495 réponses à ce sujet

[darth_lopez]

In Exile wrote...

ArcanistLibram wrote...

Yes, why give all the characters their own unique design when you can just make them wear Generic Armour #57?

Choice man! Let's say you're hanging out with someone religious. They keep kosher. You say - eat this pork. Not letting you do that is take away your choice! Why should the writers tell you what is character consistent or not?

Now,
on a serious note, I do think we ought to have more than one custom
outift per companion. The problem with that is resources. But that would
be the ideal. That a single custom outfit is much better (IMO) than
several generic ones does not mean having a choice of custom outfits is
not even better than that.

have not read the rest of the thread, nor do i really intend to. But trying to approach this from the ME POV here at least make sure the custom Outfits look reasonable. It's understandable to want a custom outfit, but look at ME, Maranda who has apparently managed to fashion Mass Effect Fields around tight fitting super clothes same with jacob but he actually has shoulder pads, Both Miranda and Samara have clear Exposures where a Kinetic Barrier failure should kill, on Subject Zero what the bojangles is generating all the Kinetic Barriers or does she only use a biotic barrier? and then what the duece happens when that goes down?  she's like insta death i mean don't even bring up Workign Void with Miranda Jack or Samara. Zanes just as bad at least the alternative appearance pack gave him something that remotely resembled workable armor the same applies to kasumi. OUt of 12 characters, only Mordin, Garrus, Tali, Zaaeed, and Wrex (legion as well)  have workable and logical custom appearances. It would be ok if they had 2 custom appearances(1 combat 1 for onboard the Normandy) But they don't jus the same thing and as varried as they get with the loyalty suits is a collor change.

So in short what i'm trying to get at here, is So long as the outfit makes sense situationally it's fine and i'd be cool with it but in the event that they don't make the custom suits look situationally correct or at least workable in combat, that's gonna cause some problems for alot of people. Defining a character and setting their tastes through a custom clothing selections is fine just make the selections reasonably intelligent options..

edit: i have read soem of the posts and i'm gald to see that i'm not alone in my desire for the armor to be "sitationally logical"-so to speak. ^^

Modifié par darth_lopez, 28 décembre 2010 - 10:00 .

[thedistortedchild]

darth_lopez wrote...

In Exile wrote...

ArcanistLibram wrote...

Yes, why give all the characters their own unique design when you can just make them wear Generic Armour #57?

Choice man! Let's say you're hanging out with someone religious. They keep kosher. You say - eat this pork. Not letting you do that is take away your choice! Why should the writers tell you what is character consistent or not?

Now,
on a serious note, I do think we ought to have more than one custom
outift per companion. The problem with that is resources. But that would
be the ideal. That a single custom outfit is much better (IMO) than
several generic ones does not mean having a choice of custom outfits is
not even better than that.

have not read the rest of the thread, nor do i really intend to. But trying to approach this from the ME POV here at least make sure the custom Outfits look reasonable. It's understandable to want a custom outfit, but look at ME, Maranda who has apparently managed to fashion Mass Effect Fields around tight fitting super clothes same with jacob but he actually has shoulder pads, Both Miranda and Samara have clear Exposures where a Kinetic Barrier failure should kill, on Subject Zero what the bojangles is generating all the Kinetic Barriers or does she only use a biotic barrier? and then what the duece happens when that goes down?  she's like insta death i mean don't even bring up Workign Void with Miranda Jack or Samara. Zanes just as bad at least the alternative appearance pack gave him something that remotely resembled workable armor the same applies to kasumi. OUt of 12 characters, only Mordin, Garrus, Tali, Zaaeed, and Wrex (legion as well)  have workable and logical custom appearances. It would be ok if they had 2 custom appearances(1 combat 1 for onboard the Normandy) But they don't jus the same thing and as varried as they get with the loyalty suits is a collor change.

So in short what i'm trying to get at here, is So long as the outfit makes sense situationally it's fine and i'd be cool with it but in the event that they don't make the custom suits look situationally correct or at least workable in combat, that's gonna cause some problems for alot of people. Defining a character and setting their tastes through a custom clothing selections is fine just make the selections reasonably intelligent options..

Pretty much everything Darth said <3
 I have no problem with set outfits as long as they are situationally appropriate. For example, Jack and Miranda only wearing oxygen masks and lycra in the void of space, while Shep ware a full helmet and has his/her whole body covered. 

