491 réponses à ce sujet

[Zanallen]

Filament wrote...

If they're retextures like apparently all 13 or so of what I thought were unique massive armor models in DAO, I'd be okay with that.

Probably won't be. Let's use Origins as an example. You would need generic body models for male and female humans, elves and dwarves plus a male kossith. Then you would need an Oghren model, a Leliana model, a Wynne model, a Morrigan model, an Alistair model, a Zevran model and a Sten model. That is fourteen models, you need the iconic armor meshes for half and all of the other armors to mesh with the generic models. That is a stupid amount of work. Even if the iconic looks were just meshes that changed the appearance of the generic model, it would be a lot of work.

[FieryDove]

esper wrote...

 It made the rouge and warriorr class different which they should be.

We are already very limited mage, warrior and rogue.

Assigning roles to these three base classes just further limits it.

Warrior = Melee AoE
Rogue = Melee or Ranged Single Target
Mage = Ranged AoE

http://social.biowar...93174/4#7940539

What is next? Rogue's only get access to bow since there is a melee class? After that? Just have one class that can do it all? I prefer choices. No one is forcing anyone to make a bow/DW warrior if they don't want too. I don't see the problem. All I see is unneeded limitations.

Zanallen wrote...

And that's why the toggle option is silly.

Toggles are the real awesome button.

Modifié par FieryDove, 02 septembre 2011 - 08:13 .

[Yrkoon]

esper wrote...

So what? And you and I have been playing different rpg games for a lot of those I played didn't even had dualwield. and even if they had we are obviosuly not playing one of these games. You can't make an argument that basiaclly said everyone else is doing it. And just because 'everyone else' are doing something it does not force bioware to do it as well.
It is distinctive to da2's rouges which I liked - Opinion. It made the rouge and warriorr class different which they should be.

It's rogues, by the way, not rouges.

And sure, we can  branch off  on tangents and  discuss  all the different ways to make rogues distinctive from warriors, but  we'd be doing just that:  Branching off into tangents.

Your initial claim was false.  There's nothing distinctive about rogues dual-wielding.  Period.  You can argue, however,  that  the only game in the whole herpy-derpy world that matters is DA2... if you wish.    No one is stopping you from arguing that.  lol.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 02 septembre 2011 - 08:10 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

I'm not sure, so I'll say neutral. It does sound ok, at least in theory, and I think I get the gist of the idea. Still, I'd have to see how it was implemented, as far as variety of armor. I still prefer being able to customize companion armor, as having an iconic look is not something I really consider important. However, if it is a direction the developers want to go, fine. If they can at least give more stat and appearance customization, then that would probably be an acceptable middle ground, if it was implemented right.

[Zanallen]

Filament wrote...

That would defeat the point of the term "generic body models." The models wouldn't be generic then at all. I don't want them to bother doing all that, no.

The iconic models could still very well be differently proportioned, just not to a ludicrous extent. No tattoos, though. Unless they're henna.

And that's why the toggle option is silly.

[esper]

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...



Warriors not being able to dual-wield: Fine with me. It is the rouge distinctive style.

I stopped reading right here.

You're so demonstrably wrong this this strange belief of yours that it's almost sad.

Why is I wrong in that?

Because every single fantasy RPG that bioware has done since 2001 has allowed for non-rogues to dual-wield.  The only exception is DA2.    And exceptions don't make the rule.

 And  no, you did not express an opinion here.  You made a false claim.  There's NOTHING distinctive about rogues dual-wielding.

So what? And you and I have been playing different rpg games for a lot of those I played didn't even had dualwield. and even if they had we are obviosuly not playing one of these games. You can't make an argument that basiaclly said everyone else is doing it. And just because 'everyone else' are doing something it does not force bioware to do it as well.
It is distinctive to da2's rouges which I liked - Opinion. It made the rouge and warriorr class different which they should be.

It's rogues, by the way, not rouges.

And sure, we can  branch off  on tangents and  discuss  all the different ways to make rogues distinctive from warriors, but  we'd be doing just that:  Branching off into tangents.

Your initial claim was false.  There's nothing distinctive about rogues dual-wielding.  Period.  You can blather all you want-- about how  the only game in the whole herpy-derpy world that matters is DA2, though.    No one is stopping you from arguing.

I never said that da2 is the only game that matters. In fact I have played games I enjoyed far more. I said that just because other games do something it does not force bioware to do the same thing.
And in da2 dualwielding is only for rouges. Which makes it distinctive to the class in da2. Which I liked hence it is a opinion. I respect that others might wish it back to warriors, but I does not state is as an absolute fact that bioware must do.

[Zanallen]

Filament wrote...

The toggle option wouldn't require them to do all that work. Generic body models means they'd have their iconic model with their iconic look, and conform to the generic body models otherwise like in DAO. It would be the same amount of work as DAO, less without a qunari companion, plus the work required making additional iconic outfits beyond the single one that DAO had.

So you're going with the iconic look being a mesh that goes over the generic body model? Like a super special suit of armor that adjusts the way the body looks? It is still a lot more work than in Origins because it is still them doing what amounts to both systems and then having a toggle between them.

