1079 réponses à ce sujet

[Quixal]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I assume most of the people who are upset about the new UI or hate that they can't dress Isabela in pants would be indifferent to this as it doesn't impact gameplay.

Well, I suppose it does mean some people won't be able to dress Bethany in pants.

[Lukas Kristjanson]

Maria Caliban wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

I would say that both Carver and Bethany add a lot to the plot and character development in their own unique way, and I wouldn't worry about it being better or worse depending who you get.

I don't think that's an issue though.

Alistiar and Morrigan are both great characters. If you could only pick up Alistiar as a mage and Morrigan as a warrior or rogue, people* would still sit at the character creation screen thinking "I want to play a mage... but do I want Alistiar as a companion? Maybe I want Morrigan."

And the thing is, that's not fun for me. When I create a character, I want to be thinking about making them look the way I like. I want to check out what various cool things I might be able to do and figure out the best way to allocate my points.

Instead, I'll be agonizing about my mini-Vermire. After all, my choice of class now determines who lives or dies. Seriously. You've taken an element of the game that used to be all about my wants and turned it into an important plot consideration.

*By people, I mean 'me.' I have no idea how many others think this way.

Ah, but if you played a certain way in Origins, the behavior of those characters changed towards you and people could die. Did you know that on your first playthrough? Did it change your second?
You’re on the forums. At this point you're effectively on your second playthrough of the meta-game. In an isolated single playthough of the actual game you're much closer to the reactionary experience of your character and these events are seamless. But frontload with info and you change the game for yourself. Once you know the mechanics that govern any entertainment you're deciding what experience you want to have, which is far different than reacting to it. You start playing a character rather than defining one. And at a certain point, it's less about our decisions making the game than it is about your preconceptions. Eventually you'll have so much info that your first playthrough of DAII will be your second, except the first one never existed.
Pull back the curtain too far (or worse, have a job like mine where you start behind the curtain), and eventually you’ll do it by reflex. You’ll never play a game/see a movie/read a book/watch network television/insert-media-here without seeing the background mechanics, and you’ll wonder why nobody else sees the obvious. Somewhere around that time a person makes their first “why don’t they make BLAH like they used to” post on a forum.

[Eclipse_9990]

shepard_lives wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

The choice between both will most likely influence my choice of class. :-/

shepard_lives wrote...

CARVER AND BETHANY ARE BOTH FULL-BLOWN COMPANIONS. CARVER IS NOT MENTALLY HANDICAPPED.

Must... use... Shatner... voice... to resist... urge... to laugh!

Lol I love how much hate Carver is getting. Though we know nothing about their personalities. Carver could very well be the favorite sibling here, who knows?
Though it seem's like my Hawke will be forced to have Clark Kent as his companion rather than Lois Lane.

[Maria Caliban]

Schwadragon wrote...

This seems like kind of a glass half empty/full kind of situation. A lot of people are viewing this as a loss of choice, like if you didn't actually get to choose who died on Virmire, but instead who died was based on you class. I kind og see it as an addition of variability, like if instead of Jenkins always dying sometimes he'd live and Kaiden would die, based on you class, and the game would be different.

I think part of my problem is that I've never had to make a decision as to whom lives or dies before in a BioWare game. That I'm now expected to do so without knowing about the characters is unnerving.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:28 .

[Snoteye]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...

Ah, but if you played a certain way in Origins, the behavior of those characters changed towards you and people could die. Did you know that on your first playthrough? Did it change your second?

Origins aside, did they depend exclusively upon your choice of class?

[Eclipse_9990]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Schwadragon wrote...

This seems like kind of a glass half empty/full kind of situation. A lot of people are viewing this as a loss of choice, like if you didn't actually get to choose who died on Virmire, but instead who died was based on you class. I kind og see it as an addition of variability, like if instead of Jenkins always dying sometimes he'd live and Kaiden would die, based on you class, and the game would be different.

I think part of my problem is that I've never had to make a decision as to whom lives or dies before in a BioWare game. That I'm now expected to do so without knowing about the characters is unnerving.

You havent? Didn't you play Mass Effect 1? What about Virmire?

[upsettingshorts]

That was an in-character decision and while it was subject to metagaming like anything else, it didn't happen as a consequence of an entirely unrelated choice - like your character's class. You could for example have been a soldier and saved Ashley.

Just in case it wasn't clear in my earlier posts, I don't mind the way Bioware's doing this at all. Just seeing if I can figure the arguments against it out.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:35 .

[Big_Chief]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Schwadragon wrote...