[soteria]

wwwwwowwww wrote...

Yet it's ok to wear magic armor that covers your body, with magic glove, magic boots, a magic helmet, carrying magic weapons on your back, wearing a magic amulet and a magic belt, but more than 1 ring on each hand is dangerous? lol

Of course! Magic rings are, physically speaking, very small. Enchanting a breastplate or belt or amulet is relatively a much safer and easier proposition because by volume you have more material to work with. Many lay-people imagine that the magic in an item is 100% contained and safe. Normally, that is true, but rings and amulets don't have enough mass to completely contain their magical forces and would interfere with each other in close proximity. That's why you can only wear one amulet and one ring on each finger. Leather and metal gloves have a buffering effect, limiting the magical field to within the inside of the glove, allowing a warrior to safely wield two handed items.

More seriously, are you really saying that magical items having or not having certain effects and limitations is unrealistic? Really?

[soteria]

Pwnsaur wrote...

The only thing that I 'know,' is that some people on this forum have inordinately fragile egos and suffer from either severe insecurities or the need to exhibit the highest level of petty behavior. I could really give two s**** as to whether or not anyone thinks I am a competent writer. I am a better writer than most, and it does illicit an emotional response from people who feel threatened by it. Your attacks are all the proof I need to substantiate my point.

The fact that you came out and told us your writing credentials and then repeatedly defended them gives lie to your claim that you don't care what we think. If you really didn't care, you wouldn't have told us. It's refreshing to be told I'm insecure about my own writing abilities--that may be the first time I've seen that particular insult. The truth is we are more entertained than threatened by your literary prowess.

And, in keeping with the spirit of this thread, I'd like to point out that "illicit" is an adjective meaning illegal or shady. I think you meant "elicit."

[wyvvern]

Wonderful! You seem to be of the mindset that I write as if I am publishing my posts instead of quickly jotting down riposte to the droves of posts being fired my way. Here are some facts for you..

I am a member of Mensa
I have a Master's in English from Western
I am currently writing opinion pieces for a publication that I will not divulge here

And yes.. I will be continue to write casually and candidly because this is a forum about VIDEO GAMES. I am not proof reading my 'work' here moron. Thanks for taking all that time to prop up your ego, that's a very empassioned display of your insecurity. You didn't get the tip-off when I was using smiley faces? You come on here and start editing my post as if this is a thesis and you're my instructor? Do you have any awareness as to the environment in which you are posturing? Your self absorbtion and self righteousness reek of self hatred... I am very sorry for you. Did my display of an obscenely prodigious vocabulary incense your fragile ego enough that your needless diatribe felt warranted at all? Even given the cirumstances? It's a freaking GAMING forum... wow.... 

You. Are. F******. Pathetic.

As my dear mother who bored [sic] me used to say: "You have taken yourself far too seriously."

Sadly, I needed this said to me far too often when I was younger.

I think my favorite part of the above is your 'obscenely prodigious vocabulary.' That was an almost inspired turn of phrase. It brought a warm tear to my eye. That was the closest I've seen you come so far to displaying an innate ability to write.

Perhaps I was being too subtle before and not communicating in the vernacular with which you are most familiar. Tone is notoriously difficult to convey across the internet, after all. Allow me to rephrase: "Dude, lighten up."

Also, kudos to AlanC9 for saying what I was thinking much more patiently and rationally than myself. You are the one who keeps drawing attention to your mad Engish skillz, and using those same skillz as a bulwark for your argument. It is hardly surprising, therefore, when someone points out your skillz are not perhaps as mad as you think. I well understand the casual nature of forum writing.

You cannot both claim your argument is correct -because- of your writing abilities (and overall genius,) and then discount anyone who points out errors in your ability to write and think coherently and correctly.

Well, you can, but it appears rather silly.

Though "I could care less" in -any- setting is an abomination before the lord. *nods sagely*

As always in online discussions, our reactions say far more about ourselves than about those challenging our arguments.

Allow me to leave you with two of my favorite quotes:


"No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical." -- Neils Bohr,

"I am not young enough to know everything." -- Oscar Wilde.

Again, welcome to the forums. 

Modifié par wyvvern, 28 décembre 2010 - 10:55 .

[soteria]

Well, you can, but it appears rather silly.

Well, irrational and incoherent, but I guess "silly" works too.