Edit: And I highly doubt they will bring back race choice with a voiced protagonist. It is entirely possible, but it isn't something I see Bioware doing. Origin choices sure, but probably all human origins with different backgrounds.

Modifié par Zanallen, 02 septembre 2011 - 08:19 .

[esper]

Zanallen wrote...

Filament wrote...

The toggle option wouldn't require them to do all that work. Generic body models means they'd have their iconic model with their iconic look, and conform to the generic body models otherwise like in DAO. It would be the same amount of work as DAO, less without a qunari companion, plus the work required making additional iconic outfits beyond the single one that DAO had.

So you're going with the iconic look being a mesh that goes over the generic body model? Like a super special suit of armor that adjusts the way the body looks? It is still a lot more work than in Origins because it is still them doing what amounts to both systems and then having a toggle between them.

Edit: And I highly doubt they will bring back race choice with a voiced protagonist. It is entirely possible, but it isn't something I see Bioware doing. Origin choices sure, but probably all human origins with different backgrounds.

Strictly speaking there is nothing saying a human and a city elf can't have the same voice.
We seems to be in three camps here: People who wants iconic look. People who want iconic look and generic armor, even if it means generic body models (because it most likely will mean that) and people who just want fully custimized armor.

[Zanallen]

Filament wrote...

That's how it was with Morrigan's outfit, yes. And it would only have to be more work in the way I described... however much that amounts to, it's worth it.

If your doubt is based on the races need different voices, which would be cost prohibitive, I disagree with them needing different voices. Say they're all from different parts of the same city, problem solved.

That's the same idea I had about races and voices. Still, I doubt it is something Bioware is going to do. And I can just imagine the screams of laziness and halfassed measures if Bioware actually did have multiple races with the same voice. It would be a beautiful thing for my troll side, but it would get annoying after a while.

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Actually, Morrigan's upgraded robes look identical to her original iconic appearance.

Right, but that's the problem. She had only one outfit option besides her original available. I want a system where she can retain her appearance, but still allows me the full spectrum of Mage Robe options.

Personally, I have nothing against unique looks, except when I don't like them.  That's the problem DA2 had.

But that will always be the case with iconic appearances. It's actually a similar problem even with generic outfits (Ex: Mass Effect armor). We always run into the risk that we don't like what we see.

I like the idea of characters having "multiple iconic looks"  i'm just not sure about having to unlock all of them.  I'd rather we at least start out with 2-3 choices and unlock more as we go along.

For example, my first paythrough of DA2 I hardly took Isabela anywhere, because I couldn't take her seriously with her starting appearance.  It wasn't until later when I downloaded a mod that put her in black leather pants and a top rather than her own pantsless tunic that I thought she looked suffciently "pirate-like" to bring along (and found she had some really funny dialogue)

True, but then we have characters like Morrigan at the other end of the spectrum, whose outfit (imo) fit her character incredibly well.

Modifié par Il Divo, 02 septembre 2011 - 08:27 .

[Yrkoon]

esper wrote...


I never said that da2 is the only game that matters. In fact I have played games I enjoyed far more. I said that just because other games do something it does not force bioware to do the same thing.

But...   with the exception of DA2, every single Fantasy RPG that Bioware has done since BG2 has  encorporated Dual Wielding, and has allowed non-rogues to partake in it. So unless you're talking ONLY about DA2, your  argument about it being rogue-distinctive is nonsense.

And this has squat to do with the topic of this thread, so....

[Zanallen]

Yrkoon wrote...

It's rogues, by the way, not rouges.

And sure, we can  branch off  on tangents and  discuss  all the different ways to make rogues distinctive from warriors, but  we'd be doing just that:  Branching off into tangents.

Your initial claim was false.  There's nothing distinctive about rogues dual-wielding.  Period.  You can argue, however,  that  the only game in the whole herpy-derpy world that matters is DA2... if you wish.    No one is stopping you from arguing that.  lol.

Allow me to repeat what I said earlier in this thread. In Dragon Age, rogues are not necessarily thieves. They are the quick and agile fighters of the DA universe. Dual wielding is traditionally a style used by dexterous fighters with a one handed sword and dagger or two short swords. As such, it fits the DA "rogues" better than it does the "warriors".

[esper]

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...


I never said that da2 is the only game that matters. In fact I have played games I enjoyed far more. I said that just because other games do something it does not force bioware to do the same thing.

But...   with the exception of DA2, every single Fantasy RPG that Bioware has done since BG2 has  encorporated Dual Wielding, and has allowed non-rogues to partake in it. So unless you're talking ONLY about DA2, your  argument about it being rogue-distinctive is nonsense.

And this has squat to do with the topic of this thread, so....

How many times do I need to say da2 to make it clear that I talk abot da2?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Il Divo wrote...

Right, but that's the problem. She had only one outfit option besides her original available. I want a system where she can retain her appearance, but still allows me the full spectrum of Mage Robe options.

I offered two possible solutions to that earlier in the thread.

I like the crafting idea best.  It avoids the requirement that companion-relevant loot drop all of the time. 

