491 réponses à ce sujet

[Reidbynature]

I can't help but think this feels like we fans are arguing with the Devs for a compromise. I think most of the fans preferred DA:O armour system (if not the looks). The Devs then want iconic looks for the characters. The fans then suggest that the DA:O system would be find if they would just make more varied and iconic armours.

Although I do think whoever posted the idea that they could introduce various unique armours for the companions at different tier levels yet still be able to wear normal armour was onto something.

Although I'm not saying the proposed system can't work, just that it may end up feeling as cheap as some of the changes they had in DA2 such as Fenris little wrist hankey he wore when romanced. We hear this talk of unlocking them and I can't help but feel it will work out in a similar fashion where you have to meet requirements like romancing a character, getting them to hate you and such for the most part.

It just doesn't fit with the RPG experience for me when I want to explore and find them much like I do with special or significant armour we usually find in these types of games, not because I slept with someone or found seven secret tokens etc.

It would also help if the armour for anything than the players chosen class we found/looted wasn't automatically junk and actually useful to our companions.

[In Exile]

Yrkoon wrote...

They are when we're talking about companions.   None of your companions in either game can  ever be the *best* blood mage, since both games are mechanically and statistically designed to insure that only the protagonist can be the best.

It doesn't matter whether we're talking about companions or the PC. There's an upper floor on builds, and these builds can be further enhanced through statistical boosts. If you want to nitpick, we can say "the best bloodmage a character can be," and it amounts to the same thing.

You need loot, in any RPG where loot has attribute/ability/etc. boosts, to optimize a build for any character.

Yes.  I have.   And so have many others here.   Scroll back already.   My suggestion is to make the Iconic gear fully customizable  (for those who want iconic gear),  while also making it removable (for those of us who  have our OWN ideas on what we want our companions to look like)

So, the opposite of what you said when we started having this debate? Well, in that case, sure, I totally agree with the opposite of what you said.

WHAT?  when did I ever say that?

I'm too lazy to find the best quotes, but here's one:

"And how many times do we have to point out that Aside from Avernus's Robes (which Morrigan can wear if she wants!) there ISN'T any armor in DA:O that helps blood magic anyway,"

If you want to make an issue of this, I'd be happy to bring up things you've said. 

Not to nit-pick here  (oh, F**K it. I'm gonna nit-pick away because you're annoying me)  +5 magic in DA:O  equates to +5 spellpower, not +10.  And    spellpower's  enhancements to damage output is  far, far more complex than you're making it out to be.  The difference of 5 spell power between two mages is remarkably miniscule.  In some cases, non-existant with regards to  the  difference in damage.   And   I'd dare say, even insignificant compared to other properties that,  for example, Morrigan's Robe bestows.

You can nitpick there. And you can be wrong. It doesn't matter how miniscule it is. Power-gaming is fun. It's part of why I play RPGs. For all of the whinning that you do about "freedom" and "choice", you certainly like throwing words like "miniscule" and "insignificant" around when it's not your pet argument. 

Otherwise, you're wrong about how + magic works. Because + magic boosts spell wisp and spell might, which doubles back to a greater + spellpower boost. And as far as I recall, there was never a cap.

With the abundance of lyrium (or blood magic) you can translate + magic into greater than a 1:1 spellpower boost. 

LOL!  good point.  I stand corrected.   Count on them to  completely screw up  in the execution of any good idea.

I wouldn't go that far, but Bioware's implementation of custom rules in an RPG is... lacking. Very lacking. 

No, that's not a  very good solution.  

Let me repeated what you said: 

"My suggestion is to make the Iconic gear fully customizable  (for those who want iconic gear),"

Which is just divorcing specific stats from gear.

I want to be able to get an idea on how powerful someone is by how they're decked out.  A shimmering sword should reflect  the magical power eminating from that sword.  Meticulously detailed dwarven runes, painstakingly  carved on an expensive-looking suit of  ancient plate should have the adequate stats to match its appearance.

You just said you are fine with making iconic gear fully customizable. 

You want  to divorce appearance from funcionality?    Ugh... no. 

So do you. Or did. But then didn't. It's hard to keep track of what you're saying sometimes. 

Modifié par In Exile, 02 septembre 2011 - 11:05 .

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's exactly what every game gives us.  If you don't like the iconic look in DA2, you're screwed.  If you don't like any of the generic armours in DAO, you're screwed.

Of course. I am not contesting that this is the case. What I am contesting is that the logic of the argument - what Laidlaw offers "accept a system you dislike, or lose armour customization" is logically equivalent, just with the terms switched.

