238 réponses à ce sujet

[RosaAquafire]

David Gaider wrote...

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...
An interesting point. I think the structure of the interacitons (home-base or quest-specific only) is interesting, but most companions could use a more lengthy introduction. I think that's the problem, before entrusting someone with watching my back on a regular basis, I'd like to get to know them a little more, sooner rather than later.

Yes, when the writers talked about how things ended up, one of our own observations was that Act 1 ended up being considerably longer than was intended-- so players went a fair length of time after that first dialogue without anything extensive. Front-loading the conversations a bit more, rather than having the sole post-recruitment dialogue, would probably have worked a little better insofar as getting to know characters went.

We'll have to decide if it was worthwhile having all the companion quests. That's where a good deal of the word budget for companions went in comparison (remember in DAO you had one very short quest, if anything at all). From a writing perspective it's a much better way to get to know a companion, but perhaps it simply didn't come soon enough (the first personal quest starts in Act 2, after all) or perhaps that's not what some people want. Perhaps what they want is to ask their companions a bunch of questions, instead? Whether or not I think that's a less desireable way to approach it, if many people felt less connected it might have to be considered.

Regardless, I know that many will take the standard "well, why not do both?" approach to an answer. Yes, ideally you'd want to have lots of personal quests, be able to talk to companions whenever you wanted and ask them lots of questions, etc. etc. That's simply not practical, however. This is not the "talk to companions" game, and thus only so much of our resources can be devoted to it.

I REALLY liked having more companion sidequests, truly, truly did. I'm not sure if it would be worth the trade off to not have them. It actually felt like you could affect your companions' lives, instead of just asking them about them. Fenris, for instance, I know, he's always my example, he's my favourite. I wouldn't trade his Act 2 and 3 personal quests for the world. Actually seeing how he was treated by Hadrianna and Danarius made his actions so much more logical, and actually being able to talk to him after those events and get his feelings about them ... just ASKING him about his old life and having him explain it in a more direct way wouldn't have been worth as much.

I liked DA2's cast a lot better than DA:O's, but I definitely felt frustrated by not being able to talk to my dudes more, and often felt like I was disconnected from them. BUT on the other hand, I definitely got frustrated in DA:O when I couldn't help but blow through all dialogues early and then had nothing for 30 hours.

I really don't know.

It's a tough call, I know. I wish there were just more words/VA money to
juggle here, because companions are, I think, the main reason why
people buy Bioware games. Clearly it's a good investment

[maselphie]

^ Yes. I felt like I actually affected the characters. Zevran, and to a lesser extent Alistair, were the only ones who showed some genuine development in DA:O.

[Wissenschaft]

David Gaider wrote...

You know, what's interesting about this is that there's actually almost as much dialogue per follower in DA2 as there was in DAO (barring perhaps Alistair and Morrigan specifically, considering their larger roles in the story). The primary difference is that in DA2 it's spread out. We took a lot of that dialogue you had before at the camp and deliberately put more of it into their personal quests and the intermittent dialogues you have at the follower's base-- that's where you get to ask them their questions, as they come up in context.

Exactly what he said. If you use the investigate options you can learn just as much about your companions as in Origins. However, I prefer DA2 method because the conversations are in context. You can't just spam talk to a companion. Instead you get to know more about them over time.

[Piecake]

Cuthlan wrote...

If you handled things the way you did in DA2 but staggered the companion quests out more, I think you'd be golden. There was an appropriate amount of dialog and quests for the companions, but it came in bursts which made them less personal.

An added benefit of having the quests staggered more so that you're not doing lumps of companion quests at one time is that each companion will have a period of time where the focus is on them, encouraging players to travel with all of the companions at different times through the campaign.

Yea, I agree with this.  I do agree with Adneate that Isabella wanting you to watch her back in a duel came out of no where.  Why does she want me watching her back in a duel when I don't know her?  I think they should should have had that predicated on completing a personal questt's of Varric, and when you finally meet her, she should have played up her friendship with Varric and said something like 'Ive heard from Varric that you are a good man to have in a spot, and I need someone to watch my back" 

I think that would have made more sense because you do not feel like you have a reputation when you meet Isabella, and if you do, why the heck is Isabella asking a person who worked for such scum as a mercenary and a smuggler to watch her back?  I think it would have made more sense if your reputation was personal to her - varric, a good friend of hers, voached for you, said glowing things, or whatever.  I think that would have made more sense. 

Modifié par Piecake, 13 mars 2011 - 07:26 .

