84 réponses à ce sujet

[Mariefoxprice83]

I like it. My only problem is working out how to be consistent in either friendship or rivalry and not get stuck near the middle!

[ColaQueen]

Naitaka wrote...

The new system basically forces us to meta-game while the old system in DAO let you say whatever you want since everything can be fixed by giving a few gifts. While Friendship vs. Rivalry is an interesting concept, it felt like it isn't fully fleshed out. Merrill's companion quest is completely broken if you choose not to give her the tool, yet has maxed out friendship in Act 2 or vice versa.

I have to disagree, I think the old system required you to meta-game all the time because companions would dissaprove at the weirdest time and I walked into their friend/hate traps all the time until I knew exactly how each of them would react to certain things and then knew when not to take them somewhere or go down certain verbal paths if I didn't want to lose their friendship/romance. Although, I used gifts to appease lost friendship it always felt like a weak system to me.

Now I can RP Hawke how I want and if someone is a rival I still get something out of it and interactions with them. I don't have to buy them off with gifts. So Hawke can be a mage lover and still have sexy time with Fen, because yeah, the hate sex can be awesomeness

Modifié par SilverSentinel, 23 mars 2011 - 03:49 .

[Wulfram]

dreman9999 wrote...

The problem is not the friend /rival system...Its you. Don't try to friend everyone, this system eas made so you can disagree with someone and still have them on your team. Fenirs will still come on you side if rival him and Isabela will come back if yourival her,too. You lose nothing if you rival your character, so stop being so scared to get on the characters bad side. Your ment to.

You're not understanding my problem.  I'm quite happy to end up a rival.  The problem is when you disagree about some things but agree on others, which for me is pretty common.
It's particularly problematic when you're on the "rivalry" path because that means that finding an area of agreement will effectively make the companion like Hawke less.

Fenris may end up siding against Hawke because Hawke chose not to enslave an elven girl, but instead gave her a job.  That is to me clearly a problem

Modifié par Wulfram, 23 mars 2011 - 04:05 .

[Naitaka]

SilverSentinel wrote...

Naitaka wrote...

The new system basically forces us to meta-game while the old system in DAO let you say whatever you want since everything can be fixed by giving a few gifts. While Friendship vs. Rivalry is an interesting concept, it felt like it isn't fully fleshed out. Merrill's companion quest is completely broken if you choose not to give her the tool, yet has maxed out friendship in Act 2 or vice versa.

I have to disagree, I think the old system required you to meta-game all the time because companions would dissaprove at the weirdest time and I walked into their friend/hate traps all the time until I knew exactly how each of them would react to certain things and then knew when not to take them somewhere or go down certain verbal paths if I didn't want to lose their friendship/romance. Although, I used gifts to appease lost friendship it always felt like a weak system to me.

Now I can RP Hawke how I want and if someone is a rival I still get something out of it and interactions with them. I don't have to buy them off with gifts. So Hawke can be a mage lover and still have sexy time with Fen, because yeah, the hate sex can be awesomeness

Ahh, but I LOVED how I can be wrong about it in DA:O, surprises like that in conversation makes the character seem much more alive and less like some cardboard cutout with a few character traits written on them. And since you aren't really penalized for losing approval because of the ease of raising it with gifts, you're really more free to pick the choices you want, instead of what would please the characters.

[baddogkelevra]

Everyone is missing what Wulfram is saying, and he's right. Fenris will side more with you if you are 100% mage lover but also a slave taking bastard. But if you say, have a conscience, and decide that slavery is wrong, you get friendship points, which take you away from a full relationship. It is an interesting idea for a system, but it needs a lot of work.

Modifié par baddogkelevra, 23 mars 2011 - 04:16 .

[Khayness]

Well, my only grudge to bear with the new system is that how Isabela quit on me after Act 2, and I have missed a heap of interesting content.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Khayness wrote...

Well, my only grudge to bear with the new system is that how Isabela quit on me after Act 2, and I have missed a heap of interesting content.

Which would have happened even if they stuck with the old system, making it irrelevant.

[Arppis]

To be honest, the system could be better. How about this?
You have both in seperate metters? This way it wouldn't destroy your hard work.

[Khayness]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Which would have happened even if they stuck with the old system, making it irrelevant.

Nope, I wasn't forced to drag party members along to get enough points.

Funnily enough, I have only used Bethany/Anders post Act 1, Varric and Fenris/Sebastian for a while, and managed to get Merril's and Aveline's bar to 100%.

Only Isabela was missed. Got her the gift, didn't romance her.

[LividLindy]

I nearly ended the game with everyone stuck in the middle. I'd get +10 friendship, then +10 rivalry, and so on and they always cancelled each other out. It was immensely more of a hassle trying to pick and choose who is going to react to what than just throwing gifts at people.

[Arppis]

Then again, the old system felt like I couldn't RP properly, because I was too busy staring at the meter and trying to optimize the friendships to get the buffs. XD

[Naitaka]

Arppis wrote...

Then again, the old system felt like I couldn't RP properly, because I was too busy staring at the meter and trying to optimize the friendships to get the buffs. XD

The whole idea for a buff is just silly imho...so is the buff in DA2 for that matter.

