1027 réponses à ce sujet

[ipgd]

tmp7704 wrote...

It really would, though ;/  I mean, the ability to equip these 'generic' armours would be there for these who can overlook the fact it'd potentially override the unique body build of the character (if there's any). Those who couldn't get past the concept could still simply limit themselves to the 'iconic' appearance selection.

Except for the thing where they end up incidentally limited by being forced to design any humanoid companions within the confines of the generic body model in order to avoid glaring incongruities whenever the companion has to switch into the generic body, or if they choose to ignore that and make jarring, physically divergent designs anyway, potentially end up with another reused environment situation on their hands -- something I have no doubt people would be completely unforgiving about following DA2. You may not care, but never doubt the existence of a massive group of people who will want to use it as an example of how ****ty Bioware is.

Plus, like, I have these opinions. I'm an expert on what my opinions are. I think I have it on good authority when I say something isn't a win for me.

[tmp7704]

ipgd wrote...

You may not care, but never doubt the existence of a massive group of people who will want to use it as an example of how ****ty Bioware is.

Well, it's one of these "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations, with the complaining bound to happen either way. As such i don't think it's really an argument that'd support picking any specific approach.

Plus, like, I have these opinions. I'm an expert on what my opinions are. I think I have it on good authority when I say something isn't a win for me.

However isn't that only because you presume such approach would cause BioWare to design the companions within the confines etc? In other words, if that part is excluded from the picture (and they decide instead to go with the "ohgods the body shape changes with the armour it's so jarring arrrgh" approach) what exactly remains as no-win for you?

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
It really would, though ;/  I mean, the ability to equip these 'generic' armours would be there for these who can overlook the fact it'd potentially override the unique body build of the character (if there's any). Those who couldn't get past the concept could still simply limit themselves to the 'iconic' appearance selection.

Aside from the generic body morphing problem igd is talking about, you're still ignoring gameplay.

The issue is stats + customization. I already described this when talking about the kinds of builds armour would enforce in terms of damage protection + buffs. 

I can create an anti-mage templar Alistair in DA:O with *HUGE* magic resistance... but I have to use the Knight Commander's Plate to do it (+40% magic resistance), i.e. swap out default armour. Even if it somehow had a drop like Morrigain's Robes of Posession (that still leaves the problem of all the time between item drops), you are nevertheless forced into a particular build because of items.

I used this extreme example before, but this suggestion is essentially like saying this:

"I think having generic armours is great, but they all should be much weaker than the iconic ones - say all have ----+200% to damage received and -4 to the primary stat, but +60% to elemental damage and +60% to spell resistance. That way, they force everyone into the same build and if they want to have a different build or one that isn't gimped, they have to use iconic armour."

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
However isn't that only because you presume such approach would cause BioWare to design the companions within the confines etc? In other words, if that part is excluded from the picture (and they decide instead to go with the "ohgods the body shape changes with the armour it's so jarring arrrgh" approach) what exactly remains as no-win for you?

But our opposition to a toggle is because we don't think Bioware would do it. So why even talk about that feature, and not just say that the best option is for Bioware to fully implement both systems and add a toggle? It actually gives everyone what they want anyway. 

[Gunderic]

ipgd wrote...
As far as I am aware, The Witcher, given that it has one PC with a static race and sex, does not have to do minimum 6-7 passes for each set of armor, and I have no idea what relevance it has to this particular topic. On a more general level, I certainly imagine that TW2's 3.5 year development cycle vs. DA2's 16-18 month cycle had something to do with it. Probably also the fact TW2 is a PC exclusive and DA2 was developed concurrently for console. But no, Bioware is just lazy; all developers' situations are exactly the same and must be judged by the same metric.

The Witcher 2 might not have different races/sexes to design for, but they have put far, far more detail in their armour models than either Origins/DA 2 did. I can't imagine that, with their limited resources, designing all those high-res armour sets complete with 3D object models and physics is so much easier than the flat textures we got in DA 2 ( or even Origins for that matter ).

I also found Neverwinter Nights 2's item sets more detailed and unique than those of Origins.