[Maria Caliban]

I think part of the problem is that we've known the DA:O longer. People who are active on the BSN don't just play the game and set it aside.

I played DA:O once and I liked Morrigan, but then I come here and I laughed at the MORRIGAN DISAPPROVES image, I've read Morrigan fanfic, I've seen Morrigan fanart, and I've had extensive conversations about the character.

People spamming that NO picture of Sten has probably done as much to make him *feel* familiar to the average forum goer as the game itself.

And for those of us who followed these characters since they were announced, what we imagined is (probably) not what we got. I assumed I'd like Anders because in Awakening he was a somewhat funny dude. Now he's the Unabomber. I assumed I'd hate Fenris, but I ended up liking him.

David Gaider wrote...

We'll have to decide if it was worthwhile having all the companion quests. That's where a good deal of the word budget for companions went in comparison (remember in DAO you had one very short quest, if anything at all). From a writing perspective it's a much better way to get to know a companion, but perhaps it simply didn't come soon enough (the first personal quest starts in Act 2, after all) or perhaps that's not what some people want. Perhaps what they want is to ask their companions a bunch of questions, instead? Whether or not I think that's a less desireable way to approach it, if many people felt less connected it might have to be considered.

I found the companion quests very satisfying. Moreso than running around in a circle at the camp, clicking on people. I like that all the companions have their own desires and goals.

[BlackDevil06]

Yes, finding the balance between the DA:O-Style and the DA:2-Style will be the real challenge.

I was a bit upset that, while the characters were still nice, you couldn't talk much about their past for example. I would've liked to hear Isabela tell some stories of her past as a pirate or Fenris how he escaped(though, maybe I missed that, dind't talk much to him). This was better in DA:O where Leliana would tell about Orlais, Morrigan about how she evaded templars or Zevran about past assignments. All this made the characters a bit more interesting.

A good in-between would be, talks about the past or, minor things available all time and the really Plot related talks over time. A romance shouldn't be clicking through lots of dialogues and boom "we're a couple", it should evolve over time. This could've been done very nicely especially if you tell a story over several years. It would've added a nice bit if there would've been something between the years that said how you grew closer to your LI, who you flirted with.

[adneate]

David Gaider wrote...
This is not the "talk to companions" game, and thus only so much of our resources can be devoted to it.

One of DA2's main problems is in this regard however, the mix of combat / storytelling is way off for this game. Combat is stacked very heavily against story telling and characterization for the detriment of this game. BioWare should be capitalizing on it's strengths not trying to do things it's never been all that great at. The recent overinvestment in combat systems detracts from investment in story and characters which have always been BioWare's strong points. It seems like an investment that won't ever really pay off, because other people in the industry have made combat their priority. They have a massive head start and they leverage that experience very well. In trying to out do them you risk losing what you use to be good at and in the end you won't have anything unique about yourself and no way to survive in this marketplace.

[RosaAquafire]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think part of the problem is that we've known the DA:O longer. People who are active on the BSN don't just play the game and set it aside.

I played DA:O once and I liked Morrigan, but then I come here and I laughed at the MORRIGAN DISAPPROVES image, I've read Morrigan fanfic, I've seen Morrigan fanart, and I've had extensive conversations about the character.

People spamming that NO picture of Sten has probably done as much to make him *feel* familiar to the average forum goer as the game itself.

You know, Maria ... this is very fair.

I distinctly, 100% remember being frustrated in my first DA:O playthrough that there wasn't enough dialogue. I was so angry when we got to Denerim and Alistair didn't have a tree about the fact that he was up for potential Kingship until way later in the plot. I finished Wynne's trees very early in and then she had nothing to contribute for the rest of the game until the storming the castle scene.

It's not all that different from how I felt playing DA2, when I'm being entirely honest.

I think there's a lot of merit to the idea that these companions are just all so awesome!! that we always want more, and we see the limitations of the writing as failure to deliver. But I do think there's a satisfaction of being able to click on someone and have a conversation with them when YOU/HAWKE wants to talk about something.

You know, press a button and something awesome happens. (Laugh at it all you want, but it's the principle games have been built on since they started.)

I hope BW can find a good way to make this all work.

[Hezulkai]

I have finished the game now and I do echo the OP's comments.  I did like the characters.  Some frustrated and annoyed me (seriously, does Aveline ever approve of anything you ever do ever?), some were funny, and some got downright disturbing.  I loved Varrick.  What this game does better than DA:O is have the characters get to know each other better.  I'd almost want to push that further and have them have the potential for romance.  We saw the potential for friendship and disagreement, be interesting to branch that out.

