213 réponses à ce sujet

[MorrigansLove]

I agree with everyone saying how the gifts in DA:O made the approval metre kinda pointless. That's why I play the game WITHOUT picking up any gifts expect for ones that add to the plot.

[upsettingshorts]

MorrigansLove wrote...

I agree with everyone saying how the gifts in DA:O made the approval metre kinda pointless. That's why I play the game WITHOUT picking up any gifts expect for ones that add to the plot.

Isn't that more or less what Dragon Age 2 actually did with the gift mechanic?

[Aaleel]

MorrigansLove wrote...

I agree with everyone saying how the gifts in DA:O made the approval metre kinda pointless. That's why I play the game WITHOUT picking up any gifts expect for ones that add to the plot.

Yeah I liked pretty much everything about the Origins approval system except for the gifts.  I liked how you didn't get bonuses based of it, but your companions did.  Like you inspired them to fight harder through leadership. People had to actually like you and approve of you to romance them.  The gifts allowed you to avoid the consequences of your actions and messed the system up.  Far too many.

[MorrigansLove]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

I agree with everyone saying how the gifts in DA:O made the approval metre kinda pointless. That's why I play the game WITHOUT picking up any gifts expect for ones that add to the plot.

Isn't that more or less what Dragon Age 2 actually did with the gift mechanic?

Yep. Very glad they did, too.

[hoorayforicecream]

Aaleel wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

I agree with everyone saying how the gifts in DA:O made the approval metre kinda pointless. That's why I play the game WITHOUT picking up any gifts expect for ones that add to the plot.

Yeah I liked pretty much everything about the Origins approval system except for the gifts.  I liked how you didn't get bonuses based of it, but your companions did.  Like you inspired them to fight harder through leadership. People had to actually like you and approve of you to romance them.  The gifts allowed you to avoid the consequences of your actions and messed the system up.  Far too many.

How did you feel about the friendship/rivalry bonus system? I really wish that it scaled more like the DAO system (as the relationship grows, so does the bonus), but on the other hand, I did like how the friendship bonuses tended to favor more of a synergy with Hawke (e.g. Aveline takes damage for Hawke, Isabela and Hawke both gain attack speed, etc.), whereas Rivalry seemed to emphasize the loner-style nature. I thought it was a nice little bit of difference between them.

[upsettingshorts]

I liked a lot of what they did in DA2 with "approval,"but a couple of occasions where they went off the "Friend/Rivalry is about the companion's big issues" house rule are frustrating not only to me but if the forums are any indication, a lot of people.

Turning down romantic advances for example.

What does, "Sorry Anders I ain't interested because, duh, Isabela!" have to do with the mage/templar conflict? Why did Hawke gain rivalry for something totally unrelated to Anders' core issue? It should have been consistent.

As a mechanic in concept though I like it a lot and hope they continue to develop it.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 août 2011 - 11:14 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I liked a lot of what they did in DA2 with "approval,"but a couple of occasions where they went off the "Friend/Rivalry is about the companion's big issues" house rule are frustrating not only to me but if the forums are any indication, a lot of people.

Turning down romantic advances for example.

What does, "Sorry Anders I ain't interested because, duh, Isabela!" have to do with the mage/templar conflict? Why did Hawke gain rivalry for something totally unrelated to Anders' core issue? It should have been consistent.

As a mechanic in concept though I like it a lot and hope they continue to develop it.

I actually think color coding the two of them differently would have made a huge difference. The fact that they went with red and blue made so many players feel like Rivalry is "bad" and Friendship is "good" that it really colored their perceptions. Friendship and Rivalry perhaps weren't the best names, but the fact that they used colors that are so ingrained with meaning in western culture was a huge factor in it. It's nearly impossible to shake the feeling that you just did something bad when you get a big red icon with a number, because of all the other things that appear in red (taking damage, heartbreak, etc.).

There's a huge amount of subliminal significance humans ascribe to color, and I really wonder what would have happened if they had changed them to, say, blue (friend) and green (rival).

[Aaleel]

hoorayforicecream wrote...


How did you feel about the friendship/rivalry bonus system? I really wish that it scaled more like the DAO system (as the relationship grows, so does the bonus), but on the other hand, I did like how the friendship bonuses tended to favor more of a synergy with Hawke (e.g. Aveline takes damage for Hawke, Isabela and Hawke both gain attack speed, etc.), whereas Rivalry seemed to emphasize the loner-style nature. I thought it was a nice little bit of difference between them.

I liked the fewer gifts and I liked how the relationships changed, and romances changed due what side of the the meter you were on.  BUT..rivalry to me has always been two people competing for the same thing, and the person competing against you is your rival.  I think the system was not named correctly. 

Like when I didn't give Merrill the tool, that was hate, not rivalry, and no way should I have been able to get a heart option after that IMHO. 

Then there was Fenris.  A former slave who barely even knew me at the time.  I take on a slave right in front of him, then there was a smary/whitty response to pretty much rub it in, and he stays with me?  I just didn't make sense, he would have tried to cut me down on the spot lol.

