200 réponses à ce sujet

[uberdowzen]

TJSolo wrote...

The number of characters whose gear can be manage and still remain fun is as subjective as how many companions can be active on a team at one time before it becomes a too many to watch over. My comment is simply that RPGs about loot can be fun, period.  You and the OP agreed that loot for 1 character is fun and are now trying to say that loot for more than 1 character is not fun. Given the why RPGs have worked with loot/gear and multiple characters the line that you two are drawing seems arbitrarily crafted to support the decisions of the DA2 dev team. Oddly enough it is my second time hearing such an argument, the first time being with ME2 but that point died quicker than you can say Appearance Pack 1.

I don't disagree that RPGs about loot can be fun (I love me some Diablo) but I'm just not sure that Dragon Age is one of those games. I don't reminisce about the time I equipped Steel Gloves +1 on Alistair, but I do remember the time when he broke my character's heart.

Borderlands and Recettear just use loot lists that have multiple ways of being sorted. I suppose Torchlight's inventory is Tetris-like if Tetris only used 1 block.
For me the inventory management is worse because in DAO I am able to sort by tabs, toss items in junk, sell all junk at vendors, and buy/sell in the same UI. However in DA2 I can do all that except for buying and selling in the same UI.  Functionally on the PC the inventory systems are the same except that DAO uses the backdrop of a book and DA2's backdrop is blackness. Going out and saying you prefering DA2's inventory management looks like a real stretch just to add something into the DA2 plus category, honestly.

For some reason, Torchlight's inventory had morphed in my head into the Diablo style one where items take up multiple squares on the grid. I think my point still stands though, it's more of a visual inventory than a list. I can't comment on Recettear because I haven't played it. The fun on loot in Borderlands seems to revolve around the excitement of finding the ridiculous guns with weird effects. In comparison Dragon Age's items are relatively meh.

I might be wrong, but as I recall there is no sort into junk option in DAO. That feature was the main reason I enjoyed DA2's management more.

I have not said there is a strict set of rules for RPGs. The RP genre of games does not have clear cut defintions and share many elements with other genres like action, adventure, and simulation. If sticking to a formula within a genre can lead to stagnation in the RPG genre then every other gaming genre is subject to stagnation but there is no genre wide stagnation. It is just unfounded fearmongering from people that want change for the sake of change and have no clue about the customer retention.

But there are fairly strict rules of what defines an RPG that other genres don't have. An action game for instant is basically any game that provides postive feedback based on the players reactions. A strategy game is any game that provides positive feedback for strategising a way out of a situation. There's a lot you can do within that definition.

I agree that the "action" part of the game can be pretty much whatever the developer wants it to be. An action game and a tactical game are both valid approaches. The meta game that surrounds that though must have a fully customisable inventory, stats based character development, levels etc. Remove one of those elements and a game is no longer considered an RPG (see Mass Effect 2).

Yes, and the default companion apparel look awesome.

No.

Yes. Agree to disagree?

No.

Yes.

[Auru]

I do enjoy there unique look, I mean Varric just wouldn't be Varric in some standard leather armour now would he?

but

why is he wearing the exact same clothes after 7+ years :/

[huwie]

I liked having companions with a "look" of their own, I always thought it was a shame to dress Morrigan in something non-witchy looking simply to get better stats. The same would have applied to Merril, in particular, since her costume seemed quite unique.

As I've said elsewhere, it also seemed odd that the same armour would magically grow or shrink to fit anyone from Oghren to Sten, and that Wade's bespoke armour performed the same no matter who wore it.

It was frustrating finding stuff in DA2 and being unable to use it, though. I'd have preferred just to get the coin.

[TJSolo]

Hunter-Wolf wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Torchlight is about loot, it is fun.
Recettear is about loot, it is fun.
Borderlands
is about loot, it is fun. Granted it is a shooter with RPG elements but
the elements in question are skills, levels, and loot.

The
sifting through loot argument is standardfare for some folks that don't
want to spend time checking out gear but still for some damn reason
insist to play RPGs. I played an RPG where the developer listened to
that argument and got rid of sifting through loot and the end result was
more tedious and awkard than loot bags. That game was Fable 3.

