89 réponses à ce sujet

[Scnew]

Irxy wrote...
1. changing armor is too complex for console gamers who only wish to press 1 button and win.

This "console players are retarded" attitude is getting really tiresome and makes you sound like a total jack off.

[Taura-Tierno]

Ruben Thomas wrote...

sestrensaz wrote...

I prefer the 'armour restriction'. Though I don't see it as restriction, I see it as a bonus - I like the characters have their own unique look and not having to dress them the generic looking tat you got in DAO (sorry DAO armour designers, it was pretty dire, especially for mages).

I left both Morrigan and Wynne in their starting robes (tho Morrigan gets an upgrade) because there was just no way I was going to put them in the stuff you get from loot and buying in stores; it actually serves to ruin their personality somewhat. I mean, Morrigan without those robes just doesn't feel like Morrigan (and I'm a woman so no it wasn't about being all lololol boobs!) It just didn't feel right... like, can you imagine Varric without showing off the chest hair?! Travesty! lol

I feel it was the right decision to switch to upgrades rather than full customisation. Though I think I would have preferred to see changes in their clothing as the years went by... or even as you complete their upgrades rather than only if you romance them.

Also some of the changes are a bit paltry... I romanced Fenris and all that changed as that he wore a red scarf around his wrist and the Hawke crest on his belt... bit meh! Also the fact it seems like the reason Fenris is wearing the scarf is never discussed in-game. Might have been nice.

But otherwise I'm all for upgrades over customisation since I think it takes away from the personality of the character to say dress Isabela in some frumpy leather get-up when we know that's not her style.

I agree with most of this

As do I. 

Keep having unique outfits, but make upgrades (or something similar) have a visual effect on the clothes. 

[neppakyo]

Scnew wrote...

Irxy wrote...
1. changing armor is too complex for console gamers who only wish to press 1 button and win.

This "console players are retarded" attitude is getting really tiresome and makes you sound like a total jack off.

There is truth to that. I know quite a few console players who are like that. The minority (in my experience) actually like complex things like that, the rest want explosions, swear words and basically w.hores in their games.

[Dragoonlordz]

neppakyo wrote...

Scnew wrote...

Irxy wrote...
1. changing armor is too complex for console gamers who only wish to press 1 button and win.

This "console players are retarded" attitude is getting really tiresome and makes you sound like a total jack off.

There is truth to that. I know quite a few console players who are like that. The minority (in my experience) actually like complex things like that, the rest want explosions, swear words and basically w.hores in their games.

I own DAO and DA2 and ME and ME2 on my consoles, this neither makes me button bashing brainless moron or some kid. I'm 30y/o have a job, a life and above average IQ with the added fact I do also own many PC games some of which require a lot more thinking than your bog standard RPG or TBS. To say console players are generic button bashers or mindless boom headshot players is beyond stupidity. No different than saying everyone who plays on PC is a Farmville mindless tool. Generalisations don't work and for very good reason, so don't do it.

[Avissel]

neppakyo wrote...
There is truth to that. I know quite a few console players who are like that. The minority (in my experience) actually like complex things like that, the rest want explosions, swear words and basically w.hores in their games.

I play both. There is no truth to this, and the sterotype is wrongly attritubted to "console players" when it is infact just a description of "That guy I picture in my mind when I think about people who play Halo"

[TJSolo]

ZombiePowered wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

I played DA:O, loved it, and loved DA2. I especially liked the companion armor. They should dress how they want to dress.

Please visit one of the RP threads as this thread is about possible real reasons.Those characters are not real and have no real want or need to appear how they are other than some designer(not the fictional characters) decided so.

I believe this is the Registered Game Owner forum. And I also believe my Dragon Age 2 case is sitting right next to my computer. Which means I own it, which means I get to post on these forums.