This seems like kind of a glass half empty/full kind of situation. A lot of people are viewing this as a loss of choice, like if you didn't actually get to choose who died on Virmire, but instead who died was based on you class. I kind og see it as an addition of variability, like if instead of Jenkins always dying sometimes he'd live and Kaiden would die, based on you class, and the game would be different.

I think part of my problem is that I've never had to make a decision as to whom lives or dies before in a BioWare game. That I'm now expected to do so without knowing about the characters is unnerving.

Which, theoretically, is why they didn't present the player with the straightforward choice to begin with. We don't know anything about them. Unfortunately, now that we know how that decision is made, we are still faced with that choice, and it's now tied into another choice that has significant gameplay effects.

Honestly, I'm not sure how I fall on this debate. Ultimately, I'll have to see how it plays out in game. But I will say this: I wish that I didn't know this going into my first playthrough. It taints things in kind of an odd way.

[MerinTB]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...
Pull back the curtain too far (or worse, have a job like mine where you start behind the curtain), and eventually you’ll do it by reflex. You’ll never play a game/see a movie/read a book/watch network television/insert-media-here without seeing the background mechanics, and you’ll wonder why nobody else sees the obvious.

Gah!  I do that with movies and tv shows all the time.  And half the time with novels and comics.

Write for a medium and study how to write for that medium long enough and all you do is look for hooks, threads, lead-ins, plot devices, pacing, etc...

The worst is sitting in a theater (or after a movie is over sitting at a diner) with non-writing, non-filmaking friends and trying to explain to them why what they think was going on in a movie wasn't going on, and wouldn't likely to have been used in a major motion picture...

No, I get this.  Having worked with movie trailers for nearly 5 years, I no longer enjoy seeking out trailers as all I can see is the editing decisons...

[Snoteye]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That was an in-character decision [...] Just seeing if I can figure the arguments against it out.

I believe you just did. What I see is a completely out-of-character decision having a direct in-character consequence. Luke is absolutely right that this design choice wouldn't have bothered me the slightest if I didn't go to the forum, because then I wouldn't know the mechanics behind the outcome, but from a design perspective I think it is a very bad decision. Or at least, one that has to be very thoroughly backed up by the rest of the game.

Modifié par Snoteye, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:40 .

[MerinTB]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Just in case it wasn't clear in my earlier posts, I don't mind the way Bioware's doing this at all. Just seeing if I can figure the arguments against it out.

I think it's a bad design choice for an RPG game, to be clear myself...

but personally I don't care that they are doing this and am personally intrigued to see the story reasons behind it, figuring they are probably pretty good reasons.

[Chaia]

I've always kinda thought of Carver & Bethany as 'background' characters so never really given them much of a look in (well actully ever since the "can Hawke date his sister" debate I've given her a wide birth).

I don't really want to be stuck with the one the irritates the hell out of me just because I've choosen to play a perticular class, unless, is there a way to ditch the irritateing sibling I wonder .......

[upsettingshorts]

Snoteye wrote...

I believe you just did. What I see is a completely out-of-character decision having a direct in-character consequence.

It depends of course how the scene(s) play out, but I don't think it works like that.  Hawke, in character, has no idea that some gameplay mechanic decided the fate of one of his siblings.  "In character" what happens to them simply happens. 

Shepard however is consciously aware of the consequences of his decision.  He knows the stakes, the situation, and - pretty much - what will happen to the comrade he leaves behind.  Hawke has no clue whatsoever - as far as we know - it's not in character.

Now if he did, and he had to choose - that would be a different story and it would absolutely have to have consequences and be fully supported just as you say the current system would. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:45 .

[Dummkopf]

Was it confirmed that Carver or Bethany will die depending on your choice of class?

[upsettingshorts]

Dummkopf wrote...

Was it confirmed that Carver or Bethany will die depending on your choice of class?

Die?  Not sure, probably.  Made not available as a companion?  Essentially.

I think.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:52 .

[Morroian]

Seb Hanlon wrote...

The article is correct. You'll get Bethany if Hawke is a rogue or warrior (regardless of gender), and Carver if Hawke is a mage.

Goddammit! Guess we'll just have to wait for mods to play as a mage with Beth.

[Maria Caliban]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...

Ah, but if you played a certain way in Origins, the behavior of those characters changed towards you and people could die. Did you know that on your first playthrough? Did it change your second?

I didn't have a 'second' playthrough.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'people could die.' Are you talking about the epilogues? Or the Alistiar/Loghain decision?

I typically play so people *don't* die because, normally, either the decision is out of my hands (the Cousland family dies no matter what Origin you pick) or I can choose to save them. (Making peace between the elves and werewolves.)