Sigh. No, they do not. That comment was meant as an example of "DA2's characters are evidently more visually iconic because there is more cosplay", not "we specifically made this change so people would cosplay more". But this wouldn't be the BSN if Bioware employees' comments weren't twisted to serve whatever agenda a poster wanted to push at the time. It's a wonder they even bother at all, with the propensity some of you guys have for turning even the most innocuous statements into a sign of the apocalypse.

BioWare wants to use their characters' image for marketing purposes; they think more cosplay will increase their games' recognition. Instead of focusing on the writing, they're prioritizing looks. Instead of making sure the wine tastes good, they want to put a prettier label on the bottle ( and sacrificing gameplay elements for it ), etc.

And they're using *cosplay* as a metric to prove that Dragon Age 2's characters are more popular, even though it sold less, and to justify the use of 'iconic looks'. I don't see any merit in that.

[ipgd]

tmp7704 wrote...

Well, it's one of these "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations, with the complaining bound to happen either way. As such i don't think it's really an argument that'd support picking any specific approach.

Of course it is, it's just giving me an aneurysm to have people repeatedly state it's a perfect solution that would satisfy everyone when it is not. Someone is going to be butt pained here.

However isn't that only because you presume such approach would cause BioWare to design the companions within the confines etc? In other words, if that part is excluded from the picture (and they decide instead to go with the "ohgods the body shape changes with the armour it's so jarring arrrgh" approach) what exactly remains as no-win for you?

Namely that I think the likelihood of them doing something like that post-DA2 is next to 0. They are not going to be able to get away with anything that suggests even half a corner was cut.

Theoretically, it wouldn't bother me personally. Realistically, they're going to have to contend with the people it does bother. And honestly, basing iconic armors off the default model is the easier, cheaper method anyway, so I wouldn't really expect them to devote extra resources to something about five people actually care about as much as I do at the risk of of creating themselves another reused environment debacle.

Modifié par ipgd, 31 août 2011 - 02:57 .

[Gunderic]

ipgd wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

It really would, though ;/  I mean, the ability to equip these 'generic' armours would be there for these who can overlook the fact it'd potentially override the unique body build of the character (if there's any). Those who couldn't get past the concept could still simply limit themselves to the 'iconic' appearance selection.

Except for the thing where they end up incidentally limited by being forced to design any humanoid companions within the confines of the generic body model in order to avoid glaring incongruities whenever the companion has to switch into the generic body

Morrigan got a lot of cosplay though; developers have admitted themselves, i.e. it serves their end-purpose ( popularity, recognition ).

[In Exile]

Gunderic wrote...
BioWare wants to use their characters' image for marketing purposes; they think more cosplay will increase their games' recognition. Instead of focusing on the writing, they're prioritizing looks. Instead of making sure the wine tastes good, they want to put a prettier label on the bottle ( and sacrificing gameplay elements for it ), etc.

But TW2, if we're going by that, already has iconic characters. Every NPC in the game has a fixed outfit (Roche wears one thing, Triss wears one thing, Letho wears one thing) and Geralt has multiple outfits but they're all based on the same thing (and Geralt has a fixed apperance).

So Geralt doesn't wear plate, or a robe, or use a bow, etc. etc. 

TW2 always goes one further than Bioware, design-wise, into these "anti"-RPG features. It was a much better game than DA2, but if you're taking about it in principle, it just full out went 1 step further than DA2 everywhere. 

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

The issue is stats + customization. I already described this when talking about the kinds of builds armour would enforce in terms of damage protection + buffs.

If i understand it right, under the new system the stats are derived either from the 'appearance' slot or, if there is item equipped in the 'gear' slot then that takes precedence. As such, i don't really see a problem here -- if you like both the stats and the looks of armour, you put it in the appearance slot. If you like stats but want different looks, you put the item in the 'gear' slot while the 'appearance' slot holds item that you like the looks of.