Also, if you read my post you would have noticed that I did give a real reason: consistent personalities. When characters have consistent personalities, it creates deeper immersion in the game. It makes the characters you are interacting with more consistent in their actions (as the name would hint). People choose their outfits, so game characters should be in charge of getting dressed in the morning as well. It's a small touch that sublty adds more to the way you perceive the character. For example, if Isabela wore a Victorian black dress that showed no skin except for her hands and face, you'd be a bit confused by all the flirting and sexual banter. It wouldn't make sense for someone as... free with her affections as she is to dress in such a manner. She just wouldn't do it.

Such recognition is fine for non-interactive media like cartoons, comic books, and movies where characters typically do not change physically or mentaly of the course of the series . But in an interactive media, particularly RPGs the character's persona is more than their clothes and changes over the course of the game.

The characters in DA2 have not been put in charge of anything relating to themselves not their levels, not their tactics, and certainly not their clothes.Having nothing else allowable to wear is not sublte and is not the character choosing anything.

Isabella in a victorian dress only changes her aesthetically, her mannerisms and personally are still the same. Clothing either in digital form or real do not have identities of their own.

Modifié par TJSolo, 28 mars 2011 - 06:04 .

[Dark83]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
No different than saying everyone who plays on PC is a Farmville mindless tool.

If you include Facebook game players as PC gamers, then the majority of PC gamers really would be mindless Farmville tools.

[Taura-Tierno]

TJSolo wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

I played DA:O, loved it, and loved DA2. I especially liked the companion armor. They should dress how they want to dress.

Please visit one of the RP threads as this thread is about possible real reasons.Those characters are not real and have no real want or need to appear how they are other than some designer(not the fictional characters) decided so.

I believe this is the Registered Game Owner forum. And I also believe my Dragon Age 2 case is sitting right next to my computer. Which means I own it, which means I get to post on these forums.

Also, if you read my post you would have noticed that I did give a real reason: consistent personalities. When characters have consistent personalities, it creates deeper immersion in the game. It makes the characters you are interacting with more consistent in their actions (as the name would hint). People choose their outfits, so game characters should be in charge of getting dressed in the morning as well. It's a small touch that sublty adds more to the way you perceive the character. For example, if Isabela wore a Victorian black dress that showed no skin except for her hands and face, you'd be a bit confused by all the flirting and sexual banter. It wouldn't make sense for someone as... free with her affections as she is to dress in such a manner. She just wouldn't do it.

Such recognition is fine for non-interactive media like cartoons, comic books, and movies where characters typically do not change physically or mentaly of the course of the series . But in an interactive media, particularly RPGs the character's persona is more than their clothes and changes over the course of the game.

The characters in DA2 have not been put in charge of anything relating to themselves not their levels, not their tactics, and certainly not their clothes.Having nothing else allowable to wear is not sublte and is not the character choosing anything.

Isabella in a victorian dress only changes her aesthetically, her mannerisms and personally are still the same. Clothing either in digital form or real do not have identities of their own.

I think you will find a lot of people who believe that clothes are an important part of personality. Sure, some people will wear whatever and not care in the least, but most people, in my experience, do care. Even "I'll wear anything as long as its comfortable" is a part of that person's personality. 

And for a lot of people, clothes are a very important part of their identity. It is, after all, a very essential part of how they hoose to present yourself to others. Clothes can signal interests, political ideas, or whatever else somebody chooses. 

You may not care about clothes, but a lot of people do. Most people have, at the very least, certain things they would not put on, under any circumstances.

[Irx]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I own DAO and DA2 and ME and ME2 on my consoles, this neither makes me button bashing brainless moron or some kid. I'm 30y/o have a job, a life and above average IQ with the added fact I do also own many PC games some of which require a lot more thinking than your bog standard RPG or TBS.

So you basically say that you own some button mashing **** on consoles and "many PC games some of which require a lot more thinking". I see... hey, wasn't that my point?  Btw, wasting your time on bio forums is not a life, sry. 
 

To say console players are generic button bashers or mindless boom headshot players is beyond stupidity. No different than saying everyone who plays on PC is a Farmville mindless tool.

