320 réponses à ce sujet

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Really? What's the point of having registered user only forums if you can bypass it without any problems?

[xkg]

mrcrusty wrote...

Really? What's the point of having registered user only forums if you can bypass it without any problems?

No clue really.
But in case you don't belive me:

http://social.biowar...75043/2#7208098

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Oh, I believe you, I'm not going to do it or anything. Just wondering the logic in setting up registered users only forums, then legally allowing it to be bypassed. I assume the reason they'd set it up is so only people who have bought the game(s) may post, but then letting anyone with basic googling skills in seems a bit counter productive.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

- Fenris remains a mage-hater.

Yet Hawke can convince Fenris to defend the mages from the Templars. I don't think Fenris will ever love mages (other than Hawke if you romance him with a mage Hawke) he's more of a slaver hater than a mage hater.

- Merrill remains the cute, cuddly elf who still believes she's in the right despite everything.

Uh no. Merrill will admit she's wrong and even destroy the mirror if Hawke is mean to her after her final loyalty quest in act III.

- Anders remains the first mage terrorist of Kirkwall.

That depends on your POV, remember one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.  

- Varric... is Varric. He could have done without the personal quest and nothing would have changed.

I have to agree with you on Varric.

- Aveline... same as Varric.

She goes from a Templar's widow to merc/smuggler to a city guard to a lonely Captain of the Guard to happily married Captain of the Guard.

- Sebastian sticks to his motto, "The Chantry is good. Period."

Unless you spare Anders at the end of act III and he then sets out to become the prince of Starkhaven. 

Isabella can, given your choices, truly evolve as a character since she's faced with a choice that ultimately goes against the kind of person she thought she was. Siblings have so little gameplay time that's not even fair to judge.

Bethany becomes a strong willed and determined and more able to stand up to her older sibling if she becomes a Grey Warden.

Carver stops whining about being in your shadow and finds his place if he becomes a Grey Warden.

Take two minutes to ponder this: these are characters you've known for ten or so years and they still behave like the first day you met them. Nothing has changed in them, their drives are the same, their thinking as well. Your actions, your behaviour during this period of time should resonate on your allies and, why not, perhaps convince them to address their issues differently, rather than having Hawke choose between the paragon/sarcastic/renegade options to solve their problems for them.

We've arrived at the friendship/rivalry system. I don't like it, I don't want it. It forces me to choose the "good" option over the "bad" option just so I can have everyone on my side. Why not remove it altogether, play the game how you see fit, and then see how your behavior affects those around you? The only problem I see with this is that you'd have to actually show that your actions, your behavior, influence those around you. DA2 doesn't show us this and so resorts to the paragon/sarcastic/renegade + friendship/rivalry combo to persuade you that your actions have an impact. Since every outcome is fixed, I'd say my character's impact is rather poor (e.g.: just ask Grand Cleric Elthina at the end of Act III). It is not a superior system, in fact, it's detrimental to gameplay.

This is not to say DAO's system is the best out there. It isn't. But DAO, through all those lines of dialogue that are practically the trademark of any RPG, gets us to connect with the characters in a way DA2 never does.

No, it doesn't it actually helps the gameplay because the characters actually do CHANGE in how they act around Hawke.
Merrill becomes colder and more self-assured if you become a rival (and you can romance her as a rival) to her. Isabella will skip town with the Tome is you become a rival.
Anders will have nothing to do with Hawke if you become a rival. 
Varric and Aveline become less trusting of Hawke. 
Bethany become willing to kill you if you side against the mages if she's a circle mage. Which in Bethany's case is a MAJOR character development going from some one who idolizes her older sister/brother even when s/he is mean and at times almost cruel to her to fighting them.
Carver becomes unwilling to kill you if you side against the Templars if he's one of them.  

Outside of Leliana, Alistair, Loghain, and Morrigan none of the other companions in DA:O have much in character development. 

Modifié par Cyberstrike nTo, 04 juillet 2011 - 02:45 .

[Cutlasskiwi]

sleepyowlet wrote...

Xalen wrote...

Let me see if I understand this correctly.
We want to to have a discussion that will most certainly include a great deal of spoilers. Therefore I offered to take it to spoiler section (you know, the appropriate place to have such a discussion).

So...you have a problem with not discussing spoilerific topics in non-spoiler forums?

Ahhh, now I get it...oh wait, I don't.

*sigh*
You have to have the game registered if you want to take part in discussions in the spoiler section. I rented the game and returned it, so I don't have it registered (well, actually, registering games is just one of these things I don't do in general), so I get locked out of these discussions. So yes, I have a problem with it moving to a place I don't have access to.

Got it now?

But you have to hand it to the admins... limiting that section to those with the game registered (meaning those who are more likely to like the game) is a pretty neat way of cutting down on the uncomfortable criticism thing...