All these games alongside Diablo involve loot and managing but only a single character ... non of them involve managing more than half-a-dozen characters ... big huge difference.

Why has this crutch been brought up three times? There are many party based RPGs that have loot and customizable gear, however my point was only to address RPGs that focus on loot/gear and are fun while doing so.
Recettear btw has 7 characters to equip with an 8 being more or less secret.

Besides .. what's with the extremity .. it's either i have to spend hours sifting through tons of items for 8 characters or it is no RPG at all .. WTH ... there is too much sifting in DA:O simple and clear .. reducing that chore isn't making it any less of an RPG .. RPGS aren't busy work and chores .... increasing the number of upgrades/mods and allowing some color/parts tinkering would hav been more than enough.

The extremity is of your own making.

Modifié par TJSolo, 03 avril 2011 - 12:18 .

[Raptr569]

I'm in a love hate relationship with this system.

I love the fact that charactors all look really individual but I hate the fact that the armour isn't just stuff you can go and buy like DA:O.

As for scrolling through stats I kind of miss it and kind of don't. Just because the first choice team got the good stuff and the 2nd choice guys get relegated to the sub par gear and with this system armour is also equal.

[TJSolo]

I don't disagree that RPGs about loot can be fun (I love me some Diablo) but I'm just not sure that Dragon Age is one of those games. I don't reminisce about the time I equipped Steel Gloves +1 on Alistair, but I do remember the time when he broke my character's heart.

That is odd. The entire reason I replied to you was because you implied just that.
I am not saying that the only way loot can be fun is if the entire game is devoted to it. DAO had lot, it allowed the player to gear/spec the party as wanted, and was fine for it.  The ability to tweak gear in DAO was not about dungeon diving for loot, it was just about finding better gear as the story progressed.

I might be wrong, but as I recall there is no sort into junk option in
DAO. That feature was the main reason I enjoyed DA2's management more.

The junk feature is in the console versions of DAO and existed for the player to classify certain items as junk to them. No item entered the junk section in DAO without the player deeming it so. Depending on how you play the junk section would be large or small in DAO but in DA2 the is no possible use for the items preclassifed as junk.

I agree that the "action" part of the game can be pretty much whatever
the developer wants it to be. An action game and a tactical game are
both valid approaches. The meta game that surrounds that though must
have a fully customisable inventory, stats based character development,
levels etc. Remove one of those elements and a game is no longer
considered an RPG (see Mass Effect 2).

It is not a matter of removing one element. Over the years many developers have been able to mix and match what conventions they want in their RPGs but the big part is those developers were still wanted the game to be a RPG not a game that has RPG elements. The action RPGs coming from Bioware show signs of confusion on what they are intended to be and just suffer from trying to please too many people.(Oddly enough one group of people that's targetted are admittedly gamers that don't like RPGs.(No matter how you look at that the idea is doomed to failure.))

[Kithayri]

I liked that companions had their own armour/appearance and prefer it over the 'generic leather/plate/robe suit' in DA:O. I had a party of me (rogue), Leiliana and Zevran in one game and all 3 of us were in identical looking armour which was kind of bleh.

However, I think (in DA2) companions should have changed their gear on their own as the years progressed; perhaps a new outfit per chapter to give them a little more life than just the same old gear year after year, but then this can be put into the pile of "thing they could have done, but didn't due to rushing the game" list that has so many entries already

[am_victory]

TJSolo wrote...
The number of characters whose gear can be manage and still remain fun is as subjective as how many companions can be active on a team at one time before it becomes a too many to watch over.

I'll agree with that.

TJSolo wrote...
My comment is simply that RPGs about loot can be fun, period.  You and the OP agreed that loot for 1 character is fun and are now trying to say that loot for more than 1 character is not fun. Given the why RPGs have worked with loot/gear and multiple characters the line that you two are drawing seems arbitrarily crafted to support the decisions of the DA2 dev team.

I don't see why you don't understand what we're saying.  Anything can be fun in short enough bursts, and anything can turn tedious if you have to do it past your point of enjoyment.  Some people don't enjoy number crunching / min-maxing gear.  That would be me.  I'm fine with it for short amounts of time, but then it gets boring.  8 characters worth of gearing up is boring for me.  Some might enjoy it; I don't. 