The difference is, there are many kinds of games on pc - while all console games are casual button mashers, except maybe a few japanese ones, but those are anime based, which is worse. (oh, and browser based games are not really pc games, the better example of retardation would be wow etc.)

Generalisations don't work and for very good reason, so don't do it.

They always work, and a few exceptions do not matter - that is, if there are any exceptions, as if a casual iq person would ever admit to be the one.

[Blue Face Beast]

I see no problem with Isabella outfit. She is pretty much like the swashbucklers or bucaneers of the late 15th century... Using rapiers and daggers, dodging and parrying attacks... Pretty much like Augustine in Suikoden 3 while Chris was using heavy armor knight-style.

Evasion, swiftness and use of parrying weapons vs heavy armor, reduced agility and limited vision.

[TJSolo]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I think you will find a lot of people who believe that clothes are an important part of personality. Sure, some people will wear whatever and not care in the least, but most people, in my experience, do care. Even "I'll wear anything as long as its comfortable" is a part of that person's personality. 

And for a lot of people, clothes are a very important part of their identity. It is, after all, a very essential part of how they hoose to present yourself to others. Clothes can signal interests, political ideas, or whatever else somebody chooses. 

You may not care about clothes, but a lot of people do. Most people have, at the very least, certain things they would not put on, under any circumstances.

So Carver has personal reasons for not putting on any scrap of armor? I would love those reasons from that character in-game and not from a guy in the interent sharing their RP with me.

[KenRed]

Remember what Blood Dragon armor first looked like on female elves in DA:O? Yeah, the decision was made to avoid things like that.

[TJSolo]

KenRed wrote...

Remember what Blood Dragon armor first looked like on female elves in DA:O? Yeah, the decision was made to avoid things like that.

I thought the patch was made to avoid things like that.

[Adanu]

KingRemington wrote...

 I don't remember there being any armor restrictions in the previous installment of dr, so why start now? Personally I think it nullified the overall gaming experience because i found myself going mad with curiosity about armors I couldn't equip due to class/attribute/character restrictions or inadequacies. Not to mention I felt some of the armors I found throughout the game would look better on my companions than their default attire. Anyone agree?

Because making dozens of unique armors for different characters takes a ton of dev time.

Personally, I hope we get more detailed personalized outfits in future games like in DA2.

[Obadiah]

KingRemington wrote...
 I don't remember there being any armor restrictions in the previous installment of dr, so why start now?
...

Because when someone spends that much time sculpting cleavage, we players should have to look at (appreciate) it for the entire game. Same logic applies to Miranda.

Modifié par Obadiah, 28 mars 2011 - 07:42 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Irxy wrote...
...[ Loads of pointless gibberish ] 

Stop now, save yourself from looking even more silly.

[Taura-Tierno]

TJSolo wrote...

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I think you will find a lot of people who believe that clothes are an important part of personality. Sure, some people will wear whatever and not care in the least, but most people, in my experience, do care. Even "I'll wear anything as long as its comfortable" is a part of that person's personality. 

And for a lot of people, clothes are a very important part of their identity. It is, after all, a very essential part of how they hoose to present yourself to others. Clothes can signal interests, political ideas, or whatever else somebody chooses. 

You may not care about clothes, but a lot of people do. Most people have, at the very least, certain things they would not put on, under any circumstances.

So Carver has personal reasons for not putting on any scrap of armor? I would love those reasons from that character in-game and not from a guy in the interent sharing their RP with me.

How about "it's ugly"? Seems to work for most people when it comes to clothing. Or, if you're a glass half full person, "I like this one better". Or what about "I've had this armor for ages, it's good luck". 

I do believe you have a point, to some extent. There should be options them. Different kinds of unique outfits that they would consider switching to. Carver could certainly be a character that could equip different kinds of armor, but perhaps not every armor. 

Aveline, on the other hand, feels absolutely great in her guard armor. She's probably the character with the single strongest in-game reason to only use her armor. 