Not really no. That section is filled with 'uncomfortable' criticism too. But it's always more fun to try and blame things on some kind of conspiracy.

[Sutekh]

@Cyberstrike nTo:
I agree with your character development analysis but,

Isabella will skip town with the Tome is you become a rival.

No. She'll skip town if she's too neutral. Past a certain % in rivalry, she'll stay.

Anders will have nothing to do with Hawke if you become a rival.

Yes he will. And he will evolve quite interestingly, as a matter of fact, becoming more at odds with Justice than in the friendship path.

And this is exactly why the friendship/rivalry system is much better than approval/disapproval, even if far from perfect. With the latter, you had to become a dirty manipulator if you wanted companions to stay by your side, always had to agree with them, except on a few occasions. You could play an honest game, but it came with a price (no companion quest, no buffs, and sometimes no companion). The system in itself rewarded hypocrisy.

Outside of Leliana, Alistair, Loghain, and Morrigan none of the other companions in DA:O have much in character development. 

I beg to differ. A romanced Zevran evolves a lot. Sten can change some of his views too, especially if the Warden is female. Shale evolves so much that she's considering reverting back to Shayle. Oghren evolves, in a way, but is back to square one in Awakening. Even Wynne can be softened re: duty first and Abominations. It's more discreet because, with the exception of maybe Zevran, it's told and not shown, but it's there.

Modifié par Sutekh, 04 juillet 2011 - 03:45 .

[DreGregoire]

I'm not really sure comparing the success of the systems is realistic in terms of characters leaving because they don't agree with the way you have done things versus the system in DA2 where they stay no matter what.

If you recruit a companion:

In DAO we were constantly traveling and were together every step of the way, so when you totally disagreed with each other there was no way to avoid each other; hence the way some companions will leave because of these disagreements.

In DA2 we are pretty much stuck in the same city constantly being thrown into each other's paths with no real way to avoid the occasional run in, so the option of I disagree with you, so I'm going my seperate way so I never have to deal with you again, doesn't work so well.

Both games have the pc's success being impacted by those around them. It's not that they couldn't do things on their own, but that things go more smoothly with the aid of the companions.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 04 juillet 2011 - 03:58 .

[Sutekh]

DreGregoire wrote...

I'm not really sure comparing the systems is realistic in terms of characters leaving because they don't agree with the way you have done things versus the system in DA2 where they stay no matter what.

Agreed. Which is why I said "far from perfect".

What I really don't like in DAO's way to handle things is that the game mechanics force you to "be nice, always agree", while DA2 just gives you a different outcome, but still a rewarding one. You can still play a honest blunt Warden, but you'll miss out on many things doing so, starting with companion quests.

One isn't more realistic or better than the other in terms of roleplaying. DA2's better (IMHO) result-wise due to game mechanics. 

[DreGregoire]

I always viewed the rivalry/friendship system as a natural progression of the one from DAO but it definately needs more improvement. What I really believe is that it needs to be more multi-faceted, meaning that it isn't just a simple sliding scale but perhaps mutliple scales keeping track of different aspects. But I know realistically given what I've heard on these forums from developers; making something more intricate isn't their priority.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:32 .

[Aaleel]

I never bought the whole friendship/rivalry system, it just wasn't realistic to me.

I have a friend in real life who is a police officer. If I'm doing illegal things and breaking law, especially in his presence. He is not going to continue to hang around with me or be my friend just in a different way now. If some believes in one thing that deeply and you're always doing the opposite, they're out.

Or if someone is really against something like slavery, and you take on slaves. They are not going to continue to be your friend, rival, or have any kind of relationship with you.

Some of the stuff you say to companions are flat out putdowns, people are not going to continue to follow you. Some small things people will overlook, and chalk it up to everyone isn't the same. But a lot of the stuff in this game was too big for people to say OK the nature of our relationship just changed but I'll still follow you. And I'll still ask you for help with the most important thing in my life at the moment.

And honestly, rivalry is about competition. I want to be better than you. If you get a job, I want to get a better job. If you a boyfriend/girlfriend, I want to get one too, and one better looking, with a better job than yours. You get a house, my house is better than yours.

Or you play a sport for different schools, and you're friends off the court but you go at it on the court.

But I just never bought the friendship/rivalry system. Origins had way too many gifts, but if someone wasn't inspired by what you were doing, or didn't think highly of you, they didn't confide in you or trust you with something so dear to them. Which to me is realistic, I know I wouldn't, why would I. You inspired people, they got buffs and fought harder, just like you'll play harder for a coach who inspires you than for one that doesn't. Once again this is realistic to me.

People seem to just have a problem because there were actually huge consequences for their actions. Which again, I think is realistic. Just too many gifts that helped you avoid the consequences of your words and actions.