I would have liked to see some stronger real time consequences to some things that really hurt companions deeply.

[upsettingshorts]

That's a good point. Even with more neutral coloring I still think having any reaction to a romantic decision (Friend for flirty, Rival for disinterest) violates the principles of the system as described by the writers.

Why - to cite an example - would Phil the Dairy Farmer, whose life is built around cheese, decide you're a rival simply because you don't want to sleep with him? It's just not related.

[bleetman]

I much preferred gifts that triggered dialogue scenes and resulted in a decent amount of either friendship or rivalry depending on where you currently where over DA1's drag-it-over 'Is that for me? Wow! I forgive you for slaughtering those innocents earlier!' style strangeness.

Aaleel wrote...

Like when I didn't give Merrill the tool, that was hate, not rivalry, and no way should I have been able to get a heart option after that IMHO.

Then there was Fenris. A former slave who barely even knew me at the time. I take on a slave right in front of him, then there was a smary/whitty response to pretty much rub it in, and he stays with me? I just didn't make sense, he would have tried to cut me down on the spot lol.

I would have liked to see some stronger real time consequences to some things that really hurt companions deeply.

I'll agree on the second example, not so much on the first. I won't go into it all that much as it's a pretty well trodden can of worms, but aside from everything else it's about the only way to get sufficient rivalry with Merrill to unlock her romance without being painfully anti-magic (which makes romancing an apostate blood mage a little bizarre) or plain old being a complete bastard to her.

Having a distinction between 'agree to disagree' and 'I hate all that you stand for but love you anyway' would've been good though, yes.

[MorrigansLove]

Probably the only complaint I have about Origins, really. Well, apart from the graphics not being all that good...

[hoorayforicecream]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's a good point. Even with more neutral coloring I still think having any reaction to a romantic decision (Friend for flirty, Rival for disinterest) violates the principles of the system as described by the writers.

Why - to cite an example - would Phil the Dairy Farmer, whose life is built around cheese, decide you're a rival simply because you don't want to sleep with him? It's just not related.

I didn't disagree with your comment on the romances. In fact, rivalmancing Isabela is incredibly difficult *because* of how much friendship you gain from flirting with her to initialize the romance.

That said, what should the terms be named instead of friendship and rivalry? I concur that they are not named well.

[upsettingshorts]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

That said, what should the terms be named instead of friendship and rivalry? I concur that they are not named well.

Oh I think they'd be fine if they are limited to the scope the writers seemed to intend.  

[ademska]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's a good point. Even with more neutral coloring I still think having any reaction to a romantic decision (Friend for flirty, Rival for disinterest) violates the principles of the system as described by the writers.

Why - to cite an example - would Phil the Dairy Farmer, whose life is built around cheese, decide you're a rival simply because you don't want to sleep with him? It's just not related.

there are a couple of problems with that analogy, though. the first is that phil the dairy farmer has other opinions and, while they may not be remotely of the same import as his opinions on cheese, he still assigns judgment to people who disagree. most of the f/r points come from the characters' Big Issues, but some of them don't.

phil the dairy farmer is also seriously, seriously into cheese. like, he's crazy about it - literally crazy - and because he's so crazy, anyone who disagrees is simultaneously out to get him and challenging his own opinions on cheese. anders' rivalry path is about having no allies in his mage cause (and, eventually, coming to accept his merger with justice as a terrible decision, but that's much later on). hawke's heartbreak option is worded very harshly, and it's pretty easy to imagine that anders feels rejected more than just romantically.

sidenote: i would like to eat you


edit: my point stands with isabela, though perhaps more weakly. the rival path is about disagreement. isabela enjoys being flirted with and likely sees it as synergic personality-wise.

Modifié par ademska, 01 août 2011 - 11:50 .

[upsettingshorts]

ademska wrote...

there are a couple of problems with that analogy, though.

Take it up with Mary Kirby, though she did call the example improbable. 

[hoorayforicecream]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

That said, what should the terms be named instead of friendship and rivalry? I concur that they are not named well.

Oh I think they'd be fine if they are limited to the scope the writers seemed to intend.  

Hm... that seems reasonable enough I guess. Though I think that some folks would also like some way to just anger Phil the Cheese Farmer enough to leave. I still think the color scheme needs fixing though. Would it just be simple enough to make romance related choices just add whatever approval you're currently at?

Perhaps disallow romantic initiation until a certain approval percentage, so that you are firmly in friendship or rivalry before starting the courtship. You can flirt a little, but the romance won't go anywhere until you flirt *and* initiate (via a conversation I guess). That's how I would do it anyway.

[upsettingshorts]

I'd keep the romantic part separate and simply use the Friend/Rival to color how its presented.

Romantic plotlines should and ought to be optional to the extent that you gain no tangible bonuses or suffer penalties by pursuing them. They are flavor content and character development. In other words, all story, no gameplay.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 août 2011 - 11:55 .