What DA:O did better was letting the PC feel closer to them.  I've eavesdropped on my companions enough to know about them, but they've rarely shared anything with my character and I've only ever been a passive observer.  I couldn't press for details or follow up.  Rather than the player in control of character progression, the computer is.  While they are cool people, they still feel more like employees or hirelings than the true companions of the Warden.

What DA:O also did better was allowing the player to hear the conversations.  I've triggered so many as I hit the button to zone out of the area and lost the thread.  Likewise even with max zoom out, the companions usually aren't even on the screen when I'm moving (why are they so far behind?).  I had to turn on subtitles just so I can catch a glimpse of a conversation box as I slow up or turn corners and I usually end up missing the opening line. 

On a side note, on a tank playthrough the fact that they are usually a room behind helps because you have time to rush and taunt.  As a mage, I tend to get flattened as Aveline activates Retaliation 100m behind and taunts when she's not near anything and the party dies as she sits on her ass.  Note to self, redo Aveline's tactics.

[RosaAquafire]

BlackDevil06 wrote...
A good in-between would be, talks about the past or, minor things available all time and the really Plot related talks over time. A romance shouldn't be clicking through lots of dialogues and boom "we're a couple", it should evolve over time.

If they have the words to afford it, this would be very lovely. I'd be happy with even a quarter or a fifth of the amount of "on-demand" trees that there were in Origins, combined with maybe one less companion quest.

One other thing people are forgetting, too, is that DA2's characters put in way, way, waaaay more input into quests and such than DA:O's ever did. I don't want to lose that, either :/ Characters in DA:O would only put in very occassionally, but it was actually rare that I could go through a DA2 quest without one of my party piping up. It went a long way in making my dudes feel like a unit, instead of some battle robots following me around.

[Blacklash93]

Companion interaction just feels like it's spread out too thin. Everything came off as a bit hollow because of that.

Plus, I would have liked to ask Fenris and Isabela about Tevinter and Rivain more. Merrill could have said more about Dalish history and legends. I really liked what the companions in Origins brought to the table lore-wise and I was pretty disappointed that they didn't do the same in DA2.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 13 mars 2011 - 07:44 .

[Pyrate_d]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Companion interaction just feels like it's spread out too thin.

Plus, I would have liked to ask Fenris and Isabela about Tevinter and Rivain more. Merrill could have said more about Dalish history and legends. I really liked what the companions in Origins brought to the table lore-wise and I was pretty disappointed that they didn't do the same in DA2.

Agreed

It didn't feel like any of them had very much to say

[Brockololly]

adneate wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
This is not the "talk to companions" game, and thus only so much of our resources can be devoted to it.

One of DA2's main problems is in this regard however, the mix of combat / storytelling is way off for this game. Combat is stacked very heavily against story telling and characterization for the detriment of this game.

I totally agree.

Take Leandra's quest when she's abducted. By far and away, the most tense and emotionally invested I've felt in a video game in a good long time, right up there with something like the Dark Ritual /Landsmeet stuff in Origins. I'm on the edge of my seat chasing down the blood trails and the tension is mounting, overwhelming sense of dread....until I have to fight yet another crowd of some mook shades. Way to break the tension.

Thats one of the larger problems I had with DA2 overall- seemingly every encounter results in a fight (plus  waves!) no matter what you do in dialogue. Coming off of playing something like New Vegas where you can quite literally talk your way out of boss fights, this forcing combat on the player hurt some of the good story moments I thought.



As an aside, while I loved that quest with Leandra Frankenstein (reminded me of the Skinner in BG2, good times=]), it would have been interesting if you could have  saved her. Not save her with no adverse consequences- have it more  damned if you do, damned if you don't- so if you save her in Act 2, the  blood mage gets away to do something bad later on in Act 3 possibly, so  that you wouldn't necessarily have people reloading to get the "good"  resolution of saving her without any adverse event.

Modifié par Brockololly, 13 mars 2011 - 07:46 .

[Pariah00]

David Gaider wrote...

You know, what's interesting about this is that there's actually almost as much dialogue per follower in DA2 as there was in DAO (barring perhaps Alistair and Morrigan specifically, considering their larger roles in the story). The primary difference is that in DA2 it's spread out. We took a lot of that dialogue you had before at the camp and deliberately put more of it into their personal quests and the intermittent dialogues you have at the follower's base-- that's where you get to ask them their questions, as they come up in context.