You're complaining about a problem that can't go away without divorcing appearance from stats, which, as you point out, is the most expensive solution.

Well, as of right now, the statistics are divorced. The customization of visuals is restricted, but the apperance is divorced.

Unfortunately, divorcing the look from the stats only solves your problem, not ours. Some of us want to be able to customise the appearance of all of the characters equally.  That has nothing to do with stats

I certainly appreciate that. And as I said, I would support a system that allows for both, even though I think it runs counter to an RPG. 

[just_me]

Totaly unrelated to the topic but since it's about Blood Mage builds...
I thought the best one was Wynne due to her hilariously powerful Plot Skill and Anerins Token...
The Spell Power Boost was that high... even a respeced PC (redistributing the Fade bonuspoints) couldn't really keep up with that.

Slightly more related:
What do people actually think about equipment requirements... I know a lot of people complain about the fact that armor in DA2 requires e.g dexterity (really doesn't make much sense)
But I think the DA:O approach wasn't any better... there was only strength, so you usually had to dump some otherwise pretty useless points in strength just to equip stuff designed for the class...
Mage Robes had no requirements, since a strength requirement would have been rather stupid, but that wasn't so hot either... and switching all requirements to magic by picking Arcane Warrior didn't make much sense either... but if they had not done this the Warrior in the name would have been a lie ^^ I personally think Arcane Warrior was done horribly, but whatever...

Imo very related:
Was the customization fun during the whole game for the "swappable armor people"?
I really enjoyed it lategame, but for the first half I considered it as rather tedious, it was too much "update generic armor pieces and hand them down to the next companion"... probably because I enjoy tweaking stats more than appearance.

Modifié par just_me, 02 septembre 2011 - 11:24 .

[Yrkoon]

  On topic stuff first:

[quote]In Exile wrote...

Let me repeated what you said:

"My suggestion is to make the Iconic gear fully customizable (for those who want iconic gear),"

Which is just divorcing specific stats from gear.[/quote]
No it's not. An empty rune slot on a pair of gloves is still a stat... on a pair of gloves. Just a customizable one.


[quote]In Exile wrote...



[quote]I want to be able to get an idea on how powerful someone is by how they're decked out. A shimmering sword should reflect the magical power eminating from that sword. Meticulously detailed dwarven runes, painstakingly carved on an expensive-looking suit of ancient plate should have the adequate stats to match its appearance.[/quote]

You just said you are fine with making iconic gear fully customizable. [/quote]
Correct. And who's to say the wearer of that ancient plate didn't customize it with the runes that you're looking at? Or that he didn't add the cold damage that's making that sword shimmer? And more importantly, who's to say the new owner can't switch out the runes?

 



[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...

They are when we're talking about companions.   None of your companions in either game can  ever be the *best* blood mage, since both games are mechanically and statistically designed to insure that only the protagonist can be the best. [/quote]

It doesn't matter whether we're talking about companions or the PC. There's an upper floor on builds, and these builds can be further enhanced through statistical boosts. If you want to nitpick, we can say "the best bloodmage a character can be," and it amounts to the same thing.[/quote]
I can assure you, Exile, that I can, without any cheats at all, create an equally powerful (or more powerful)  level 20 Bloodmage Morrigan... using HER  (iconic) robes of possession... than you can with, say, Wynne wearing any robe avaliable in DA:O.  The ONLY way you can make a better bloodmage  Wynne is by using  her vessel of the spirit ability...  But that's not gear... that's a plot based talent.

And again, What does this have to do with my proposal, which you're attempting to shoot down?  Have I not said, at least 25 times on this thread, that Iconic gear should be customizable?

[quote]





[quote]Yes.  I have.   And so have many others here.   Scroll back already.   My suggestion is to make the Iconic gear fully customizable  (for those who want iconic gear),  while also making it removable (for those of us who  have our OWN ideas on what we want our companions to look like)[/quote]

So, the opposite of what you said when we started having this debate? [/quote]
Yeah, your reading comprehension s*cks.  I wasn't sure before....I thought that since there's so many people posting on this thread, that maybe you're just confusing me with someone else, but no.  You're just utterly  misunderstanding  what  many people  here  are saying.

Needless to say, NO, that's NOT the opposite of anything I've ever argued.  it is, in fact, the same thing I've been repeating since...  oh... page 20 of the LAST thread.

[quote]In Exile wrote...