In other words you aren't really enforced into wearing something you might not like visually, just to get the advantage of the stats provided by the item..?

edit:

But our opposition to a toggle is because we don't think Bioware would do it. So why even talk about that feature, and not just say that the best option is for Bioware to fully implement both systems and add a toggle? It actually gives everyone what they want anyway.

You lost me here. What toggle are you speaking of? One to either allow or disallow equipping generic armour in addition to 'iconic' ones? That feels quite pointless when instead the game can be made to always allow equipping such gear, and leave it to player's discretion whether they make use of it, or not.

As for why even talk about it -- because Mr.Laidlaw said the system wasn't currently set in stone. So while you choose to believe such enhancement to the system isn't something BioWare would do, it doesn't mean i can't hope for different outcome, and voice my support for it.

Modifié par tmp7704, 31 août 2011 - 03:12 .

[ipgd]

Gunderic wrote...

BioWare wants to use their characters' image for marketing purposes; they think more cosplay will increase their games' recognition. Instead of focusing on the writing, they're prioritizing looks. Instead of making sure the wine tastes good, they want to put a prettier label on the bottle ( and sacrificing gameplay elements for it ), etc.

As far as I am aware, DA's writers are not their artists. If they are diverting any resources away from from anything to make unique companion models happen, it's going to come out of their art department first. Strengthening the visual component of their character designs does not associatively diminish their writing -- in fact, it strengthens it, in that it gives the writers an entirely new dimension with which to develop their characters' traits and histories (see, yet again: Jack, Fenris. Fenris is a character whose character narrative is heavily predicated on a physically visible change).

DA2 had about the same individual companion word budget as DAO did, and a lot of work went into improving the companion interaction infrastructure, so I have no idea where this is coming from. Writing in no way has to suffer when artists have more design leeway.

And they're using *cosplay* as a metric to prove that Dragon Age 2's characters are more popular, even though it sold less, and to justify the use of 'iconic looks'. I don't see any merit in that.

Of course not, because you immediately went to the conclusion that is the most pessimistic and makes Bioware look the worst because you want to believe their ideas have no merit. If you could look at the situation without searching for a way to make it confirm your preconceived negative opinions, you might actually understand the real reasons they made these decisions, instead of the twisted ones you've selectively prioritized to construct your own conspiratorial narrative.

Morrigan got a lot of cosplay though; developers have admitted themselves, i.e. it serves their end-purpose ( popularity, recognition ).

A Morrigan-type system is still constrained by the things I've gone over many times, none of which have anything to do with 'popularity' or 'recognition'. It is not an ideal system, because popularity and recognition are not the sole motivations to have a unique companion model system. There are, in fact, other reasons.

Modifié par ipgd, 31 août 2011 - 03:19 .

[krinst]

In Exile wrote...

Gunderic wrote...
BioWare
wants to use their characters' image for marketing purposes; they think
more cosplay will increase their games' recognition. Instead of focusing
on the writing, they're prioritizing looks. Instead of making sure the
wine tastes good, they want to put a prettier label on the bottle ( and
sacrificing gameplay elements for it ), etc.

But TW2, if we're going by that, already
has iconic characters. Every NPC in the game has a fixed outfit (Roche
wears one thing, Triss wears one thing, Letho wears one thing) and
Geralt has multiple outfits but they're all based on the same thing (and
Geralt has a fixed apperance).

So Geralt doesn't wear plate, or a robe, or use a bow, etc. etc. 

TW2 always
goes one further than Bioware, design-wise, into these "anti"-RPG
features. It was a much better game than DA2, but if you're taking about
it in principle, it just full out went 1 step further than DA2
everywhere. 

Thank you. I've been wanting to say this for many of the (what is it, 35?) pages of this thread but am too much of a timid lurker to do it.

That game has done so many of the things people try to skewer DA2/Bioware for it's not even funny. Actually, it's really annoying. <_<. TW2 even canonized the LI; I can't imagine what kind of storm would appear here if BW did that.

Edit: 39 pages

Modifié par elebamf, 31 août 2011 - 03:20 .

[tmp7704]

ipgd wrote...

Namely that I think the likelihood of them doing something like that post-DA2 is next to 0. They are not going to be able to get away with anything that suggests even half a corner was cut.