[Serpieri Nei]

Eldrethar wrote...

In regards to equipping gear on companions, their argument is that they want the characters to retain their own individual uniqueness, rather than having Anders and Merril run around in "Generic Circle Robe #3" the whole game, for example.

Easy Fix - stop making Generic Circle Robes - and start making armor, robes, etc...that shine.

[Shatterkiss]

The problem isn't that console gamers are too stupid to handle a traditional RPG.  The problem is that Bioware thinks that COD players (their new target audience) is too stupid to handle traditional RPGs.  Mike Laidlaw said himself that COD players might be "confused" by too many options or features.  It isn't the fault of console players or COD players.  It's the fact that Bioware and EA are delibarately targetting people they think are stupid and easily confused.

[ZombiePowered]

TJSolo wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

I played DA:O, loved it, and loved DA2. I especially liked the companion armor. They should dress how they want to dress.

Please visit one of the RP threads as this thread is about possible real reasons.Those characters are not real and have no real want or need to appear how they are other than some designer(not the fictional characters) decided so.

I believe this is the Registered Game Owner forum. And I also believe my Dragon Age 2 case is sitting right next to my computer. Which means I own it, which means I get to post on these forums.

Also, if you read my post you would have noticed that I did give a real reason: consistent personalities. When characters have consistent personalities, it creates deeper immersion in the game. It makes the characters you are interacting with more consistent in their actions (as the name would hint). People choose their outfits, so game characters should be in charge of getting dressed in the morning as well. It's a small touch that sublty adds more to the way you perceive the character. For example, if Isabela wore a Victorian black dress that showed no skin except for her hands and face, you'd be a bit confused by all the flirting and sexual banter. It wouldn't make sense for someone as... free with her affections as she is to dress in such a manner. She just wouldn't do it.

Such recognition is fine for non-interactive media like cartoons, comic books, and movies where characters typically do not change physically or mentaly of the course of the series . But in an interactive media, particularly RPGs the character's persona is more than their clothes and changes over the course of the game.

The characters in DA2 have not been put in charge of anything relating to themselves not their levels, not their tactics, and certainly not their clothes.Having nothing else allowable to wear is not sublte and is not the character choosing anything.

Isabella in a victorian dress only changes her aesthetically, her mannerisms and personally are still the same. Clothing either in digital form or real do not have identities of their own.

There is more to them that clothes, but that doesn't mean clothes don't matter to them. Yes, putting Isabela in a Victorian dress only changes her appearance, but as a character, especially one who cares about her appearance, how she appears is important. That's why in the real world people put time into getting dressed in the morning. It's about the character being consistent in their personality, because their personality affects how they dress. Thus, as you stated, it isn't their personality that is changed by their appearance, but their appearance that is changed by their personality.

And the characters in DA haven't been put in charge of their clothes until now, but now they are, and rightly so. I will agree that they should change their clothing throughout the game (seriously, how many sets of white blouse and no pants does Isabela have?), or at least regularly adjust the details. Ideally, Bioware will do that in future installments. It is a limitation that should be there, but there should be some freedom within that limitation. The direction Bioware is going with this is correct, they just need to take it all the way and deepen the idea that the characters have their own wardrobe and don't have their fashion advice entirely dictated by the player.

[Irx]

Shatterkiss wrote...

The problem isn't that console gamers are too stupid to handle a traditional RPG.  The problem is that Bioware thinks that COD players (their new target audience) is too stupid to handle traditional RPGs. Mike Laidlaw said himself that COD players might be "confused" by too many options or features.  It isn't the fault of console players or COD players.  It's the fact that Bioware and EA are delibarately targetting people they think are stupid and easily confused.

Of course, COD players secretly yearn for more complex games, still they avoid them and just keep playing COD... hmmmm... because they really enjoy the plot! yes, that's must be it.

[neppakyo]

I'm really disliking this 'But but its the companions own choice! You don't need to dress them up!!11 lolz' defence..