[quote]Yrkoon wrote...[quote]You've just said that I should deal with not being able to build a character any way I want if I want to have an iconic look.[/quote]
WHAT?  When did I ever say that?[/quote]

I'm too lazy to find the best quotes, but here's one:

"And how many times do we have to point out that Aside from Avernus's Robes (which Morrigan can wear if she wants!) there ISN'T any armor in DA:O that helps blood magic anyway,"[/quote]
And what part of  "if she wants!"... and  "there's none in the game for anyone" equates to  "if you want iconic looks, you're gonna have to deal with  not being able to build a character how you want"?






[quote]
If you want to make an issue of this, I'd be happy to bring up things you've said.[/quote]
Yes...  please do, because twice now you've managed to take my posts and pluck out the complete opposite meaning to what's actually been said.

 [quote]In Exile wrote...







[quote]Not to nit-pick here  (oh, F**K it. I'm gonna nit-pick away because you're annoying me)  +5 magic in DA:O  equates to +5 spellpower, not +10.  And    spellpower's  enhancements to damage output is  far, far more complex than you're making it out to be.  The difference of 5 spell power between two mages is remarkably miniscule.  In some cases, non-existant with regards to  the  difference in damage.   And   I'd dare say, even insignificant compared to other properties that,  for example, Morrigan's Robe bestows.[/quote]You can nitpick there. And you can be wrong. It doesn't matter how miniscule it is. Power-gaming is fun. It's part of why I play RPGs. For all of the whinning that you do about "freedom" and "choice", you certainly like throwing words like "miniscule" and "insignificant" around when it's not your pet argument. [/quote]
Oh no, you misundersand, Exile.    I'm calling you out for making a  FALSE claim.  Having +5 more spell power than, say, Iconic robed Morrigan will NOT make your Cone of cold  (for example) deal more damage.    In fact,  unless you've got enough + cold damage gear to trump the bonus that her robe gives her, you'll be doing less.  And with many other spells,  and against many different  opponents you'll be doing exactly the same damage.





[quote]Otherwise, you're wrong about how + magic works. Because + magic boosts spell wisp and spell might, which doubles back to a greater + spellpower boost.[/quote]
Your  goal-post moving is beginning to bore me.  Your  initial claim was that an extra 5 magic equates to a solid boost in damage.  And while even that is false, you're now trying to argue that it's at least true of you decide to stack a pair of mage sustains  (which ANY mage can do anyway), so the difference  of 5 spell power between two mages  both using those sustains is not "increased", or "compounded" or whatever you're trying to argue..








[quote]With the abundance of lyrium (or blood magic) you can translate + magic into greater than a 1:1 spellpower boost.[/quote]
Oh?  and what kind of  boost to   the  1:1 ratio  does lyrium and Blood magic give you? 

Modifié par Yrkoon, 03 septembre 2011 - 12:33 .

[Barbarossa2010]

In Exile wrote...

Barbarossa2010 wrote...

Yeah, resource constraints are just not my concern as a consumer. This is a business relationship, not a charity. If they cannot provide the product that [let's say, half] the franchise fan base wants, then that half will feel no desire to pay money for what they consider to be a substandard product, and honestly they shouldn't pay for something they don't want or would be unsatisfied with.  

Absolutely. But as a consumers, we don't have to care what the other side wants. I like iconic looks. I don't care about DA:O style visual customization. So on those grounds, I have absolutely no reason to care that you have any visual customization at all. Which means that it's fine to defend this system (which you feel does not satisfy your taste) on the grounds that it satisfies mine alone. 

Why anyone would argue on behalf of the company providing a product to actually provide less, is beyond me. I want those who like iconic looks to get what they want AND those who don't like them to get what they want too.

It's the same principle you just espoused. You don't pay for someone else's copy of DA3. They're under no obligation to stand up for your taste. 

It's absolutely fine to defend whatever system you want.  It's still stands that it's way beyond me why anyone would argue so vehemently for less choice...unless, of course, you actually work for Bioware.

[craigdolphin]

I'm actually quite surprised by the negative reaction evidenced in the poll.

I am one of those who feels pretty strongly negative about many aspects of DA2. This aspect of the game was probably 3rd or 4th on my list of aggravating changes. I really did not like the lack of armor customization in DA2 at all, and I vastly preferred Origin's system.

But, personally, I am generally positive about Mike's proposal for this aspect of DA3. Would I prefer a full return to DAO's system? Sure. But, Mike's proposal seems to be a workable compromise.