[Piecake]

Pwnsaur wrote...

He was right? He perceived the term 'streamlining' to be an innovative step towards 'Improving appearance or efficiency,' and I (in this situation) perceived it as a slick term coined in place of 'simplifying' for obvious reasons. I hardly see either side as right, but seeing as you indicate a bias towards author I will attribute your statement as a manifestation of that bias.

He was right.  that what the word means in this context.  Streamlining means simplifying/getting rid of excess fat in order to improve efficiency, appearance or ease of use - meaning that the word has relative positive connotations.  There is nothing subjective about it.

The other, and only other, meaning of streamline is "To construct or design in a form that offers the least resistance to fluid flow."  And that was the definition that you were using to claim that Streamline means removing and not 'making better'.  The problem is, is that definition's synonym's are sleek, fluid, and aerodynamic - words used to describe vehicle design - which, incidentally also have positive connotations.

Two meanings, thats it.  One is used when describing vehicle design and the other is used for everything else.

The debate would have ended if you just said that you were using streamlined in a pejorative sense(which is what your 'perceived definition' is, using streamlined in a pejorative sense) or simply selected a better word to describe your thoughts, like gutted, simplified, completely removed.  I mean, you basically admit that streamlined has positive connotations, why else would it be a slick term coined by, I'm assuming, PR spokesmen and developers?  You just think that when game developers say that, they are in actuality gutting and simplifying everything.  And hey, that is perfectly fine.  You are entitled to your own opinions, but, that does not mean the word has a 3rd 'fundemental definition'.

Instead you had to post this

Haha, okay... No, I am not saying because you are not using a word in the same way that I do, that you are wrong. I am saying because you use the word INCORRECTLY you are wrong. Streamlining, IS, without argument, an idea of removing resistance. REMOVING. It actually has it's origins in describing a path conducive to the flow of liquid. That's literally why it had been adopted to describe 'watering down'. Not 'making better.'  That, is INNOVATION. I could care less how you 'see' it being used by others.. I am only interested in the fundamental definition of the word and it's implementation into our current subject being accurate. It's not my fault that you take your literary cues from the context in which your peers use them. If you want, I won't call it streamlining. I'll call it Bacon Bits. My opinion remains valid, and my opinion is that removing the ability to change your companions outfits is a technique of Bacon Bits. Bacon Bits, as I define it,  is watering down a product to create a simpler gaming experience and thusly making more money through the consumption of your product by a more casual fan base.

in respone to this

So what you're telling me is that I'm not using words the way you use them, so I'm wrong? How is that simple? You expect me to be able to readyour mind?

The argument was never about your opinions.  You are free to have any views that you like.

Modifié par Piecake, 28 décembre 2010 - 11:06 .

[wwwwowwww]

soteria wrote...

wwwwwowwww wrote...
Yet it's ok to wear magic armor that covers your body, with magic glove, magic boots, a magic helmet, carrying magic weapons on your back, wearing a magic amulet and a magic belt, but more than 1 ring on each hand is dangerous? lol

Of course! Magic rings are, physically speaking, very small. Enchanting a breastplate or belt or amulet is relatively a much safer and easier proposition because by volume you have more material to work with. Many lay-people imagine that the magic in an item is 100% contained and safe. Normally, that is true, but rings and amulets don't have enough mass to completely contain their magical forces and would interfere with each other in close proximity. That's why you can only wear one amulet and one ring on each finger. Leather and metal gloves have a buffering effect, limiting the magical field to within the inside of the glove, allowing a warrior to safely wield two handed items.
More seriously, are you really saying that magical items having or not having certain effects and limitations is unrealistic? Really?

Nope not saying it's more unealistic at all, what I'm saying is it's silly to put those limitations on them given it's a fantasy world where anything is possible. Please do not try and skew my words to try and make it appear as though I can't tell the difference between what is real and what is not, especially whith sarcastic remarks about the mass of a said object.

Simply put if your playing a fantasy game that involves magic putting a limitation of 2 rings on a person already covered in magic with your argument of putting magic items to close together being dangerous is absurd.

I understand limitations need to be made, and with everyone clamoring about not following the rules that are set by old school pnp D&D style games, why is this one thing continuing to be the norm? This is a rule set out by the creator of D&D as we know it and it still exists, why is that?