And I agree with Shatterkiss as well, makes sense. Bioware/EA thinks COD players are easily confused by options and choices that don't resemble a uniform or gun..

[TJSolo]

ZombiePowered wrote...

There is more to them that clothes, but that doesn't mean clothes don't matter to them. Yes, putting Isabela in a Victorian dress only changes her appearance, but as a character, especially one who cares about her appearance, how she appears is important. That's why in the real world people put time into getting dressed in the morning. It's about the character being consistent in their personality, because their personality affects how they dress. Thus, as you stated, it isn't their personality that is changed by their appearance, but their appearance that is changed by their personality.

And the characters in DA haven't been put in charge of their clothes until now, but now they are, and rightly so. I will agree that they should change their clothing throughout the game (seriously, how many sets of white blouse and no pants does Isabela have?), or at least regularly adjust the details. Ideally, Bioware will do that in future installments. It is a limitation that should be there, but there should be some freedom within that limitation. The direction Bioware is going with this is correct, they just need to take it all the way and deepen the idea that the characters have their own wardrobe and don't have their fashion advice entirely dictated by the player.

Where is this conversation with Isabella noting that she cares for her appearance? Boats, sex, money, and freedom are about all of the cares I have heard from Isabella. A character being consistent with their personality means their actions, conversations, and how they respond to the in-game world. Clothing, barring some stupid extreme example, plays little in demonstrating a consistent personality.

Don't twist my words around. I never said nor implied anything like, "...it isn't their personality that is changed by their appearance, but their appearance that is changed by their personality. "That implies personality is some how attached to clothing either directly or indirectly.

I truly don't know what you are talking about inreference to characters being put in charge of their own clothes in DA2. There is no selection for a character to select from, there's no choice it is a mandate look from a designer at Bioware. Even if you want to put on a RP mask the characters that change outfits are not doing so simply because they want to; the Guard, Grey Wardens, and the Circle all have specfic looks and make every member wear their respective uniform*. From the character's perspective it is not their choice and more so just part of the job*. When characters change clothes due to romancing/loyalty it is not made because of a choice but because of some actions from Hawke.

Many RPGs  are able to give characters either access to all gear,  a custom  wardrobe, or at least a selection of RGB palette modified clothes for the player to decide on. The lack of selection makes your buzzwords of freedom and choice empty. This absurd notion that the player is ill-equiped to decide what characters on their team should wear when that player turns on the game is an excuse for EA Bioware's technical failure to implement a system that allows for unique and flexible appearances.  Given all the power the player has over every character on the team it is odd, random, and inconsistent for the player not to be able to equip the companions with helmets, armor, gloves, and boots as the situation needs.

Ideally Bioware will still stop calling the corners they have to cut in order to meet deadlines, "innovations." Pick almost any action, adventure, shooter, non-RPG and see that unique outfits for canon characters are the norm and have been for a looooong time.

Modifié par TJSolo, 29 mars 2011 - 07:06 .

[FedericoV]

A game is about visuals as well as stats. Honestly, I liked the iconic look of DA2's NPCs better. In DA:O all charachter looked the same and sometimes the outfit of NPCs was really odd and ugly: Morrigain in Chantry Robes anyone?

At the same time, DA2's inventory system does feel too superficial and too linear. It's accessible but it's not deep. First of all, the armour look should change during the course of time and maybe reflects the relationship with your charachter. Having Isabella with the "easy insertion" dress for 10 years is boring if the focus are visuals.

But mostly, the problem lies in the rune system. The Rune upgrade system could have been a great solution to mix iconic look and customizable stats, but it falls flat because at the end it's just something like: since the the rune of valiance is given for granted, what other kind of protection rune do you wish to implement? Fire for the High Dragon, Electricity for the Rock Wraith, etc. Honestly, if they could develop a more intricated, rewarding, deep and customizable rune armour upgrade system (without loosing accesibility) it would be the best of both world. I would trade less items for Hawke with a reworked rune system.

[Riloux]

They had no time.