As I understand it we will get:
*full customization of armor stats again
*loot armor being useful for more than the class of the PC again
*a variety of iconic look-sets through the game (and undoubtedly via DLC although I only buy story based DLC)
*possibly a visual tweaking of the iconic armor set based on the armor items we choose to equip

That sounds pretty decent to me overall. Or am I misunderstanding Mike's proposal in some respect?

I'm having trouble understanding the issue. Full visual customization like Origins would be awesome, but given the 'sacred-to-Bioware-and-therefore-untouchable' focus on cinematics I can't see this happening. And honestly, I'm curious to see how this plays. There's actually some chance I might end up liking it even better. If they manage to slightly tweak the look of the sets based on our equips etc then I think I might be pleasantly (for a change) surprised. And even if this ends up being cut, there's still a good possibility it'll end up 'ok'. My take is that this proposal is about 75% Origins and 25% DA2.

Heck, I could wish for a similarly acceptable compromise on other aspects of the game (*cough* darkspawn/elf art style, anywhere conversations, etc *cough*)

[ScotGaymer]

@CraigDolphin...

The negativity comes from the fact that Bioware often promise things that they do not deliver on quite frankly. Both with Mass Effect 2 and with Dragon Age 2.

In DA2 we were promised that Hawke would have a different body type depending on what class he/she was. Did he/she? No.
In DA2 we were assured that companions would change their outfits multiple times during the course of the game and that there would be many stat upgrades to purchase for their outfits that could carry over onto the "new" outfits as the game progressed. Do the companions change outfits? Not really, only if you **** them. Aveline is the only one who changes at all really.
In DA2 we were promised real familial interaction that was to be one of the cornerstones of the game. Did we get it? No not really. The Sibling was lost to us before they were of any use and before we could actually give a crap about, and Mother had less interaction before her quest than Hawke has with his Mabari.

So when Mike Laidlaw tells us that we will get multiple iconic outfits for DA3 and "more" customisation options for said outfits and companions the fanbases general response is "pfft heard that before."

At least thats how I see it.

[addiction21]

Barbarossa2010 wrote...


It's absolutely fine to defend whatever system you want.  It's still stands that it's way beyond me why anyone would argue so vehemently for less choice...unless, of course, you actually work for Bioware.

Well for him its rather simple.

The stat customazation is his prefrence and is what matters most to him for making those characters. Performance over apperance.

For others its Having that apperance customizable over the stats.

Thats what I have been able to gather. I am just going to go back to thinking about waffles at this point.

Modifié par addiction21, 03 septembre 2011 - 12:42 .

[Yrkoon]

^no, that seems about right (from what I've been able to gather from reading   both of these threads, at least.)

Me though, my issue is that I missed the meeting where it was decided that we should  all be happy with a "meet me half-way" proposal. I'm  disappointed about such a compromise.

I'll be HAPPY with complete choice.  And  the frequent rebuttals of  "well, sure, but that'd be expensive!", do not impress me.  These companies make hundreds of millions of dollars on their games.  Time for them to *sweat* for it, and cease  with trying to make  corner cutting an art-form..

Modifié par Yrkoon, 03 septembre 2011 - 12:56 .

[FieryDove]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

So when Mike Laidlaw tells us that we will get multiple iconic outfits for DA3 and "more" customisation options for said outfits and companions the fanbases general response is "pfft heard that before."

At least thats how I see it.

People are setting themselves up for disappointment I think.

---
Mike said:
Followers will have more than one appearance
Did you prefer Merril in green over white?
---

So we will get two appearances (at minimum or maybe maximum too) but they may or may not be just recolors ME2 style.
Also the unlocking thing might not be such a good idea unless we have at least two choices to begin with.
If I want all party members to at least wear pants I should be able too. That isn't too much to ask is it?

---
Mike also said:
Additionally, we are experimenting with armor equipped to the followers having some additional visual impact on the follower's iconic appearance
---

This might require even more time and resources than doing dao+da2 iconic style. (If there is lots of companion outfit styles to choose from).
 

Modifié par FieryDove, 03 septembre 2011 - 12:58 .

[ScotGaymer]

@FieryDove...

I reckon what we are going to get is a few lame ass recolours of the original outfits and expected to swallow it as something different.

I have very very low expectations regarding this and I dont see that changing.

[Yrkoon]

Or.... 1 new  reskin for each act. So basically 3 total. And then we'll scream OH YEAH! when bioware decides to release Item DLC pack #1 which adds one more outfit for each companion.... followed by Item DLC pack #2 a couple of months later that does the same thing.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 03 septembre 2011 - 01:12 .

[addiction21]

Yrkoon wrote...

