexibility. & Ridged Leather would be perfect for Isabela

I edited before your post. The heaviness I was unsure about.
But my point still stands. She could eventually wear more, she has a valid reason not to at start.

[AlanC9]

Aermas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...
Let me clarify this last point. There still are slots for rings and trinkets on companions. However, instead of four armor slots like Hawke (Helm, Body, Arms, Legs), those are fused into a single one called armor, which I believe is either equippable (but doesn't change look) or the interface way of allowing runes on companions. Companion looks change (if they do) when the designers believe is an appropiate point in the story, not with gear.

I believe the armor slot is also there so the player can see the stats of the equipped armor. My understanding is that the armor is upgradeable at certain plot points but is never removable. There's no point in making it removable since you'll only ever have one worthwhile set of armor for a given companion at a time.

Worthwhile is highly debatable, 

*looks at forum

Oh, yeah were debating the "worth" right now!

Don't be silly. The upgraded gear will be better than the gear it replaces in all gameplay aspects. Hence the previous set won't be worth equipping. I'm talking gameplay, obviously.

Or are people really demanding the right to equip NPCs with worse gear? 

Edit: or is this a reading-comprehension goof? Aermas, I'm talking about the gear that's actually going to be in DA2, not some hypothetical different design.

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:37 .

[Liablecocksman]

AlanC9 wrote...

Don't be silly. The upgraded gear will be better than the gear it replaces in all gameplay aspects. Hence the previous set won't be worth equipping. I'm talking gameplay, obviously.

Or are people really demanding the right to equip NPCs with worse gear? 

Eh, no.
We are demanding to simply be able to equip our NPCs.
If you think the game automatically upgrading your companions for you, instead of you actually having to work to find improved parts of armour to be an improvement, then we will, frankly, never reach a point in the discussion where we will agree.
It gave me satisfaction to equip my party in Baldur's Gate, it did in Dragon Age:Origins too. I was working to improve their gear, and I was rewarded for my effort. I don't care that the difference was 1 armour from tier 6 to tier 7... I enjoy that kind of thing. I like to know that if I put effort into it, I can make the game easier down the road. In older titles you actually needed to upgrade your items, else you would just be killed.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:37 .

[Maria Caliban]

Liable****sman wrote...

We are demanding to simply be able to equip our NPCs.

Demanding? Tell me how that works out for you.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:44 .

[AlanC9]

Guess it was reading comprehension. Again, in DA2 you will only have one worthwhile set at a time for an NPC because there aren't going to be any others in the game. Therefore, there's no point in making NPC armor removable since you'll only be gimping yourself. I said nothing about the desirability of this system; I was only discussing how it's likely to actually work.



Though as it happens, I do find the system desirable. I have always preferred my RPGs to have minimal or no inventory. CRPGs generally haven't done this, of course. I wasn't bringing that up because you're right, Liable****sman; beyond a raw statement of preferences we have nothing to say to each other on the subject.

[Liablecocksman]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Demanding? Tell me how that works out for you.

Hello there, child.

AlanC9 wrote...
Or are people really demanding the right to equip NPCs with worse gear?

Liable****sman wrote...
We are demanding to simply be able to equip our NPCs.

Now if all you have are one-liners to point out some sort of flaw, please stay out of the discussion - at least the ones I'm participating in.

AlanC9 wrote...

Guess it was reading comprehension.
Again, in DA2 you will only have one worthwhile set at a time for an
NPC because there aren't going to be any others in the game. Therefore,
there's no point in making NPC armor removable since you'll only be
gimping yourself. I said nothing about the desirability of this system;
I was only discussing how it's likely to actually work.

Though
as it happens, I do find the system desirable. I have always preferred
my RPGs to have minimal or no inventory. CRPGs generally haven't done
this, of course. I wasn't bringing that up because you're right,
Liable****sman; beyond a raw statement of preferences we have nothing
to say to each other on the subject.

I seem to be unable to comprehend myself then. I apologise.
I find the system very undesireable, but that is a matter of personal preference. I am saddened, actually, that my favourite PC-developer is cutting out one of the most enjoying aspects of RPGs, for me, personally.
I feel there is no need to continue our discussion then, have a good night/evening/dag (wherever you are in the world).

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:52 .

[Ziggeh]

Russalka wrote...

I guess Jack would serve my point here. She is not a marine

When you talk to the Illusive man about Lazarus he tells you they wanted Shepard to be as much like his/her former self as possible. They didn't add pro-cerberus suggests or anything they thought might have helped because they wanted Shepard, as he/she had been, a man/woman with a proven record of getting it done.