[Arppis]

Naitaka wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Then again, the old system felt like I couldn't RP properly, because I was too busy staring at the meter and trying to optimize the friendships to get the buffs. XD

The whole idea for a buff is just silly imho...so is the buff in DA2 for that matter.

Yep, makes it makes the player wanting to maximize the metters. I wish the reward was something that didn't affect the combat gameplay in any way.

Modifié par Arppis, 23 mars 2011 - 04:59 .

[Camilladilla]

In DAO, I ended up leaving a lot of companions behind simply because I just didn't want to deal with their disapproval. Morrigan and Sten being big examples since I like to do sidequests and even gift giving lost its power over time.

At least in DA2 I could bring all of my companions out with me and I could just eat the rep without having to worry. Who cares if Fenris leaves me by the end of game and I sided with the mages? It's the friggin end of the game, I don't need him anymore!

[Lisa_H]

I liked the friendship/rivalry system. In DAO I hardly ever brought Morrigan with me because she disagreed with everything I did.
However in the end I still ended up with most characters on friendship except Merrill who became a full rival, and Carver of course. Now I could bring any character and I think it gave me more freedom to roleplay the type of character I wanted my Hawke to be.

[Naitaka]

Lisa_H wrote...

I liked the friendship/rivalry system. In DAO I hardly ever brought Morrigan with me because she disagreed with everything I did.
However in the end I still ended up with most characters on friendship except Merrill who became a full rival, and Carver of course. Now I could bring any character and I think it gave me more freedom to roleplay the type of character I wanted my Hawke to be.

I don't get this, why are people so afraid to lose approval in DAO? It's not like they'll betray you or even try to kill you like it's in DA2 if you don't end up on either end of the scale. Honestly, DA2 seems alot more restrictive in this sense than DAO imho.

[sten_super]

Both systems encourage metagaming to a degree, but I prefer the new system to Origins. The only problem I have is that once you are set on a path it's very hard to to reverse it; for example I got some rivalry points with Merrill early on due to anti-blood mage comments, but I wanted (for RP purposes) to get on her good side. I gave her gifts, but due to the way the system works these simply gave me more rivalry points. I ended up taking the contrary position to everything she said in order to gain friendship points until I was in the positive, which is a bit silly.

[Arbalest7]

Bah, I prefer the Mass Effect method where I Jedi Mind Trick everyone I meet to agree with me. Also where was Hawke's persuasion skills?

[Statulos]

I loved maxing out rivalry with Sebastian. And I really hope that is used in the future to fuel a Starkhaven invasion because I'd love to have the oportunity to kill him with a "where is your maker now?"

[Apathy1989]

Its better than old systems, but yes not perfect.

Needs to have 4 prongs - Ally/Rival on one dimension. Respect/Disrespect on the other. Someone can agree with you, but still think you are incompetent, or disagree with you but respect your decisions and conviction.

[Noatz]

This system allows you to build relationships with characters and gain benefits without compromising your Hawke's beliefs, and allowing you to maintain the character you are trying to role play.

At least in theory. You still have to "tell them what they want/don't want to hear" sometimes, or not bring certain characters to certain quests if you want to develop every character. But if role playing is that important to you then you shouldn't care that some of your allies won't fight with +10% dodge or will go against you in the finale.

What it improves on is the system of "agree with me or you lose", and the constant reams of cocking gifts that clog up your inventory that you can't even tell who they're meant for without looking online because some of the logic behind them doesn't make sense.

[Noatz]

Apathy1989 wrote...

Its better than old systems, but yes not perfect.

Needs to have 4 prongs - Ally/Rival on one dimension. Respect/Disrespect on the other. Someone can agree with you, but still think you are incompetent, or disagree with you but respect your decisions and conviction.

The red is what I interpret rivalry relationships as now. But yes. The problem with your idea is that I see no incentive to allow any character to disrespect you. I would be concerned that respect points would just be treated like influence/favour used to be in NWN/Origins etc.

[Pinely]

I think the system is solid, they just need to focus on consistency and transparency.

Making a decision that a companion supports should always carry friendship and vice versa for rivalry. And we need to have a clear idea of what a companion supports.

I shouldn't have Anders in my party, save a Mage, and get nothing in return. Nor should I have to guess how Aveline will respond to love advice.

I like the system, but it really needs refinement.

[monima]

I just always ended up in the middle. and had to kill my LI in the end because approval wasnt high enough. The fact that you can tell the slavers to keep Fenris, adding to his rivalry, meaning he might not turn against you in the end doesnt make much sense.

But I am sure Bioware just had to make a choice on what to do. Hard to make it perfect really

[OdinTGE]

I had Varric, Merril, and Aveline to 100% friend. I played with those 3 for pretty much the entire game and I chose 90% witty answers, about 7% nice answers, and 3% mean/forceful answers in all dialog. I was pro-mage for the entire time.

Basically I ignored the feature. I didn't care who was friend or rival or whatever and just said the stuff I wanted my character to say.