1309 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

But that would be a difference from the statistical options available in DAO, and we've been told we're not losing those.

From Bioware's perspective I truly doubt they believe they are saying, "Yes, you can still make Leliana into a tank." But referring instead to statistical item progression within a particular class.  Such as Shadow of the Empire being way better than Tier 3 Medium Armor.

Like I said though, I'm just guessing.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Also, since armour in DA2 has only strength requirements - not class requirements - that Rogue Hawke can wear massive armour already breaks this aspect of making the classes distinct.

*shrug* 

Not necessarily.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:04 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Actually, yes there is.

We've been told that the companion outfits are fixed in their appearance, but we'll still be able to make statistical adjustments just like in DAO, though in DA2 it is done through the addition of upgrades.

However, in DAO we could take Leliana and put her in Massive Armour, thus giving her a terrific armour rating and making her a useful tank.

If that function hasn't changed in DA2, then we can upgrade Isabela's outfit to give her protection equivalent to Massive Armour, even though it will still look like she's wearing her pirate outfit.

What's the reason to assume that huge "if" I italicized above? I can understand being concerned that Bio might do something like that, but simply assuming that they did do it?

Edit: I'm assuming it's common knowledge that there is an armor slot for companions with, um, armor in it. It strikes me as a very big leap to assume that the item in that slot will have no stats associated with it.

Modifié par AlanC9, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:20 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

What's the reason to assume that huge "if" I italicized above? I can understand being concerned that Bio might do something like that, but simply assuming that they did do it?

We've been specifically told that we're not losing the ability to customise companion armour statistically.

And, frankly, I want them to do it as I've described, because I'd rather the characters look silly than lose gameplay options.  This is why I opposed the DW restrictions.

[Brockololly]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Also, since armour in DA2 has only strength requirements - not class requirements - that Rogue Hawke can wear massive armour already breaks this aspect of making the classes distinct.

Yeah, the whole rationale of getting rid of the DW warrior was that they had to make the unique rogue ninja assassin animations and didn't want to share animations with some bulky armored warrior. And yet, rogues can still equip bulky armor and do their flips and rolls?

[Ryzaki]

Brockololly wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Also, since armour in DA2 has only strength requirements - not class requirements - that Rogue Hawke can wear massive armour already breaks this aspect of making the classes distinct.

Yeah, the whole rationale of getting rid of the DW warrior was that they had to make the unique rogue ninja assassin animations and didn't want to share animations with some bulky armored warrior. And yet, rogues can still equip bulky armor and do their flips and rolls?

Wat.

What kind of nonsense-!

*cries*

They took my DWW away for no reason? Come on! 

[nightcobra]

maybe this time the armor stats requirements are higher than in origins so you'd be basically gimping the rogue by allocating most points into strength just for the armor.
it also would allow a bit more time of usage for medium and heavy armors for warriors before hitting the massive armor requirement. 

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:20 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

AlanC9 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
 It's not going to happen in DA2, where characters without visible heavy armor won't have any heavy armor to equip.

Isn't this the point of contention with Aveline before she gets her armor? That she's a sword and shield warrior and presumably tank, yet wearing street clothes?

I see. But do we know that Aveline's street clothes actually have the stats that armor has?  I haven't seen any such information.

Does it matter? regular pants/shirts should not have the same defensive properties of full **** plate mail. The hell is wrong with you people.

Sarah, dear, at lest read posts before responding to them. The question is whether there actually are any suits of regular clothes that have the stats of plate mail in the game.

Seriously, what exactly did you think I was talking about?

That shouldn't even be a question. It shouldn't even happen as its completely retarded and makes no logical sense.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ryzaki wrote...

Wat.

What kind of nonsense-!

*cries*

They took my DWW away for no reason? Come on! 

I suspect they did it to enforce class roles, but that's not the justification they provided.

And the justification they provided is defeated by their other design choices.

[Sylvius the Mad]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

maybe this time the armor stats requirements are higher than in origins so you'd be basically gimping the rogue by allocating most points into strength just for the armor.

Actually, it sounds like bows and daggers get damage bonuses from Dex, not Strength, so you probably would be gimping the Rogue by having him wear massive armour (since daggers and bows are the only weapons a Rogue can equip).

[Ryzaki]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Wat.

What kind of nonsense-!

*cries*

They took my DWW away for no reason? Come on! 

I suspect they did it to enforce class roles, but that's not the justification they provided.

And the justification they provided is defeated by their other design choices.

tch. If they want to enforce class roles rogues will not being allowed to wear heavy/massive armor reagardless of stats.

I mean warriors can't even equip bows regardless of stats so it's not like that would be the only ridculous restiriction.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:21 .

[DMC12]

Brockololly wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Also, since armour in DA2 has only strength requirements - not class requirements - that Rogue Hawke can wear massive armour already breaks this aspect of making the classes distinct.

Yeah, the whole rationale of getting rid of the DW warrior was that they had to make the unique rogue ninja assassin animations and didn't want to share animations with some bulky armored warrior. And yet, rogues can still equip bulky armor and do their flips and rolls?

What? Is there a source for this? I was skeptical at first about companion outfits, but I was also under the impression that their "upgraded" companion outfits were typical of their class or maybe even prestige class. That's a bit BS if it's true.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

David Gaider wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I would have expected the major out cry after you did it in ME2, (since Maria and like 2 other people are the only ones who get off on the "UNIQUE COMPANONS" !!!111!), would have been enough to disuade you folks from making the same terrible design decision in regards to companion armor again. Yet amazingly you did it anyway.