True, but then we have characters like Morrigan at the other end of the spectrum, whose outfit (imo) fit her character incredibly well.

But others might disagree, which is why it was great that DAO allowed us to dress her in whatever armour we found.

I use a mod to let me dress the companions in DA2.

[esper]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Right, but that's the problem. She had only one outfit option besides her original available. I want a system where she can retain her appearance, but still allows me the full spectrum of Mage Robe options.

I offered two possible solutions to that earlier in the thread.

I like the crafting idea best.  It avoids the requirement that companion-relevant loot drop all of the time. 

True, but then we have characters like Morrigan at the other end of the spectrum, whose outfit (imo) fit her character incredibly well.

But others might disagree, which is why it was great that DAO allowed us to dress her in whatever armour we found.

I use a mod to let me dress the companions in DA2.

I would also like some kind of crafting, actually. But that is just because I don't like the idea of stripping corpes.

[Yrkoon]

esper wrote...

How many times do I need to say da2 to make it clear that I talk abot da2?

But we were discussing proposals for DA3...

[bEVEsthda]

tmp7704 wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

If you find yourself unable to respond to a point with more than a single word 'troll', then perhaps refrain from posting. Why you'd think that kind of post is in any way acceptable is beyond me.

Indeed; at the very least put some effort and make it "You troll." instead, people. That will show you care ;/

I'm afraid I read our dear mr. Epler as that "troll" is entirely out, even in contexts involving more eloquence.
I have a plan B though.

edit: incidentally, this system as described is nearly identical to how Final Fantasy games handle this issue -- the characters can be equipped with all sorts of stat-providing gear, but they retain their fixed apperance. Difference is they only have one such appearance rather than few variants. Bit amusing how BioWare keep introducing aspects of the games the Good Ol' Doctors so mercilessly mocked for being stale...

Well, I've spent some time today considering how Japanese fighting games (which sometimes seem to be considered the epitome of iconic looks) are moving towards ever increasing customization instead. Not only that, but the feedback is pretty conclusive. When DOAU first arrived, featuring a multitude of costumes, they almost wiped out Tekken.
The gamers do NOT want iconic looks. They want customization. They DO however want uniqueness, as in variation. And I kinda get the feel that this is what people here, in these threads, also want, regardless of what side of the fence they are. Truly 'iconic' looks are only wanted by the marketing people.  
But yea, Japanese fighting games, once held by one poster as a prime example of how clever iconic looks are, now feature an amazing level of customization. In one of them, you can stitch up almost any kind of costume from a large wardrobe of garment details, and colour each and any of them in almost any colour.
...Meanwhile, Bioware are moving "forward", newspeak mode.
To be more fair to Bioware, Mike's suggestion could mean more of uniqueness of looks than 'iconic' looks. We'll have to see how it's implemented.

[Zanallen]

esper wrote...

I would also like some kind of crafting, actually. But that is just because I don't like the idea of stripping corpes.

Looting corpses for weapons and armor is a RPG staple that really needs to go. It is completely unrealistic. I could maybe see looting weapons if it was some fabled magical weapon or if your own weapon was lost, but never armor. You just killed the man, how good could his armor possibly be?

[esper]

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...

How many times do I need to say da2 to make it clear that I talk abot da2?

But we were discussing proposals for DA3...

Yeah, and I am saying it is something I would like to continue into da3 because I felt it set the rouge and warrior class more apart than the two classes were in da:o. It does not make my opinion 'false' nor does it make your opinion a 'fact'. It is simply a matter of two different opinions if you would take you time to discuss it in a civil tone.

[Il Divo]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...


I offered two possible solutions to that earlier in the thread.

I like the crafting idea best.  It avoids the requirement that companion-relevant loot drop all of the time. 

I'll take a look. I am a fan of crafting...

 

But others might disagree, which is why it was great that DAO allowed us to dress her in whatever armour we found.

I use a mod to let me dress the companions in DA2.

That is a good point. Really, the only thing I need to fix it would be an "armor lock" toggle. If I like Morrigan's outfit, turn it on, and her appearance will become static. Turn it off, and she can now wear armor.

The problem with the DA:O approach was that if I don't like the stats on her "iconic armor", it's necessary to either change her appearance or gimp the character.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

But that will always be the case with iconic appearances. It's actually a similar problem even with generic outfits (Ex: Mass Effect armor). We always run into the risk that we don't like what we see.

True, but then we have characters like Morrigan at the other end of the spectrum, whose outfit (imo) fit her character incredibly well.

And what I think is giving player a range of options greatly increases the chances that a given player will find a given look they find appealing.  Some may like Isabela in a tunic.  Others in pants.  Some may like Merrill in green robes, and others in white armor. 

An "iconic range" is probably a better idea than an "iconic look" as it potentially broadens appeal without making the characters generic.    

[Yrkoon]

esper wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

esper wrote...

How many times do I need to say da2 to make it clear that I talk abot da2?

But we were discussing proposals for DA3...

Yeah, and I am saying it is something I would like to continue into da3 because I felt it set the rouge and warrior class more apart than the two classes were in da:o.

To hell with player freedom and choice then.