Both systems have their issues, and honestly DA2 is named wrong because that is not rivalry, it's more how tolerance.  But I at least found aspects of DA:O realistic, DA2 for the most part I was asking a lot, why would you stay.

Modifié par Aaleel, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:29 .

[Rogue Roxy]

DP

Modifié par Roxy Ferret, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:26 .

[Rogue Roxy]

xkg wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Really? What's the point of having registered user only forums if you can bypass it without any problems?

No clue really.
But in case you don't belive me:

http://social.biowar...75043/2#7208098

You DID notice that Mr. Chicken is now registered, right?

~ Roxy

[DreGregoire]

There have been many discussions on the forums about what rivalry is and although competition can be a huge part of some rivalries it is not the only meaning of rival. And I disagree with the things many people in my life do, but it doesn't keep me from keeping them as friends.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:33 .

[Aaleel]

DreGregoire wrote...

There have been many decisions on the forums about what rivalry is and although competition can be a huge part of some rivalries it is not the only meaning of rival. And I disagree with the things many people in my life do, but it doesn't keep me from keeping them as friends.

I didn't say people don't.  I said if someone does things against your core beliefs, do you keep them as friends or are they more acquaintances .  And moreso If you need something done that is very important to you, life altering, are those the people you're going to go to for help with it?

Edit: And also.  The thing about a rival, is that you're trying to do something, win something, be the best or have the greatest superiority.  The rival is the person who stands in the way of that goal.  Whether is a promotion, sports title, man/woman both of you like.  Rivalry is all about competition, I don't know what other meaning you can give it.

Modifié par Aaleel, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:39 .

[xkg]

Roxy Ferret wrote...

xkg wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Really? What's the point of having registered user only forums if you can bypass it without any problems?

No clue really.
But in case you don't belive me:

http://social.biowar...75043/2#7208098

You DID notice that Mr. Chicken is now registered, right?

~ Roxy

Me ? Yes I know, I was posting in that linked thread back then

Modifié par xkg, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:36 .

[Tirfan]

Aaleel wrote...

I never bought the whole friendship/rivalry system, it just wasn't realistic to me.

I have a friend in real life who is a police officer. If I'm doing illegal things and breaking law, especially in his presence. He is not going to continue to hang around with me or be my friend just in a different way now. If some believes in one thing that deeply and you're always doing the opposite, they're out.

Or if someone is really against something like slavery, and you take on slaves. They are not going to continue to be your friend, rival, or have any kind of relationship with you.

Some of the stuff you say to companions are flat out putdowns, people are not going to continue to follow you. Some small things people will overlook, and chalk it up to everyone isn't the same. But a lot of the stuff in this game was too big for people to say OK the nature of our relationship just changed but I'll still follow you. And I'll still ask you for help with the most important thing in my life at the moment.

And honestly, rivalry is about competition. I want to be better than you. If you get a job, I want to get a better job. If you a boyfriend/girlfriend, I want to get one too, and one better looking, with a better job than yours. You get a house, my house is better than yours.

Or you play a sport for different schools, and you're friends off the court but you go at it on the court.

But I just never bought the friendship/rivalry system. Origins had way too many gifts, but if someone wasn't inspired by what you were doing, or didn't think highly of you, they didn't confide in you or trust you with something so dear to them. Which to me is realistic, I know I wouldn't, why would I. You inspired people, they got buffs and fought harder, just like you'll play harder for a coach who inspires you than for one that doesn't. Once again this is realistic to me.

People seem to just have a problem because there were actually huge consequences for their actions. Which again, I think is realistic. Just too many gifts that helped you avoid the consequences of your words and actions.

Both systems have their issues, and honestly DA2 is named wrong because that is not rivalry, it's more how tolerance.  But I at least found aspects of DA:O realistic, DA2 for the most part I was asking a lot, why would you stay.

This, and well, okay, the approval/disapproval system was one aspect of gameplay where I actually placed restrictions to myself (not doing the "right thing" gameplaywise, but rather doing the right thing RP-wise and not giving gifts, other than those that initiated dialogue, and even gave those only to the characters my character liked)

While the approval-system and bonuses were nice, it did encourage that "agree with everyone"-gaming.. which meant that you were "punished" for RP:ing (I never viewed it that way..) and then there is the fact that DA2 encourages this kind of behaviour too.. (try to play a generally sarcastic/niceguy Hawke who agrees with mages and doesn't like slavery and try to max Fenris friendship or rivalry without sucking up to him and telling him what he wants to hear or telling him what he does not want to hear.. and even then you need some metagaming to bring him only on certain quests)

[DreGregoire]

Aaleel wrote...

[I didn't say people don't.  I said if someone does things against your core beliefs, do you keep them as friends or are they more acquaintances .  And moreso If you need something done that is very important to you, life altering, are those the people you're going to go to for help with it?