[Hunter-Wolf]

TJSolo wrote...

That is odd. The entire reason I replied to you was because you implied just that.
I am not saying that the only way loot can be fun is if the entire game is devoted to it. DAO had lot, it allowed the player to gear/spec the party as wanted, and was fine for it.  The ability to tweak gear in DAO was not about dungeon diving for loot, it was just about finding better gear as the story progressed.

And how is finding better gear as the story progresses any different from upgrading your companions gear by finding upgrades as the story progresses ... sticking to by-the-book-defnitions of an RPG (or any genre) for the heck of it makes no sense whatsoever to me.

Besides .. DA most improtant RPG element is the role-playing, choices and impersonating your character while interacting with the other characters ... gear was never that improtant .. it is just there .. so making a change the removes uneccesary busy work and makes the flow of the experiance better is a welcome change by all means.

TJSolo wrote...
It is not a matter of removing one element. Over the years many developers have been able to mix and match what conventions they want in their RPGs but the big part is those developers were still wanted the game to be a RPG not a game that has RPG elements. The action RPGs coming from Bioware show signs of confusion on what they are intended to be and just suffer from trying to please too many people.(Oddly enough one group of people that's targetted are admittedly gamers that don't like RPGs.(No matter how you look at that the idea is doomed to failure.))

Don't speak for people you know nothing about and try to shove your defintion of RPG into their throats .. how can you tell they like or hate RPGs !!!! ...  first of all hybrids between several genres are nothing new ... and just becasue the game has action elements mixed with RPG elements it doesn't suddenly stops being an RPG .. also .. becasue some hate the stagnant and busy work elements of RPGs doesn't mean they hate RPGs .. it's not like RPG genre -according to you- is a godsend free of all earthly flaws .. it is littred with tons of stagnation and flaws ever since D&D came to existance ... it's seems that the problem here is that your defintion of RPG is extremely narrow and stagnant  ... that's all there is to it.

DA was never an item centric game (like Diablo and Torchlight) and will never be ... so removing the companions armor equipping isn't much of a big deal .. there is way more good that comes from it than bad.

TJSolo wrote...
Why has this crutch been brought up three times? There are many party
based RPGs that have loot and customizable gear, however my point was
only to address RPGs that focus on loot/gear and are fun while doing so.

Recettear btw has 7 characters to equip with an 8 being more or less secret.

Most if not all gear centric games have only one character .. games that have 3 or more party members usually limit the gear choices and the item game in them is just there .. and usually "meh" and has extremely linear item progression that's just there for tradition (for the heck of it in other words) .. having a full party to manage is clealry something that needs fixing/tweaking .. becasue there is something called "TOO MUCH SIFTING" .. it exists.

TJSolo wrote...
The extremity is of your own making.

lols .. doubt that .. others saw what i saw ... let me remind you with your own words --> Why has this crutch been brought up three times?

[Zkyire]

I love the change.

Would you rather it be like Origins, where you can give your companions generic suits of armour to make them look exactly like everyone else in the game?

Or would you rather they have their own, cool-looking, unique sets of armour that set them apart from everyone else?

I choose the latter.

[Si-Shen]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

I love the change.

Would you rather it be like Origins, where you can give your companions generic suits of armour to make them look exactly like everyone else in the game?

Or would you rather they have their own, cool-looking, unique sets of armour that set them apart from everyone else?

I choose the latter.

It has a lot to do with personal opinion and the type of RPG player you are.  I view myself as a traditional RPG player, so I actually don't mind putting "Suit A plate" on a warrior.  I always thought changing suits of armor were a step forward in RPGs. 

That said, there are ways to ensure that armor looks the same on an NPC, no matter what you put them in.  Simply lock the appearance, so that even if you have merril wearing "Robes of Fallen Leaf" instead of "Merril's Funky Chain Robes", they still look like the default funky chain.
(note if you don't like my made up robe names, make up your own! LOL)

Its all personal opinion and in the end, it does not make or break my game that my compaions armor does not change so I don't mind a lot, its just not my preference.