My impression is that some people miss being able to get all the dialogue at once. I think there's an urge to get an immediate response for interaction-- click-reward-click-reward, etc. --until they feel they've gotten to know the character and then move onto the rest of the game, even if there's not a lot of dialogue after that point outside of triggered moments.

Maybe that's better, I don't know. It's simply an interesting perception, but whether it's caused by some people simply missing dialogue or because the first act is so long and there's only one major dialogue for a follower there after you recruit them... or something else, I can't really say. I imagine it varies, and the fact that someone feels less connected certainly speaks for itself, but it's not from lack of dialogue. Not everyone feels the same way, of course, but we'll definitely look at the various reactions and tweak it some more. There are indeed some things we tried in DA2 that I don't think we'll try again, but I'm still willing to give it some time to mull over.

Reflecting on my DA2 playthrough, I think I had- roughly - 8 specific conversations with most of my companions which, when comparing to DA:O dialogues from the wiki, seems to match up in number to the unique topics presented throughout the game for the companions in DA:O (minus their companions quest convos, Alistair and Morrigan plot convos, and relationship related convos).  So I can see where you say that the amount of conversations were the same. However, the majority of conversations DA:O were longer for each topic which I think goes a long way toward making the dialogues in DA2 feel lacking. 

I think presentation does quite a bit to reinforce the "lacking" perception; that you can't choose to have a conversation in idle moments (everything tied to a "quest feeling"), can trick the player into thinking that conversations you are having somehow aren't conversations shared between friends but rather tasks that the character is demanding of you.  You lose the feeling of reciprocity that comes from forming new relationships.  It simply feels more natural to be able to interact with the character when you want and for them to, in turn, interact and ask things of you when they want or need. Obviously no one wants the player to blow through conversation options from the get-go, but ultimately, that is the player's choice to make.  I greatly appreciate the concern that went in to pacing but it was perhaps too extreme. 

Also, and this ties into the length of conversations, when you say their was as much dialogue in DA2 as DA:O that may be mostly true in instances of conversation but not in how the dialogues could progress.  Many conversations in DA:O had up to 8 interchanges/back-and-forths per topic and (sometimes) up 30 potential response options discreetly embedded in the dialogue tree.  Obviously those 30 options are not available for selecting, since every option you choose cuts you off from the others by branching to conversation and can even end the conversation right then and there, but my point is in the potentially that you find in the DA:O trees versus how the dialogue wheel was used in DA2 may illustrate that there is a hidden depth to the dialogue tree that is not coming across or being realized with the wheel- thus compounding the feeling that the dialogues are shallow. I think I only ever experienced 3 or 4 back-and-forths in my conversations in DA2 and there is no way that 30 potential options were embedded in that wheel.  Each topic simply didn't, and couldn't, branch as far as it did in DA:O.

Surely, I may be getting numbers wrong in my examples and using only the more in-depth examples, but I think the underlying ideas are sound- and that is the crux of what I'm getting at.  Anyway, I would love to hear more perspectives on this because I think the writers did such an amazing job with the characters and interaction that I did experience that I'm actually feeling guilty for not connecting to them more.

[Maria Caliban]

Hezulkai wrote...

...seriously, does Aveline ever approve of anything you ever do ever?

Aveline loves my Hawke. She was shoveling friendship points my way.

[Cajeb]

The problem I had with the companion quests was I had no idea how or when to get them. In fact, I never got any of Fenris's.

[Piecake]

RosaAquafire wrote...

BlackDevil06 wrote...
A good in-between would be, talks about the past or, minor things available all time and the really Plot related talks over time. A romance shouldn't be clicking through lots of dialogues and boom "we're a couple", it should evolve over time.

If they have the words to afford it, this would be very lovely. I'd be happy with even a quarter or a fifth of the amount of "on-demand" trees that there were in Origins, combined with maybe one less companion quest.

One other thing people are forgetting, too, is that DA2's characters put in way, way, waaaay more input into quests and such than DA:O's ever did. I don't want to lose that, either :/ Characters in DA:O would only put in very occassionally, but it was actually rare that I could go through a DA2 quest without one of my party piping up. It went a long way in making my dudes feel like a unit, instead of some battle robots following me around.

The more that I think about it, the more I am willing to completely sacrficie inconsequential side quests to get player initiated dialogue along with all of the things that DA2 does right - improved party banter, much improve companion quests, and, like you said, companion inclusion. 