^no, that seems about right (from what I've been able to gather from reading   both of these threads, at least.)

Me though, my issue is that I missed the meeting where it was decided that we should  all be happy with a "meet me half-way" proposal. I'm  disappointed about such a compromise.

First. I am not going to touch the part I cut out. I am a person that needs numbers when it comes to such things. Not in a bad way but dont bring that up to me again because I am rather sure neither of us know what that cut is.

But the thing I wonder about. How many of the vocal regulars that didnt like the change of companion armor for DA2 criticized both the loss of stat allocation and visual but are now acting as if the visual side is the only thing that matters.

I AM NOT pointing fingers but those two went hand and hand untill a few days ago. Now its all "not having visual customzation kills player freedom" totally.

I'm just babbeling again.

[addiction21]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

expectations

The word that murders emperors...

[FieryDove]

addiction21 wrote...

But the thing I wonder about. How many of the vocal regulars that didnt like the change of companion armor for DA2 criticized both the loss of stat allocation and visual but are now acting as if the visual side is the only thing that matters.

I'm just babbeling again.

I don't know. I know in DAO many of my wardens wore the ancient elven armor for looks. (The stats were lousy). But I do know I love choices. (And toggles)

Babble is good. Swooping is bad.

[Maconbar]

addiction21 wrote...

FitScotGaymer wrote...

expectations

The word that murders emperors...

Don't you mean expectorations?

[Yrkoon]

addiction21 wrote...


First. I am not going to touch the part I cut out. I am a person that needs numbers when it comes to such things. Not in a bad way but dont bring that up to me again because I am rather sure neither of us know what that cut is.

But the thing I wonder about. How many of the vocal regulars that didnt like the change of companion armor for DA2 criticized both the loss of stat allocation and visual but are now acting as if the visual side is the only thing that matters.

I AM NOT pointing fingers but those two went hand and hand untill a few days ago. Now its all "not having visual customzation kills player freedom" totally.

I'm just babbeling again.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but my gripes have always been both.  In the case of Avaline, it was stats.  I use her as my tank.    And I'm serious about my tanks.   Seeing a *perfect* suit of tank armor at the Black emporium and then realizing that I'll never be able to equip it on Avaline, well, that  pissed me off to no end.

On the other hand, with Isabela and Varric, it was looks.  I don't  mind  seeing  Isabela  half naked  (or better), when  She's chatting it up with my Hawke at his estate, or even if she's at the bar at the hanged man.  But when  we're in the middle of a   violent and tense battle on the streets...  Just no.  It made me not take the game seriously.  And Varric... I just didn't like his outfit.  It was ugly.  it didn't look "cool*.

Overall, however, I'm now having trouble understanding why  we even need to seperate the two issues from each other.  Equipped Gear should show on  any avatar and  that gear should be removable.  period.

[ScotGaymer]

addiction21 wrote...

FitScotGaymer wrote...

expectations

The word that murders emperors...

You say that like expectation is a bad thing.

It isnt. Its perfectly reasonable and natural to expect that we will get precisely what we are explicitly told we will get. That isnt a problem. The problem comes when we react to having our expectations having not been met.
Or forming unrealistic expectations from things that we arent told.

[addiction21]

*Shudders*
I will be getting to each of you inline... I shoulda known better opening my fat beak before diving into such a hotbed issue after being at the bar and a 14 hour day.

FieryDove wrote...

I don't know. I know in DAO many of my wardens wore the ancient elven armor for looks. (The stats were lousy). But I do know I love choices. (And toggles)

Babble is good. Swooping is bad.

1.
That is the break. There are those that want stats above all else (me) and others that want a]]reance over everything else.
I know this has been gone over sooooooooo many times before.
BioWare seems deadset on making the companions stand out. To make them unique or "iconic" And this is a monster of their own making I believe.
I dont know I dont want to get into all the numbers games  Yes I am biased but this is a comprimise for 2/3rds. Those that want the stats, those that want the "iconic" looks and sorry someone gets left out.
That said it does hint there will be some visual cusomazation for party members but that is so flimsy right now I dont want to get there.
2.

FieryDove wrote...

Babble is good. Swooping is bad.

I babble a lot but if I am swooping in on some waffles its a good thing.

Maconbar wrote...

Don't you mean expectorations?

I am lost and you might need to PM me that punchline.

Yrkoon wrote...

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but my gripes have always been both. 

That does suck you have acted rather negativly since you got something you wanted. That is just me tho. Like I said stats are the importent thing, but if this system goes thru how it is described I allready know that changing gear on my companions and them looking the same will bother me.
No it will everytime I do it.