When the game does force me to pick who lives or dies, it's typically within a strong role-playing context. Do you support Branka or Caradin? Harrowmont or Behlen?

These decisions are expressions of my PC's values.

"Is saving the dwarves worth the possible abuse and eternal enslavement of part of their population?" is a weighty question, and I fully support tying companion gain/loss to that sort of decision.

"Does Maria want to play a mage or a warrior?" is altogether different.

You’re on the forums. At this point you're effectively on your second playthrough of the meta-game. In an isolated single playthough of the actual game you're much closer to the reactionary experience of your character and these events are seamless. But frontload with info and you change the game for yourself. Once you know the mechanics that govern any entertainment you're deciding what experience you want to have, which is far different than reacting to it. You start playing a character rather than defining one. And at a certain point, it's less about our decisions making the game than it is about your preconceptions. Eventually you'll have so much info that your first playthrough of DAII will be your second, except the first one never existed.

In this, I strongly disagree. I'm an admin for the DA wiki. Before DA:O launched, I got a copy of the strategy guide, read the entire thing, and began writing up articles. I do this because when people play, they often head to the wiki for help with quests or simply to help understand the game better.

This certainly influenced my first play-through, but I disagree that I didn't get the 'first-play through experience.' That's akin to saying that reading pornography is makes one no longer a virgin. Knowledge is not equivalent to experience. Playing through Dragon Age: Origins for the first time is completely different from reading the strategy guide, even with the significant plot spoilers.

Pull back the curtain too far (or worse, have a job like mine where you start behind the curtain), and eventually you’ll do it by reflex. You’ll never play a game/see a movie/read a book/watch network television/insert-media-here without seeing the background mechanics, and you’ll wonder why nobody else sees the obvious.

I agree.

I think that your post is suggesting that my discontent with this information is, in part, my own damn fault. No one forces me to come to the forums. No one makes me read the spoiler laden articles. I choose to do these things when apparently there are aspects of the game that I'd be much happier never knowing about.

I think that's fair.

[Ziggeh]

Maria Caliban wrote...

When the game does force me to pick who lives or dies, it's typically within a strong role-playing context. Do you support Branka or Caradin? Harrowmont or Behlen?

I did this with Zevran, and to an extent Sten. On face value they seemed problematic. Hiring your own assassin to follow you around? I take this guy at his word that he's in trouble with the crows? Seemed like crazy talk, but knowing he was a companion, I didn't stab him in the face and wonder off.

[TheCreeper]

Hmmm, I suppose it's a good way to increase replay value

[Maria Caliban]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think part of my problem is that I've never had to make a decision as to whom lives or dies before in a BioWare game. That I'm now expected to do so without knowing about the characters is unnerving.

You havent? Didn't you play Mass Effect 1? What about Virmire?

I am not my PC.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 20 décembre 2010 - 10:02 .

[Blacklash93]

Bethany's cone spell has a lot of width in that shot with the Spiders. Is it an upgrade?

If so, I'd like it if we could use abilities in their original forms, as well. The upgrades could bring up issues of friendly fire that could be avoided with a weaker version of a particlar move.

A mage, for example, should be able to tone down the power of a spell from an enhanced version if it would endanger their companions.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 20 décembre 2010 - 10:12 .

[Ziggeh]

Morroian wrote...

Goddammit! Guess we'll just have to wait for mods to play as a mage with Beth.

I can see that being a problem. If I'm right about the reasoning behing always having a mage and non mage sibling, she's going to refer to you as if you're a non mage (and probably vice versa), and any problems you come into due to being an apostate may not similarly effect her because the plot assumes you're the mage in the family.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 20 décembre 2010 - 10:04 .

[Dummkopf]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Dummkopf wrote...

Was it confirmed that Carver or Bethany will die depending on your choice of class?

Die?  Not sure, probably.  Made not available as a companion?  Essentially.

I think.

So people are assuming that one will always die?

Was it actually confirmed that one of them will be a permanent companion?

[Addai]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I think that your post is suggesting that my discontent with this information is, in part, my own damn fault. No one forces me to come to the forums. No one makes me read the spoiler laden articles. I choose to do these things when apparently there are aspects of the game that I'd be much happier never knowing about.

I think that's fair.

You would eventually hear about it though anyway, wouldn't you?  I'm sure that a lot of people who see Bethany in the promos (with a mage brother) just assume she'll be a party member, so when she isn't, people would go to the internet and find out why.

Maybe they won't care.  Guess we'll see.