I can't imagine that player initiated dialogue is all that expensive or more expensive than those side quests.  Personally, I would much rather have more interactions with party members than more combat.  What I mean by this, is that I want the optional content that I initiate to be companion dialogue that fleshes out their character, the city, the world, what-have-you.  That is the strength of Dragon Age.  It isnt combat, which those side quests are basically used to give an excuse for more of that combat. 

Like I said previously, i still want a few side quests, just not nearly as many and just at the end - quests for extremely difficult, but optional bosses, or long, drawn out quests that really add to the lore like Andraste's Ashes.

While I think DA2 had a good excuse for doing those side quests - you needed money for a specific story reason - you can't use that reason all of the time.  I think dropping those side quests for the next game would get rid of the feeling, wait, why am I helping this old lady, arent I supposed to be the hero or what-have-you?

[Hezulkai]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Hezulkai wrote...

...seriously, does Aveline ever approve of anything you ever do ever?

Aveline loves my Hawke. She was shoveling friendship points my way.

Do tell?  Find her a boyfriend?  +10 rivalry.  Rescue her boyfriend?  +10 rivalry.  Get her a new shield?  +15 rivalry.  She's like Morrigan.  She disapproves of everything I do because although she asked me to do these things for her, she's far too noble to do them herself and needs to let me know exactly how much she considers me scum... as she asks for favours.  She of course has no problems using my indentured labour to get herself into the city, but after that, oh I'm such a terrible person because I'm not a super-awesome guard.  I'm just sad she's the only tank because I find her thorougly sour.  In fact I've started killing people just to annoy her.

And that she approves of.  I have no idea what she wants or what makes her happy.  She's as fickle as Sebastian.

[tbsking]

David Gaider wrote...

You know, what's interesting about this is that there's actually almost as much dialogue per follower in DA2 as there was in DAO (barring perhaps Alistair and Morrigan specifically, considering their larger roles in the story). The primary difference is that in DA2 it's spread out. We took a lot of that dialogue you had before at the camp and deliberately put more of it into their personal quests and the intermittent dialogues you have at the follower's base-- that's where you get to ask them their questions, as they come up in context.

My impression is that some people miss being able to get all the dialogue at once. I think there's an urge to get an immediate response for interaction-- click-reward-click-reward, etc. --until they feel they've gotten to know the character and then move onto the rest of the game, even if there's not a lot of dialogue after that point outside of triggered moments.

Maybe that's better, I don't know. It's simply an interesting perception, but whether it's caused by some people simply missing dialogue or because the first act is so long and there's only one major dialogue for a follower there after you recruit them... or something else, I can't really say. I imagine it varies, and the fact that someone feels less connected certainly speaks for itself, but it's not from lack of dialogue. Not everyone feels the same way, of course, but we'll definitely look at the various reactions and tweak it some more. There are indeed some things we tried in DA2 that I don't think we'll try again, but I'm still willing to give it some time to mull over.

I think the style of gameplay hobbled the companions. The fact that there are long stretches where you can't talk to companions makes it feel like there is less dialogue, and because it's easy to miss dialogue if you don't seek out your companions (I didn't talk to Anders ever. Like, at all, because I never took him with me and never wanted to go out of my way to talk to him) makes it feel like there is less.

Also, because the story stretches over a long period of time, it almost gives the impression that I've only talked to my friends and companions several times in a decade.

In Origins, because everyone was centrally located, I could talk to characters I never used (like Oghren, Zevran, Shale) and still get quests, background info, friendships - without ever having to take them anywhere. the fact that I could talk to them whenever I wanted, even if they had nothing to say, gave the impression that we were indeed talking often.

DA2, much like Awakening, makes it a chore to talk to my companions and get their approval (friendship/rivalry) to a point where they are a friend (or rival) and get their quests, feel like I know them, and all the other good stuff that comes from it.

At the end of DAO, I felt like my little group had become a close circle and the ending was made sad by the fact that they would all leave. DA2 makes the companions feel like they weren't really friends, just a bunch of folks that followed me for some reason or other, and though half my group had been killed off by the end, I didn't care.

[NRO TYN]

I realy hope Bioware take's the conserns of the fan base this time around with DA3, lets face it DA2 was ok but it was a big let down.

[_Aine_]

Strange as it may sound, I think the fact that you could click on your companions at ANY time in DA:O and have them talk to you made you feel like you were more like actual companions. Now, they just rehash their one liners and you have to wait for them to WANT to talk to YOU. They are in control the whole time of the progress of your "relationship".