[ademska]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Take it up with Mary Kirby, though she did call the example improbable. 

NO I AM TAKING IT UP WITH YOU

after reading it, i actually agree with most parts of her analogy, and i still think the rejection rivalry increases fit (though perhaps it's not a product of authorial intent.)

that said, i'd also prefer there were no bonuses either way.

Modifié par ademska, 01 août 2011 - 11:55 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'd keep the romantic part separate and simply use the Friend/Rival to color how its presented.

Romantic plotlines should and ought to be optional to the extent that you gain no tangible bonuses or penalties by pursuing them. They are flavor content and character development. In other words, all story, no gameplay.

The amount of gameplay they provide is really minimal. There's more than enough Rivalry and Friendship points available outside of the romances that the romance-specific ones are mostly just for flavor. Adding them helps emphasize that the romance actually has an effect on the character. Separating the two would feel weird... we're lovers, but not friends? That seems inherently jarring to me.

[upsettingshorts]

That may be true but their impact on the player's perception of their gameplay relevance is enough to cause several hundred homophobes (approx.) to flip out at the fact telling Anders they weren't into dudes got them +25 Rivalry.

I'm just saying that such reactions could be avoided if the system stuck to its guns. Not that I think BioWare ought to be catering to such responses, but it seems so... avoidable.

[hoorayforicecream]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That may be true but their impact on the player's perception of their gameplay relevance is enough to cause several hundred homophobes (approx.) to flip out at the fact telling Anders they weren't into dudes got them +25 Rivalry.

I'm just saying that such reactions could be avoided if the system stuck to its guns. Not that I think BioWare ought to be catering to such responses, but it seems so... avoidable.

Well, in this particular case, it seems just like they should have provided better options overall.

"Sorry Anders, I don't think of you in that way. I think we work much better as friends." +5 friendship, heartbreak
"No, Anders. Everything about you repulses me." +5 rivalry, heartbreak
"Oh, Anders.... I would believe it if it comes from you." +5 friendship, romance initiated
"I... I don't know what to do. I can't stand what you say, but I am drawn to you..." +5 rivalry, romance initiated
"MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A LOVELY RIVER OF LOVING, LOVE" - Anders leaves party. ANDERS PROPOSES MARRIAGE (edited)

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 02 août 2011 - 12:08 .

[Darth Krytie]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That may be true but their impact on the player's perception of their gameplay relevance is enough to cause several hundred homophobes (approx.) to flip out at the fact telling Anders they weren't into dudes got them +25 Rivalry.

I'm just saying that such reactions could be avoided if the system stuck to its guns. Not that I think BioWare ought to be catering to such responses, but it seems so... avoidable.

Well, in this particular case, it seems just like they should have provided better options overall.

"Sorry Anders, I don't think of you in that way. I think we work much better as friends." +5 friendship, heartbreak
"No, Anders. Everything about you repulses me." +5 rivalry, heartbreak
"Oh, Anders.... I would believe it if it comes from you." +5 friendship, romance initiated
"I... I don't know what to do. I can't stand what you say, but I am drawn to you..." +5 rivalry, romance initiated
"MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A LOVELY RIVER OF LOVING, LOVE" - Anders leaves party. ANDERS PROPOSES MARRIAGE (edited)

lol...that's great.

I thought it made sense that you got rivalry points for saying no to a relationship, the more harsh the let down, the more points earned.

The only problem was that players associated "rivalry" with "bad" and it really wasn't the same in DA2 as it was in DA1.

[Shuma Gorath]

Filament wrote...

If people bashing DA2 wouldn't present their opinions as if they were statements of fact perhaps they wouldn't be so rankling to people whose opinions conflict with those 'facts' as to warrant the snark. However people who bash DA2 are liable to snark at any hint of praise for DA2 no matter how tepid.

If people liking DA2 wouldn't present their opinions as if they were statements of fact perhaps they wouldn't be so rankling to people whose opinions conflict with those 'facts' as to warrant the snark. However people who love DA2 are liable to snark at any hint of hate for DA2 no matter how tepid.

Now the above statements have some truth to it.

Let's stop pretending one side is holier then the other.

[Black Arachnia]

Shuma Gorath wrote...

Filament wrote...

If people bashing DA2 wouldn't present their opinions as if they were statements of fact perhaps they wouldn't be so rankling to people whose opinions conflict with those 'facts' as to warrant the snark. However people who bash DA2 are liable to snark at any hint of praise for DA2 no matter how tepid.

If people liking DA2 wouldn't present their opinions as if they were statements of fact perhaps they wouldn't be so rankling to people whose opinions conflict with those 'facts' as to warrant the snark. However people who love DA2 are liable to snark at any hint of hate for DA2 no matter how tepid.

Now the above statements have some truth to it.

Let's stop pretending one side is holier then the other.

That can't be right...those that love DA2 are Angels. The Chantry says so.

LoL