[crimzontearz]

yaaaay early morning replies. So while I wait for the caf at the hospital toopen here's my two additional cents.



we are kinda missing a key element in this debate and that would be, of course, an imput from those who made these design choices. As curious as I might be about it tho this is not going to happen because.....well.....all we are likely to get is snark' followed by a one sided evasive explanation, followed by more snark and a lockdown. Still I wonder, when the relevant staff at Bioware was voting on this no one did rise their hand and said "uh, guys? is it just me or is Jack really wearing a nipple belt in haZardous environment?" or "and isabela is not wearing anything resembling an armor because.......?"...or did they actually object and were sent to fetch coffee?

[PinkysPain]

For PC gamers with some historical perspective (and thus most ex-PC developers) the term streamlining is defined by the PR for Deus Ex 2 ...

[dragon_83]

Still I wonder, when the relevant staff at Bioware was voting on this no one did rise their hand and said "uh, guys? is it just me or is Jack really wearing a nipple belt in haZardous environment?" or "and isabela is not wearing anything resembling an armor because.......?"...or did they actually object and were sent to fetch coffee?

They probably felt that the characters are more awesome and cool this way. And yeah, I think this is sad.

[Maria Caliban]

[quote]wyvvern wrote...

Pwnsaur opined:
[quote]Yea, ok....I AM in love with my own rhetoric.. you got me
there. But that's only because I write opinion pieces for  a living. I
CERTAINLY wasn't 'surrendering' however. The fact is, my interpretation
of the word is exactly right... It's sad when people see a game
developer use a term like streamlining and believe they are innovating
or improving the game. It's industry lingo for simplifying, and either
you can read between the lines or you can't. Because of what I do for a
living, I am literally paid to interpret BS and I do it very, very well.
Streamlining masquerading as innovation is just one such example of BS.[/quote]

Begin pedant mode:

Improper use of ellipses. Correct usage is, of course, to indicate omitted words. Not to 'trail off.'
Appeal to authority logic fail. "I write opinion pieces..."

[quote] This is what I would love to see also. Simple and well put, thank you [/quote]

Usage of a smiley sans approptiate period to terminate your sentence.

[quote] I could care less how you 'see' it being used by others.. [/quote]

Appalling use of "I could care less" as opposed to the correct "I could not care less." For that alone I'd fire you. The double period is a nice bonus.

[quote] It's not my fault that you take your literary cues from the context in which your peers use them. [/quote]

This is of course the only way to understand English or any other language. To discern the proper meaning of the use of a word or phrase from that wonderous thing called context. Language is not, as you appear to be arguing, binary. Otherwise there would never be misunderstandings.

[quote] Your debating tactics are impeccable, really they are... [/quote]

This is a run-on sentence, of the type commonly called a 'comma splice.' I suggest the use of a semi-colon here.

[quote] I will reiterate my longstanding and yet constantly overlooked statement being; [/quote]

However this usage of a semi-colon is incorrect. You should have used a colon. An em dash would also have been effective. It depends which style manual you prefer.

[quote] No more fighting.. pls.. [/quote]

I'll assume 'pls' is standard usage in your universe. Ellipses, even when used informally to indicate an elision in a sentence contain three periods -- not two.

I could continue, but really why bother?

[quote] This may have something to do with my masters degree in English, or the
fact that my college aptitude in english puts me in the top 1% in the
country. [/quote]

Please learn to capitalize the word 'English.' Also please recall that it is 'master's degree' and not 'masters degree.'

I'm not in the habit of correcting other people's forum postings. However, given your .sig claiming a genius-level IQ, the moniker 'literary genius,' and your penchant for throwing around the fact that you write for a living it was impossible to resist.

Welcome to the forums! Do enjoy your stay.

(edit to clean up formatting.)[/quote]

This was a beautiful post to wake up to.

[quote]errant_knight wrote...

[quote]Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, streamlining something is good design. It has connotations of sleekness and efficiency.

I wouldn't use it as a synonym for 'watered-down.' To water something down suggests adding something lesser to dilute the experience.
[/quote]
I'm thinking 'gutted' works.[/quote]

And this is icing on the cake. Gutted is better for a number of reasons. It's short, visceral, it's undeniably bad, and g-tt is harsher sounding than str-ml-.

I love how beautiful and expressive the English language is. Think I'm going to go work on my Isabela smut.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 28 décembre 2010 - 12:08 .