A decent enough solution would be to have pivotal conversation points be timed out and placed along a time line as per the story progression Bioware wishes, but to have less important dialogue available to you along the way so you have at least an illusion of casual conversation to revert to if you are a role-player and just simply want to have a little chat. Be that their history ( yes, maybe for the 90th time) what they know about the history of the area etc, it gives the personal connection your character makes with those they travel with a bit more real.

DA2 is very on-par with ME2 in this regard and it, admittedly, is my least favorite part of ME2 for that very reason.

This way, no matter how wonderful the companion stories, I am left with a feeling that I don't know them as well as I should. More because of frequency of story exposure than strength of companion stories themselves. The timing makes they just seem less personal when you can't have even casual conversation while you are out and about. It makes it a tad more sterile: when you are out questing or fighting, it is now just all about the quest or the waves of fighting. If you are out and find a quest giving item for a companion, you can't lean over and gift it to them. you *have* to wait.

I think there is so much about DA2 that is *better* than DA:O but for me, this holds this game back a bit for my own personal preference, but I am I suppose more of a role-player. As in everything, ymmv.

[upsettingshorts]

Ah yes "consensus" - we have dismissed that claim.

I thought it was a major improvement on its predecessor with its own flaws. Hopefully DA3 improves upon DA2 as opposed to quite literally - as opposed to metaphorically - take a stap back and try to redo all of DAO's flaws.

That being said, I preferred the companions in DA2 as characters though the points about how to divy up the dialogue in this thread are very good ones. A few characters I nailed down pretty quickly, others eluded me the entire game - and that may have contributed.

[Maria Caliban]

Hezulkai wrote...

Do tell?  Find her a boyfriend?  +10 rivalry.  Rescue her boyfriend?  +10 rivalry.  Get her a new shield?  +15 rivalry.  She's like Morrigan.  She disapproves of everything I do because although she asked me to do these things for her, she's far too noble to do them herself and needs to let me know exactly how much she considers me scum... as she asks for favours.  She of course has no problems using my indentured labour to get herself into the city, but after that, oh I'm such a terrible person because I'm not a super-awesome guard.  I'm just sad she's the only tank because I find her thorougly sour.  In fact I've started killing people just to annoy her.

And that she approves of.  I have no idea what she wants or what makes her happy.  She's as fickle as Sebastian.

All those things also get you friendship points. Gifts give friendship or rivalry based on what path you're on.

If you want a friendship with Aveline, let her make her own decisions and ask for her input. Uphold the law and don't extort people for money. Use the diplomatic or charming conversation options.

[FinalGirl]

No one in DA 2 is really charming me as much as Alistair, Morrigan, Leliana, and Shale did in DA:O...well, maybe Varric and Merrill...but the relationships do feel a bit deeper here, like most of them are actually *friends* of Hawke. The relationships have the give and take that friendships often do- I think this is particularly true with Aveline, who sticks by and protects Hawke even though she doesn't always agree with everything Hawke does. She's also protective of her own personal life, but was a true friend after Hawke's mother died. It's a complex relationship- even giving her a damn gift is tough.

Merrill is adorable, but I haven't done her ACT III personal quest yet and I'm worried about how things will work out- cavorting with demons and blood magic are bad ideas, no matter what she says. I like her, but not what she does, necessarily, and I'm interested to see what I'll decide.

I like that compliments and gift giving aren't enough for people to like you, necessarily. Again, the relationships are all pretty complex, and they really develop over time. I wish appearances were altered slightly after each forward leap in time- maybe even just a change of outfits. It would have really driven home the fact that the story spans years and people can really change in the interim.

All that said, Fenris is festering up in his cobwebby mansion and I don't feel like I know him at all. I kind of like that- that having people in your party frequently (I never bring him anywhere) will alter your relationship as well.

[Lord Atlia]

I remember in DA:O I always exhausted all my companion dialogue as soon as I got a companion and thus got to know them through and through immediately, my obsessiveness required me to repeat this process with each play through and as such it became much of choir, so I'm more partial to the DA2 style of spreading the conversations over the game. I also think, as others have said, that because Alistair and Morrigan were main characters as much as the warden, they got substantially more dialogue and development. Thus if one or both of these characters were your favorite it would diminish DA2's characters because there is no equivalent main companion in DA2, all characters are given equal treatment. By far I loved how companion to companion relationships were developed in DA2, there was a lot of back and forth between Merrill and Anders on blood mages that was much better than the companion dialogue in DA:O, save for maybe Morrigan and Alistair's dialogue. In fact over time this companion dialogue made me view Anders as sort of a hypocrite believing that mages should be free but also condoning certain types of magic.