It's really about what kind of person you are in reallife isn't it? So in that part it's off topic. From my experience going too deeply into the individual you are in reallife on these types of forums creates too much dissention. What you choose to do with people who do things you don't like and what I choose to do can be complete opposites. And aren't we all very selective with whom we choose to trust different things with? Have we all not needed to bite our tongues around certain people in order to maintain friendships?

Modifié par DreGregoire, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:43 .

[Xalen]

DreGregoire wrote...

I'm not really sure comparing the success of the systems is realistic in terms of characters leaving because they don't agree with the way you have done things versus the system in DA2 where they stay no matter what.

I liked that if in DAO you do something that the companion stands absolutely against you have to fight them (Leliana and the Ashes, Wynne in the Tower etc)
But companions didn't leave you because they disagree with the way you've done things - they leave if their approval was low, period. Since there's no distinction between low approval from a simple disagreement, low approval from despicable actions and low approval just from acting like a dick - it doesn't make much of a difference.
And DA2 friendship/rivalry system has the same problem, actually. DA2 companions have their moments too (like if you made a deal with [oh, f*** you, no-spoiler forum] Anders will break romance with you no matter what), but they are too few.

In defense of DA2, the characters don't "stay" with you though. They just happen to live in the same city with Hawke. You don't have to talk to them. You don't have to be friends with them (or rivals). You don't have to do their quests.

In DA2 we are pretty much stuck in the same city constantly being thrown into each other's paths with no real way to avoid the occasional run in, so the option of I disagree with you, so I'm going my seperate way so I never have to deal with you again, doesn't work so well.

How are they "thrown", exactly? Like I said, you don't have to talk to anybody in this game (like in DAO, actually). Companions don't approach you with their quests unless you specifically ask them. Yes, you can't tell them to GTFO because they are not with you, they are just around. And yes, you can still use them in the party, but why would you if you don't want to deal with them at all?  

Modifié par Xalen, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:44 .

[Aaleel]

DreGregoire wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

[I didn't say people don't.  I said if someone does things against your core beliefs, do you keep them as friends or are they more acquaintances .  And moreso If you need something done that is very important to you, life altering, are those the people you're going to go to for help with it?

It's really about what kind of person you are in reallife isn't it? So in that part it's off topic. From my experience going too deeply into the individual you are in reallife on these types of forums creates too much dissention. What you choose to do with people who do things you don't like and what I choose to do can be complete opposites. And aren't we all very selective with whom we choose to trust different things with? Have we all not needed to bite our tongues around certain people in order to maintain friendships?

Yeah we're selective, that's my point.  If someone has done things you think are immoral, or make them seem untrustworthy a lot.  You'll probably select not to ask that person for help with something that important.  At least I would.  I'm not speaking for or judging anyone else.  That's why I always say 'I would/wouldn't', or 'to me'.

Modifié par Aaleel, 04 juillet 2011 - 04:55 .

[DreGregoire]

Xalen although it's true in DA2 that you don't have to do their quests and you don't have to be their friends etc. You are still in the same city, you are all still working to reach your own goals. And if they become your companion (the ones you actually have a choice about) you cannot get them to leave you. You can, like in DAO, choose not to have them in your party, but just because you as an individual choose not to deal with them does not mean that they don't show up in Hawke's enviroment. Thrown together by events, fate, destiny, whatever you choose to call it. These people even come to your home. There is evidence of them in your home long before you see them there (hightown mansion).

And in order to get that low of a score in DAO to get somebody to leave you would have to do more than just one of the three options you mentioned, unless of course you just gave them onions and coal as gifts. LOL

[DreGregoire]

d

Modifié par DreGregoire, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:48 .

[sleepyowlet]

xkg wrote...

@ sleepyowlet:
If you really care so much about talking in registered users forum :

1 - Click "My Games" -> "Register Game"
2 - Choose PS3 game
3 - Enter this UPC code : 014633195286

Voila ! You have now Dragon Age 2 registered and you can post everywhere.

Oh and don't be affraid. This is perfectly legal - confiremd by the moderator here on BSN.

Thank you! Did just that. As for my comment about the game registering; I wasn't completely serious, but alas, written word sometimes doesn't make the tone clear enough...

[xkg]

DreGregoire wrote...

Here's the thread I started as requested to take the off-topic into another forum that allows spoilers

http://social.biowar...6/index/7797014

I was watching your thread there, and I can see you already have enough of registered users section ? heheheh


Yeah, sorry for my stupid comment.

Modifié par xkg, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:51 .

[Derrp]

DA:O felt like an epic journey

DA2 felt like a voiced offline mmo

[TEWR]

To all the people who say Varric doesn't change, that's not entirely accurate. His Act 2 family quest gives him a chance to come to terms with his brother, provided you bring Anders. He grows past the enmity he holds to his brother and realizes that his family is important.


If you bring him to Fenris' Act 3 quest, he pretty much tells Fenris this.