So when you go and hire folks, folks with proven methods and abilities, the last thing you want to be doing is asking them to change whatever they were doing that made them effective to begin with. Being Jack is what you hired her for, telling her to suit up as if she's a random marine seems like a terrible idea. (Though I will concede the whole "Vacuum? Nah, sure this'll be fine" thing is very silly.)

This would have been pretty problematic in Origins because you can literally tell Morrigan she'd be sword and boarding it from now on, here's your armour, where as in DA2 it's rather more the ME2 model of hiring people for their chosen skill (with a possible sideline in something similar or related)

[Ryzaki]

...Are people still trying to use the biotic barriers argument for Jack wearing no hardsuit in spaces like the CB and CS? Really?

No wonder Jack keeps getting caught is all I'll say.

*resist going into the whole Jack shouldn't be a forced recruit from the get go spiel*

And why oh why does Jack/Miranda/Jack/Samara get these uber biotics that eliminate the need for armor yet Shepard doesn't? 

Shepard is by far a better biotic than Jacob and I'd be willing to bet Shep Sue gives Miranda a run for her money. Yet of all of them Shep Sue is the only one wearing a hardsuit? The only one covering his/her face completely in hazardous/sterile enviornments? You expect me to believe the Quarians are soooo afraid of big bad Jack that they wouldn't tell her to GTFO off their ship? 

Seriously? 

The fixed outfits are facepalm worthy. Yes Samara's clevage is so enticing the Quarians will risk exposure just to see it. <_<

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:59 .

[crimzontearz]

Russalka wrote...

Aermas wrote...
Russalka, do you have any clue as to the uses of armor on a battlefield?
Isabela could wear armor, even plate & be more balanced & maneuverable than if she wore her horrible golden neckbrace.

And how would you know she stays that way permanently? 
Perhaps she is dressed that way at start, after her ship has been destroyed, taking along anything she needs for combat. She would gradually gain more armour as the danger increases
But do you have any clue about the uses of armour? Especially one which a rogue needing to camouflage needs?

crimzontearz wrote...
of course....everything can be explained yet people need to stop climbing mirrors to try and explain seemingly nonsensical design choices when bioware themselves do not offer any explanation.

again, I dare you to go up to a marine and ask him not to wear his vest because he seems sooooo in control of the battle just with his rifle. Sure Isabela might decide it is a good idea not to wear much because in a 1 on 1 battle she never really got harmed much...wonder what she is going to think when a lucky arrow gives her a brand new and unwanted boob piercing tho. Also.....healing magic all you want but a sword through the heart is going to kill you...healing magic has limits
no point arguing tho, you already decided that if Isabela ran into combat in just a thong in the name of unique looks it would be A-OK because one way or another through a few stretches it can be explained.

I guess Jack would serve my point here. She is not a marine, she is a nigh-insane prisoner who would probably kill any Cerberus person trying to force a body armour on her. Yes, she is chaotic stupid, yes it is amazing she survived or the developers expected her to survive in that skimpy armour of hers. But that is what overall speaks of her, she is a survivor. Isabela is not a marine, Isabela is a rogue, an expert in evading danger, knowing when even an archer would strike. You can refer to the first part of my post if you would like. You do not
know what is concealed under that white outfit either, besides well...
you know.
And I have not decided anything, rather weak to resort to mockery. All I am saying there are various possibilities to everything and I have accepted that these appearances already designed and put into the game.
I first argued against people finding certain companions to have too ugly outfits, but you just turned it into a battle of practicality. That is not our world, things are different. Even appearance, even what people decide to wear.

you haven't?

look at how you are explaining some of these issues! Isabela has borderline precognitive abilities and is stashing armor under her skin tight shirt.....Jack has a redendant shield generator that fires up when she is unconscious...come on! Or even better "it makes no sense but it speaks for her being a survivor".

You are just justfying everything for the sake of it. I may not find their outfits too ugly to bring those character along but I surely find them goddamn too ridiculous (in a practical sense) for me to want to bring those characters along.

[0x30A88]

Though I don't like the term "Dragon Effect", Bioware seems to take decitions in that way.

[Xewaka]

Ryzaki wrote...

And why oh why does Jack/Miranda/Jack/Samara get these uber biotics that eliminate the need for armor yet Shepard doesn't? 

Because we must be able to dress Shepard in hot pink.

[upsettingshorts]

Gisle Aune wrote...

"Dragon Effect"

God dammit, it's always the unexpected ones that get me.

*downs shot*

[Ryzaki]

Xewaka wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

And why oh why does Jack/Miranda/Jack/Samara get these uber biotics that eliminate the need for armor yet Shepard doesn't? 

Because we must be able to dress Shepard in hot pink.

Well if Shep's going to be saving the galaxy he/she might as well look fabulous!