I guess we'll have to just choose to disagree regarding this   To be exact, since there's plenty other aspects where they'll have to make tough calls which are bound to ****** off some group(s) of people, i don't think they'd find themselves truly unable to make similar call in this area (for this matter, since both DA and DA2 already had instances of character's body build changing when swapping armour, i don't think they consider it a serious issue, and view possible forum screeching about it as just that, forums noise that isn't to be taken seriously)

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
If i understand it right, under the new system the stats are derived either from the 'appearance' slot or, if there is item equipped in the 'gear' slot then that takes precedence. As such, i don't really see a problem here -- if you like both the stats and the looks of armour, you put it in the appearance slot. If you like stats but want different looks, you put the item in the 'gear' slot while the 'appearance' slot holds item that you like the looks of.

Wait, what? I think I failed my reading comprehension check. 

Wasn't the post I was responding to about the iconic item being just another in-game item?

You lost me here. What toggle are you speaking of? One to either allow or disallow equipping generic armour in addition to 'iconic' ones? That feels quite pointless when instead the game can be made to always allow equipping such gear, and leave it to player's discretion whether they make use of it, or not.

Esssentially, the "apperancce slot" system that you're talking about. We can just call that a toggle. 

As for why even talk about it -- because Mr.Laidlaw said the system wasn't currently set in stone. So while you choose to believe such enhancement to the system isn't something BioWare would do, it doesn't mean i can't hope for different outcome, and voice my support for it.

I don't mean that Bioware is committed to this system. I mean that I don't think Bioware will allow for body morphing. 

[Gunderic]

In Exile wrote...

Gunderic wrote...
BioWare wants to use their characters' image for marketing purposes; they think more cosplay will increase their games' recognition. Instead of focusing on the writing, they're prioritizing looks. Instead of making sure the wine tastes good, they want to put a prettier label on the bottle ( and sacrificing gameplay elements for it ), etc.

But TW2, if we're going by that, already has iconic characters. Every NPC in the game has a fixed outfit (Roche wears one thing, Triss wears one thing, Letho wears one thing) and Geralt has multiple outfits but they're all based on the same thing (and Geralt has a fixed apperance).

So Geralt doesn't wear plate, or a robe, or use a bow, etc. etc. 

TW2 always goes one further than Bioware, design-wise, into these "anti"-RPG features. It was a much better game than DA2, but if you're taking about it in principle, it just full out went 1 step further than DA2 everywhere. 

The Witcher 2 doesn't have a party system. 

There's only one controllable character for the Witcher 2, so if by 'iconic', you're referring to the fact that it can be only worn, and is built around Geralt then, sure.

If you're referring to Geralt being instantly recognizeable/marketed through either one item set, I'd disagree. Of course, if you use Geralt's medallion in a cosplay or something, or if you hint that it's about the Witcher 2 etc. it's going to be obvious since Geralt is the only player character in TW 2.

When I think of iconic ( armour ), I think of something that would instantly make a character recognizeable, and I can't think of one item set in particular that defines Geralt. Aveline's guard armour defines Aveline. Morrigan's robes define Morrigan. None of the items in particular represent Geralt more than others would, even if they're suited for him ( or Witchers in general ). 

Geralt can't have bows/plate etc. since it's not built around his fighting style (like a rogue Hawke can't have swords). It doesn't limit gameplay for the sake of aesthetics.

Modifié par Gunderic, 31 août 2011 - 03:29 .

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
I guess we'll have to just choose to disagree regarding this   To be exact, since there's plenty other aspects where they'll have to make tough calls which are bound to ****** off some group(s) of people, i don't think they'd find themselves truly unable to make similar call in this area (for this matter, since both DA and DA2 already had instances of character's body build changing when swapping armour, i don't think they consider it a serious issue, and view possible forum screeching about it as just that, forums noise that isn't to be taken seriously)

Honestly, if Bioware goes out and does it, I would fully support the apperance slot + equipment slot approach, so long as we get an iconic look and an alternate (let's say). If it doesn't impact their NPC design, and we get more visuall rich NPCs than we've gotten (i.e. taller & shorter, different body types) instead of this all races are identical, all human males are 6'0 tall, etc. 