You mean we don't make all our decisions based on how loud and nasty people can get on the forums?

Yes. It's amazing, I know.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
since Maria and like 2 other people are the only ones who get off on the "UNIQUE COMPANONS" !!!111!

Incidentally, regarding this statement:

a) Simply because the people who support something or, at the very least, don't find it bothers them in the slightest don't rush to every thread and match the level of venom spewed by those against it does not make the venom-spewers the center of the universe.

Even if it was just "Maria and like 2 other people" that doesn't make them wrong. Possibly nobody cares what you think.

Sacasm FTW David, you of all people should get the jist of where I was going with that. I think you get the idea though and have obviously seen the negative outlook on static companion armors far outweigh the maybe 5 people who are for it, 4 of which are generally for anything you devs feed them for info in the first place.

I don't think I'd be as venom spewing if you guys would actually stop pandering so much to the console crowd and stop dumbing down your games thinking you'll automagically sell an extra 3-5 million and pull in AC or COD type numbers.

[upsettingshorts]

DMC12 wrote...

What? Is there a source for this? I was skeptical at first about companion outfits, but I was also under the impression that their "upgraded" companion outfits were typical of their class or maybe even prestige class. That's a bit BS if it's true.

I think Brock is talking about Rogue Hawke, not companions.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:24 .

[nightcobra]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

maybe this time the armor stats requirements are higher than in origins so you'd be basically gimping the rogue by allocating most points into strength just for the armor.

Actually, it sounds like bows and daggers get damage bonuses from Dex, not Strength, so you probably would be gimping the Rogue by having him wear massive armour (since daggers and bows are the only weapons a Rogue can equip).

by allocating only points on str for the armors there wouldn't be a good number of points left for dex assuming armor stats requirements are to be higher this time around which could or not happen.

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:25 .

[Fortlowe]

David Gaider wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I would have expected the major out cry after you did it in ME2, (since Maria and like 2 other people are the only ones who get off on the "UNIQUE COMPANONS" !!!111!), would have been enough to disuade you folks from making the same terrible design decision in regards to companion armor again. Yet amazingly you did it anyway.

You mean we don't make all our decisions based on how loud and nasty people can get on the forums?

Yes. It's amazing, I know.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
since Maria and like 2 other people are the only ones who get off on the "UNIQUE COMPANONS" !!!111!

Incidentally, regarding this statement:

a) Simply because the people who support something or, at the very least, don't find it bothers them in the slightest don't rush to every thread and match the level of venom spewed by those against it does not make the venom-spewers the center of the universe.

Even if it was just "Maria and like 2 other people" that doesn't make them wrong. Possibly nobody cares what you think.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Piecake wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Piecake wrote...

I think Aveline's street clothes could make a lot of sense storywise (and hopefully does). I mean, if you are fleeing from Lothering and are essentially refugees are you going to be rocking full plate mail? When I think of a refugee fleeing from an enemy attack I think of people who only have have the clothes on their back (and maybe another few essential items), not people in armour. Personally, I'd find that more immersion killing.

If there's anything we learned in these discussions, it's that characters should keep several sets of armour handy and should have several stores where armour is freely sold.

The solution seems clear.  In the next DA game we should need to buy a fleet of pack mules that follow our companions around if we want to carry more gear than physically possible.  All for the sake of realism

Actually its more so for the sake of choice in a CPRG. Something ME2 and at least from alot of aspects of DA2 that have been released so far, lack.

[Ryzaki]

*blinks and sighs*

NVM not worth mentioning.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:25 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

We've been specifically told that we're not losing the ability to customise companion armour statistically.

"Not losing" didn't mean "keeping the exact same amount of." I know if you said "not losing" you'd have meant "not losing any", but that's you.

[Kasces]

I just noticed...



Why is the "Aveline tanks in street clothes for the rest of her days" still even a discussion? In the Dev Diary she is clearly wearing full armor (she's in the background when Hawke is speaking to Izzy)

[Ziggeh]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I think you get the idea though and have obviously seen the negative outlook on static companion armors far outweigh the maybe 5 people who are for it, 4 of which are generally for anything you devs feed them for info in the first place.

Statistics cat frowns at your methodology.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:30 .

[Ryzaki]

Really though I'd be willing to stake my cat on a part of the reasoning for static outfits being that it's cheaper, faster and more efficient.

[AlanC9]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
and have obviously seen the negative outlook on static companion armors far outweigh the maybe 5 people who are for it, 

Which proves... what? A thread like this isn't a poll. 

I'd say you should know better except that you do know better.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I think you get the idea though and have obviously seen the negative outlook on static companion armors far outweigh the maybe 5 people who are for it, 4 of which are generally for anything you devs feed them for info in the first place.

Statistics cat frowns at your methodology.

Heh sure its exageration but its not far off, I've seen very few people actually actively cheer companions looking the same for the whole game as a good thing in a CRPG.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Heh sure its exageration but its not far off, I've seen very few people actually actively cheer companions looking the same for the whole game as a good thing in a CRPG.

That's because youre fixated on the price, not what it purchases, because to you it is purchasing nothing. 

That doesn't mean others are as incapable of seeing the value in it to the extent that they are willing to pay that price, or simply wish the price wasn't so high.

[Nyaore]

Ryzaki wrote...

Really though I'd be willing to stake my cat on a part of the reasoning for static outfits being that it's cheaper, faster and more efficient.

That's probably a rather safe bet.