[1varangian]

A unique look for companions sounds good on paper.

But in DA2 it backfires horribly. Your companions looking exactly the same for 10 years and their entire level progression while Hawke changes regularily creates a bad disparity. If you choose that path you have to provide significant upgrades to their look to reflect progression. This makes DA2 companions feel flat compared to Origins companions who progress with you in a believable way.

Progression is the key here. Remembering how modest a character looked like when she first joined you, and seeing her 10 levels later in impressive gear. Radical changes are good too instead of just slapping more shoulder pads on the same look.

For some reason the companion armor didn't bother me in ME2. I'm guessing it must be the 3rd person camera and only really playing Shepard. One of many examples of things that work in Mass Effect but fail in DA.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I find this great armor which I really like to use for my characters, but I can't. I wish I could. The only reason that I can think of is for economic reasons. Now BW only has to make the armor fit to the player character and doesn't have to worry about dwarfs and elves. That's probably also why we can only play as a human. I wouldn't be surprised if this whole idea was an afterthought. The restrictions on some of the armor suggests to me that at one point in development armor was equipable to all.

Edit: To the previous poster... I didn't like companion specific armor in ME2 either. For the same reasons you mention for DA2. That was even worse. You could buy "other" armor (read "retextured" armor) as DLCs. Talking about economic reasons...

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 04 avril 2011 - 02:06 .

[Hunter-Wolf]

1varangian wrote...

Progression is the key here. Remembering how modest a character looked like when she first joined you, and seeing her 10 levels later in impressive gear. Radical changes are good too instead of just slapping more shoulder pads on the same look.

Aveline clothes/armor does progress .. her armor changes as the story progresses (and for logical reasons) ... it of course would have been nice if all the characters changes clothes after time jumps .. but alas .. either way it is far from a game breaker for me.

[Rockpopple]

It would have been better if there were actual graphical changes to the companion armor upgrades, like you said. There is a little of that, especially if you're in a relationship with one of them, but not enough for my tastes.

[Heather Cline]

I don't care either way for companion armor in DA2, same with DA:O.

Only gripe I have with accessories is the star system, it makes no sense especially if you have two items that give the exact same stat boosts but one has 4 stars and one has 2 or 3 stars. Seriously it's dumb.

[Rockpopple]

lol. That got me too. First time I saw that I was like... whuh? Why is this +5 Stamina/Mana better than THIS +5 Stamina/Mana? What's going on?!?! Where AM I?!!? ... and it just went on from there.

[Dragoonlordz]

I am of the opinion that it would have been better to keep what was than what has become. More so to the fact I object to having to buy 'customes' at an additional price on top of retail one paid for what I class as more the 'sims' appeal. It would be a lot better to have a large selection if they was going down this route in the first place in the actual $40-$60 product to start with. I however like customisation and not a streamlined version of it but thats just my opinion. I think these things would have been better tested in a new title or series that wasn't already in motion and had built a large fanbase that really didn't wish to be used as guinea pigs for the trial and error approach that in the long run makes us buy DLC costume packs for extra prices on top of what we paid. This route was taken in ME2 and I did not like it one bit.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 avril 2011 - 04:48 .

[Ramus Quaritch]

Even ME2, with it's streamlined elements, gave you more than one look for your companions (three for some companions if you download the appearance packs). In DA2 the only changes in appearance come when you romance someone or when you do Aveline's quest for example. It's sad to say that ME2 has more rpg depth than DA2 in some areas. There was also a lot more flexibility in regards to what weapons your companions could use in ME 2. That is also something DA2 is lacking. Seriously? Fenris does not know how to use a shield?

[Lumikki]

StingingVelvet wrote...

People more concerned with looks than gameplay bother me. Equipping your party members is gameplay... them looking pretty and unique is just looks. Gameplay > Looks.

I disagree.

It depense what kind of gameplay. If gameplay is just playing with statical attributes, that's not really good gameplay. Because visuality can also affect the role-playing experience as how the game world feels. If you talk generally combat vs visuality, I would agree. Because without good gameplay, there isn't much point to have good visuality. But as we talk in this thread armors, stats as gameplay in armors aren't more important than they visual look. It's about impression too, not just numeric gameplay.