[ipgd]

tmp7704 wrote...

I guess we'll have to just choose to disagree regarding this   To be exact, since there's plenty other aspects where they'll have to make tough calls which are bound to ****** off some group(s) of people, i don't think they'd find themselves truly unable to make similar call in this area (for this matter, since both DA and DA2 already had instances of character's body build changing when swapping armour, i don't think they consider it a serious issue, and view possible forum screeching about it as just that, forums noise that isn't to be taken seriously)

I just think, in this particular instance, when the choice is between 'less resource intensive and less likely to irritate people' and 'more resource intensive, and also more likely to irritate people', they're going to go with the lower risk option. I think they are going to be inevitably more cautious in DA3 given the level of hyperbolic ****-****** they were drowning in post-launch. If I were them, I wouldn't do it, and I really care about visual character designs.

edit: This being in the context of 'unique armors modeled around a generic default body model' vs. 'divergent designs plus weird body morphing within a system supporting generic armor swapping'

Modifié par ipgd, 31 août 2011 - 03:31 .

[In Exile]

Gunderic wrote...
The Witcher 2 doesn't have a party system.  

That's my point. TW2 doesn't have to design outfits for anyone but Geralt. And Geralt has a "theme" to his armour. He wears leather (he can wear padded leather too) but never chainmail or plate and never robes, etc.

There's only one controllable character for the Witcher 2, so if by 'iconic', you're referring to the fact that it can be only worn, and is built around Geralt then, sure.

No. I mean that the armour models in TW2 are about 2-3. We have the base mode Geralt starts with, a padded armour model, and I think one more. 

DA:O had 8 models, and switched them around for different species. TW2 has 2-3 models for 1 character. That's a lot less.

If you're referring to Geralt being instantly recognizeable/marketed through either one item set, I'd disagree. Of course, if you use Geralt's medallion in a cosplay or something, or if you hint that it's about the Witcher 2 etc. it's going to be obvious since Geralt is the only player character in TW 2.

No. I'm saying Geralt is physically recognizable. Not too many white-haired, yellow-eyed dudes with a scar over their eye around. 

When I think of iconic ( armour ), I think of something that would instantly make a character recognizeable, and I can't think of one item set in particular that defines Geralt. Aveline's guard armour defines Aveline. Morrigan's robes define Morrigan. None of the items in particular represent Geralt more than others would, even if they're suited for him ( or Witchers in general ).

Leather armour. Geralt never wears plate. He never wears maille. He never wears robes. He never wears regular clothes. 

Geralt can't have bows/plate etc. since it's not built around his fighting style (like a rogue Hawke can't have swords). It doesn't limit gameplay for the sake of aesthetics.

And Aveliene doesn't wear leather armour or use a 2H sword or a bow because it's not her style, so why would we say that TW2 does anything better, when Geralt is less customizable? 

Modifié par In Exile, 31 août 2011 - 03:31 .

[Sad Dragon]

Some of you out there might want to change the armour of your companions because you want the party to look uniform and that's one thing -- something I personally don't do but if you are one of these people you will never like the distinctive character looks and -- as I do -- we would have to agree to disagree. For those of you out there who wants to have the ability to customize your characters because gear has stats I have a question for you:

Would something like the quote below satisfy your need or would the full armour change be required for you to be satisfied?

Sad Dragon wrote...

Personally I like the unique looks for the characters, take a look at what icecream has posted and you would get a good explained of why.

That said, i did miss the customization part in Dragon Age 2 -- though not the customization of how the companions looked rather the optimization part of it (aka. min maxing part of it). Luckily for me and others who feel that it was the optimization part, rather then the looks part, that was the problem I think this one can quite easily be solved.

I mentioned something like this in my feedback to Bioware but I want to put the idea out there in this thread as well so here goes!