Yrkoon wrote...

 And I'm serious about my tanks.   Seeing a *perfect* suit of tank armor at the Black emporium and then realizing that I'll never be able to equip it on Avaline, well, that  pissed me off to no end.

Kindred soul because I am a tanker. I get it but like I said I am a performence man. I dont care what something looks like as long as it performs!

Yrkoon wrote...

On the other hand, with Isabela and Varric, it was looks.  I don't  mind  seeing  Isabela  half naked  (or better), when  She's chatting it up with my Hawke at his estate, or even if she's at the bar at the hanged man.  But when  we're in the middle of a   violent and tense battle on the streets...  Just no.  It made me not take the game seriously.  And Varric... I just didn't like his outfit.  It was ugly.  it didn't look "cool*.

1.
I never understood the fawning Varric got. My chest hair would put him to shame and that always seemed the focus.
2.
Again its the whole "apperance performence" thing for me.
Apperance does not dictate performence to me.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

You say that like expectation is a bad thing.

It isnt. Its perfectly reasonable and natural to expect that we will get precisely what we are explicitly told we will get. That isnt a problem. The problem comes when we react to having our expectations having not been met.
Or forming unrealistic expectations from things that we arent told.

Expectations are a horrible thing if you do not understand how to manage them. If you put everythig down on the line based on your expectations of how "something should be" based on your expectations  then I feel no pity for you when you are disapointed.
Lighting does not strike twice.
If you live your life thru your expectations then be prepared to be disapointed time after time.

I am a simple and blunt person. IF you live your life on expectations alone then I do not feel sorry for you. Sorry.

Modifié par addiction21, 03 septembre 2011 - 02:31 .

[Reno_Tarshil]

Why so srs?

[Barbarossa2010]

Yrkoon wrote...

^no, that seems about right (from what I've been able to gather from reading   both of these threads, at least.)

Me though, my issue is that I missed the meeting where it was decided that we should  all be happy with a "meet me half-way" proposal. I'm  disappointed about such a compromise.

I'll be HAPPY with complete choice.  And  the frequent rebuttals of  "well, sure, but that'd be expensive!", do not impress me.  These companies make hundreds of millions of dollars on their games.  Time for them to *sweat* for it, and cease  with trying to make  corner cutting an art-form..

Yeah, constrained resourcing doesn't wash with me.  These companies need to be pushed harder.  Giving less choice is not evolution.  How anyone could ever see it as a good thing is simply baffling.

Obviously, DA2 was a rushed hack job of cost-cutting, and sales appear to have sufferred significantly because of it.  It was a mess and its sales seem to bear that out.  Being forced into a compromise because of the introduction of a product that not only didn't build on the goodness of its predecessor that seemed to draw in so many, but failed utterly to even resemble it, is a non-starter from the outset as a proposal.

With such polarization, Bioware should either go the Full Monty, and make the earnest attempt to get their hardcore Origins fans back, ang get word of mouth moving again, or simply quit pretending and just please the iconic crowd.  Right now they're just trying to pour the honey potions in the ears of Origins fans and feign: "well, we're trying to find that right balance," but in effect that's showing itself to be just more DA2, with a lame bone or two thrown to those who prefer Origins. Sorry, the goodwill capital from Origins was squandered with the marketing and release of DA2; and compromise has shown itself to be little more than a scrap from the table.


Oh, and let me add, that Bioware has every right to ignore the significant backlash against DA2 and offer half-measures shrouded as compromises.  They are absolutely free to choose a bad direction, water down and dilute their products in search of a [yet to be proven] mythological audience and lowest common denominator, and shrink their fan base, as any other business.  Just don't be surprised when consequences in sales show themselves.

A sequel not even selling half of it's predecessor is not something half-hearted compromises will fix.

Modifié par Barbarossa2010, 03 septembre 2011 - 02:08 .

[addiction21]

Reno_Tarshil wrote...

Why so srs?

Because clowns are scary

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I certainly appreciate that. And as I said, I would support a system that allows for both, even though I think it runs counter to an RPG.

That's only true if you assume that the player only controls one character.

That obviously isn't the case in DAO.

[Iakus]

erynnar wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

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.    

Agreed. I recommend you coin that term for the future.

I would like the range . Best of both worlds would be to have the option to clothe them the way you want or have an "Iconic range."  Hmmm I like that term. You should coin that.

That's it, I want a quarter every time someone uses the term "iconic range"