[crimzontearz]

mmm



now I want some Isabela smut too

[L33TDAWG]

I have been playing Origins recently, and I can honestly say that I hate having to find pieces of armor for my party because you have to buy anything that's worth a damn, and the gloves and boots for mages suck just like the cap do. Thank god for this new system.

[wyvvern]

Isabela smut? *perks*

[crimzontearz]

wyvvern wrote...




Isabela smut? *perks*

not just smut....but Isabela smut, written by a woman....who happens to be Maria Caliban.


I almost do not need smut anymore after that thought

[Morroian]

crimzontearz wrote...

yaaaay early morning replies. So while I wait for the caf at the hospital toopen here's my two additional cents.

we are kinda missing a key element in this debate and that would be, of course, an imput from those who made these design choices. As curious as I might be about it tho this is not going to happen because.....well.....all we are likely to get is snark' followed by a one sided evasive explanation, followed by more snark and a lockdown. Still I wonder, when the relevant staff at Bioware was voting on this no one did rise their hand and said "uh, guys? is it just me or is Jack really wearing a nipple belt in haZardous environment?" or "and isabela is not wearing anything resembling an armor because.......?"...or did they actually object and were sent to fetch coffee?

From the sound of it DA2 will not be the same as ME2 in terms of the unsuitability of their non customisable outfits. We already went through that with the debate on Aveline where it was established that yes warriors will get proper armour. As for Isabella....meh she's a rogue, they shouldn't necessarily need armour and her outfit won't have the stats of even say light armour according to what the devs have said.

[Monica83]

Yes people thinks that have static things improve evrything they jumps happy if a dev says:::



Ohhh but you can puchase upgrades...

Fanboys: Cooooooowl



This is how work things here...



Generic armor for evrything is very different the best way is make different models of armor for ANY character...

But it seems bioware likes cut roleplay features and customization on theyr in favour of cinematics shiny graphic and stuff like that.. So you can take a awesome game and make a rushed streamlized sequel but... oh yeah of course.. you can always puchare DLCS

And have a new armor!

Or have a new party member!



This is how EA's Bioware works...



You can also preorder now and you get a unique object.....











......

[crimzontearz]

monica you are giving me a headache





type in Italian for God's sake

[Xrissie]

Monica83 wrote...

*snip*

What is this, I don't even...

[Monica83]

mmmmmh... silly fanboys commando

[Cutlasskiwi]

Monica83 wrote...

Yes people thinks that have static things improve evrything they jumps happy if a dev says:::

Ohhh but you can puchase upgrades...
Fanboys: Cooooooowl

This is how work things here...

Generic armor for evrything is very different the best way is make different models of armor for ANY character...
But it seems bioware likes cut roleplay features and customization on theyr in favour of cinematics shiny graphic and stuff like that.. So you can take a awesome game and make a rushed streamlized sequel but... oh yeah of course.. you can always puchare DLCS
And have a new armor!
Or have a new party member!

This is how EA's Bioware works...

You can also preorder now and you get a unique object.....





......

I find that post quite pretentious. It's not all black or white - right or wrong. You don't have to love it or hate it. Some people can be just fine with the change of followers armor. Some may not like the idea very much but prefer it to the armor system in DAO.

Making different ammors for followers would cost more and then BioWare might have been forced to cut other things from the game. They don't have unlimited founds they can draw from or some magic money tree they can shake. And I'm guessing the improved combat system wasn't free either - but hey, that's just my guess. What other roleplaying features have they cut from the game? 

[crimzontearz]

Monica, we debated this before, right now you are complaining for the sake of complaining. You KNOW I am not a BDF in any way shape or form but even I can see static outfits with stat costumization buffs is not dumbing down. Not unless you consider PST to be a dumbed down game

[Monica83]

Well the combat system its not improved at all... With that silly anime and bad done animation and that teleport moves... Its strange how someone can see it improved...... I respect your opinion but for me dragon age 2 don't have nothing improved from origins..



Its going to be shorter..

Have a schematic dialog system...

Maybe the new graphic can be nice but we don't see enought of that

Have a static hemm "distinct" class system

Outfit of companion are static but upgradable.. ((but they still remain static))

Silly line and shiny effects on move...

An perfect hack and slash gameplay with a ridicolus teleport system

And silly trash combat animation that seems taken from dinasty warrior...



The only positive thing and not so great innovation for me is the voiced character....



Improved from origins?

naaaaah