In Dragon Age 2 we have the armor upgrade slots. While I feel that this feature could have been implemented better I believe this could also be used to solve the problem. If instead of making them static upgrade slots, how about making them companion specific armor slots that could update the characters in the same vain as the romance armor does.

Take Isabella for instance, how about we find the "nimble dualist armband" (just roll with it) which gives a bonus to dexterity and we want to equip her with it. A problem arises as we also had a pair of "cunning pirate gloves" (again, just roll with it) equipped on her which gave her a bonus to cunning. We would now have to choose how we would want her specced and we might even get a small visual cue for our choice -- maybe she gets a slightly different looking pair of gloves with some embroidery from the pirate gloves and an embroidered armband if we equip the armband.

This will let us keep the characters at least mostly visually unique and also gives us a small visual token for our optimization choices.

I could go on but I think that covers the basics.


-The Sad Dragon

Something small like this could be made in various ways from a simple texture swap to a minor item change -- which wouldn't require a complete remodel of the character. Sure they would have to take this into consideration when making the original model of the character and creating the texture maps -- hell they might even get away with just having some mount points which would make things even more simple.

Though how it could be done is not what I want to discuss here, but rather if something like this would be a possible solution or not.

-The Sad Dragon

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

Wait, what? I think I failed my reading comprehension check. 

Wasn't the post I was responding to about the iconic item being just another in-game item?

I guess you can view it like this, but to me it was more about being able to treat the generic items as another source of character's appearance, just like the iconic items. It didn't imply the whole appearance/gear slots system would be removed as a result.

Esssentially, the "apperancce slot" system that you're talking about. We can just call that a toggle. 

Ah; no then, i don't think anyone called for removal of the appearance/gear slot thing (unless it was me who failed my reading comprehension check)  And if i understand the OP right, it is something that they currently plan to put into DA3. It's just planned to have a limit on what items can be placed in the 'appearance' part of it, and i don't think having that artificial limit is necessary or beneficial.

[tmp7704]

ipgd wrote...

I just think, in this particular instance, when the choice is between 'less resource intensive and less likely to irritate people' and 'more resource intensive, and also more likely to irritate people', they're going to go with the lower risk option.

That's a fair presumption, i think. On the other hand, I have some faith in Mr.Gaider's attitude rubbing off on other members of the team  (for better, or worse)

"Nobody tells him what to do! No~obody!"

Modifié par tmp7704, 31 août 2011 - 03:44 .

[Big I]

While I'm glad they're looking at bringing back greater armor choices for companions, I'm not a fan of the gameplay/story segregation they're proposing (e.g put Isabella in plate mail and she looks exactly the same). I've always thought that a good compromise would be to have companions wearing their "unique" look in their home base and maybe in cutscenes, but have their equipped armor be visibile the rest of the time (the ME1 system).

[willholt]

I recently did my one and only playthrough of DA2. I did it using the 'Equip Your Companions' mod I downloaded from Nexus.

It allowed me to change Bethany's, Isabella's, Merrll's, Aveline's, and Ander's appearance using pretty much any armour/outfit I found in game.

When I did this their unique body models got swapped out for either Hawk's male or female body model.. as most in-game lootable/buyable armours are made for Hawk. This did not bother me in the slightest. In fact, to be able to do this enhanced the game enough that I was able to get through it.

In Varric's case the mod did not allow me to change his in-game look. Apparently the mod author had some good reasons for not being able to allow this... If I recall, one of them had something to do with Bianca being part of the model.

Though you couldn't change Varric's appearance, you could however equip him with any suitable (class-wise) armour you found/looted/bought... This meant he kept his appearance but the stats changed depending on what you equipped him with. This bothered me somewhat.

Watching a dwarf that I've just equipped with decent-looking armour (I tried it on one of the others first) running around the battlefield in his open-necked 70s disco shirt was jarring, to say the least... This bothered me a lot.

Unfortunately the system being proposed is the one I've just experienced with Varric. I could tolertate it in Varric's case because I was able to customise most of my companions... so one of them not being so was acceptable.  However, in a system where all the companions end up like my recent experience with Varric, that to me is not acceptable.