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 avril 2011 - 05:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Ramus Quaritch wrote...

Even ME2, with it's streamlined elements, gave you more than one look for your companions (three for some companions if you download the appearance packs). In DA2 the only changes in appearance come when you romance someone or when you do Aveline's quest for example. It's sad to say that ME2 has more rpg depth than DA2 in some areas. There was also a lot more flexibility in regards to what weapons your companions could use in ME 2. That is also something DA2 is lacking. Seriously? Fenris does not know how to use a shield?

Agreed, even with ME3 they have said they are bringing back some of the RPG elements due to the reaction from the fans and will be interesting to see if DA3 does the same or continues down this negative downward spiral and not realising when it is they made mistakes.
 
As for Fenris my opinion of him from the get go was he didn't know the difference between his arse and his elbow. So I'm not surprised.

[nicethugbert]

I played the game just fine with the companion armor. I don't see the problem. It does make sure the NPCs have their own personal style. And, I certainly wouldn't want to cover up Isabella.

[barryl89]

I liked it, it makes no sense that the character is dressing his companions. It was creepy, looking at them half naked. I agree with people who like it but would have preffered alternate unique armour for them. I suspect this will be addressed in DLC, however.

Also, those harping on about RPG elements. What? You mean playing dolly elements surely! RPG's are about controlling a single character who's actions are controlled by you. Your companions should be independant. Why should fenris suddenly change the combat style he trained for years to perfect? You can't just suddenly adapt to using a different combat style on a whim.

I suppose they could have implemented the option to change companions tendencies over jumps forward in time. Maybe Aveline decides that she wants to be a two hander because Shields are for Chevaliers. Maybe Fenris decides that abandoning his fighting style will bring him freedom.

So, I've managed to argue with myself in one post

[Abispa]

I'm neither here nor there on the whole "iconic appearance," but I agree that some modest change should be apparent with each upgrade, even it it were merely color or give Isabelle some pants (though her outfit does make her "extracurricular activities" easier to perform, I guess). And I found SO MANY pairs of pants during my adventures.

[brightblueink]

Abispa wrote...

I'm neither here nor there on the whole "iconic appearance," but I agree that some modest change should be apparent with each upgrade, even it it were merely color or give Isabelle some pants (though her outfit does make her "extracurricular activities" easier to perform, I guess). And I found SO MANY pairs of pants during my adventures.

If you tried to slap a pair of pants on Isabela she'd probably give you lip for trying to force her to act like a "respectable" person. Do I think she looks silly without pants? Yes, yes I do, but she's a grown woman that my character just happens to know, not my toddler that hasn't learned how to dress herself yet. I can't tell one of my friends how to dress just because I think they look silly or ****ty, why should I be able to tell my companions how to dress?

Honestly, I think it's MORE like an RPG to not be able to tell the characters what to wear, even if it doesn't suit them. My role is the Champion of Kirkwall, not as Isabela's stylist or a god from another dimension impanting ideas into characters heads to wear outfits that completely clash with their personalities. It was much, much more jarring to me to have Wynne running around in a skimpy barbarian dress, Lelianna wearing apprentice robes from the circle dispite not being a mage, and Morrigan wearing a glorified nightgown with a ridiculous hat. (And yes, they all ended up wearing stuff like that for a time in DA:O on my playthrough based on the stats and what I had handy.)

I'm not at all against customization--I'm the sort of person that has my wallpaper set to shuffle every 30 minutes because I love to collect desktop wallpaper that fits my interests and personality. But if I'm really going to be customizing my characters I want it to be customizing my characters, not putting my characters into ill-fitting outfits that I think are hideous just because I want them to have higher stats. That has nothing to do with roleplaying or even being able to choose how I really want my characters to look.

Now, do I wish you had a few different outfits to choose from like we did in ME2, or that the upgrades were reflected a bit in companion's outfits? Yes, yes I do. But if I had to choose between Origin's system and II's system, I would definitely pick the "unique look" system every time.