Finally...  In a game which comes with all the companions having a unique look, someone single-handedly was able to create a mod which allowed the player to change a companion's appearance, though it means the player CHOOSES to lose the companion's unique look. I would suggest it would be much easier (and much fairer to ALL the players too) for the actual developer to create a similar system... especially when they have all the tools and knowhow at their disposal

I see people saying one negates the other... I disagree.

[Maconbar]

willholt wrote...

I recently did my one and only playthrough of DA2. I did it using the 'Equip Your Companions' mod I downloaded from Nexus.

It allowed me to change Bethany's, Isabella's, Merrll's, Aveline's, and Ander's appearance using pretty much any armour/outfit I found in game.

When I did this their unique body models got swapped out for either Hawk's male or female body model.. as most in-game lootable/buyable armours are made for Hawk. This did not bother me in the slightest. In fact, to be able to do this enhanced the game enough that I was able to get through it.

In Varric's case the mod did not allow me to change his in-game look. Apparently the mod author had some good reasons for not being able to allow this... If I recall, one of them had something to do with Bianca being part of the model.

Though you couldn't change Varric's appearance, you could however equip him with any suitable (class-wise) armour you found/looted/bought... This meant he kept his appearance but the stats changed depending on what you equipped him with. This bothered me somewhat.

Watching a dwarf that I've just equipped with decent-looking armour (I tried it on one of the others first) running around the battlefield in his open-necked 70s disco shirt was jarring, to say the least... This bothered me a lot.

Unfortunately the system being proposed is the one I've just experienced with Varric. I could tolertate it in Varric's case because I was able to customise most of my companions... so one of them not being so was acceptable.  However, in a system where all the companions end up like my recent experience with Varric, that to me is not acceptable.

Finally...  In a game which comes with all the companions having a unique look, someone single-handedly was able to create a mod which allowed the player to change a companion's appearance, though it means the player CHOOSES to lose the companion's unique look. I would suggest it would be much easier (and much fairer to ALL the players too) for the actual developer to create a similar system... especially when they have all the tools and knowhow at their disposal

I see people saying one negates the other... I disagree.

Not having tried that mod, I would imagine that putting a dwarf companion head or a Kossith head on a human body would look odd but I didn't like the generic bodies in DA:O. Having said that, an approach like this wouldn't bother me much.

I would like to be able to give all the companions the Varric body. I am guessing there is a mod that does this; time to start looking.

[Gunderic]

In Exile wrote...

Gunderic wrote...
The Witcher 2 doesn't have a party system.  

That's my point. TW2 doesn't have to design outfits for anyone but Geralt. And Geralt has a "theme" to his armour. He wears leather (he can wear padded leather too) but never chainmail or plate and never robes, etc.

He does wear a bit of chainmail at times:




No. I mean that the armour models in TW2 are about 2-3. We have the base mode Geralt starts with, a padded armour model, and I think one more. 

DA:O had 8 models, and switched them around for different species. TW2 has 2-3 models for 1 character. That's a lot less.

Not quite true. It did have a similar concept for models, but that's all. They're not just reskins like in Origins.

No. I'm saying Geralt is physically recognizable. Not too many white-haired, yellow-eyed dudes with a scar over their eye around. 

Obviously, but that's got nothing to do with armour/gameplay.

Leather armour. Geralt never wears plate. He never wears maille. He never wears robes. He never wears regular clothes. 

Neither does rogue Hawke.

And Aveliene doesn't wear leather armour or use a 2H sword or a bow because it's not her style, so why would we say that TW2 does anything better, when Geralt is less customizable? 

We were talking about the effort put into item sets. Hawke is more customizeable than Geralt when it comes to different types of armour material, yes ( though not his companions ).

Eh, whether leather armour is/isn't her style is not the argument I would be aiming for if I wanted her to wear leather. And like I said, I was referring to Geralt's customization options from a gameplay/lore perspective.

Geralt's options don't limit him with anything, i.e. he can use any weapon/armour he finds.

Modifié par Gunderic, 31 août 2011 - 04:25 .