791 réponses à ce sujet

[RussianSpy27]

PLEASE DON'T START A WAR HERE. I am honestly just trying to understand the corporate strategy here and I can't seem to do it.

So BioWare is ready for a compromise where they may let us add items but not SHOW them. They are adamant about it and I still have not figured out the reason.

1)  Marketting - Could it be that having party members in non-changing attire is somehow good for marketting? I don't see how. If they need posters and TV commercials with Isabella looking the way she does, what's to stop them from doing it if  a player has a choice to change up attire around and SEE it during mid game?

2) Programming Hassle - I am sure programmers spend countless hours writing difficult code for the game. I'm no expert but if it was done in Origins, how much heavy duty unbearable weight on system specs would it be to do so again and let players see different armor/attire sets? 

3) Helping non RPG players get used to RPG -  I understand the move of DA2 and desire to try and streamline the whole process like in ME2. Fair attempt. But once you say that customization will be back, how is it a strain on a non RPG player to view with her own eyes what the armor looks on a party member? 

In KOTR and in Origins, iconic looks were there. I had those Jedi robes. I had Morrigan's clothing. But I also found it very enjoyable to see Morrigan in another attire. I mean, she can put some other magical robe on and let me view it, right? 

If they chose to just purely stick with DA2 version, I may not be a fan of that, but I would at least understand it. But once there is talk of letting us customize, why the fear of party members show what they look like in other attire? I do not get it, friends.

Modifié par RussianSpy27, 07 septembre 2011 - 03:47 .

[Dragoonlordz]

If I recall the original comment PR wise was because when looked at screenshots even though all the characters had variety in what could wear eveyone tended to pick the same things so hated how they all looked same in most of the screenshots of the party. They then removed the ability to change what looked like so they ended up with everyone looking same in party in every screenshot because there was no way to change the way they looked. The only difference was this time the devs got to pick the look of party not the player.

Later they said it was due to model structure of each companion and how hard or tedious or tough for them was designing clothes that could fit anyone you picked although I am pretty sure Sten was different model and size to Oghren yet had no problem in DAO allowing to equip variety of clothes and armours. In the end they finally decided to use and settle on the "iconic looks" argument.Which isn't exactly good to be honest Morrigan and Alistair are more memorable to me than all of DA2 companions because no matter what they wore they were the same person through writing and story/persona whether I put them in a tutu or a giant peice of armour Morrigan was still Morrigan only we had more variety.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:07 .

[Pasquale1234]

I've wondered that myself.

I think in part it is to allow them to use vastly different body models for the companions - like the hyper-inflated Isabela or slighter-built Anders. They seem to want to establish a very unique, very strong iconic image for the companions.

While I can see some value in it, I don't think it's a good tradeoff because it means the armors are not interchangeable unless you create meshes for every armor on every body model. It restricts player choice, which is generally not a good thing.

Morrigan was a pretty good example. She had a very unique, iconic look, but the player was able to "mess that up" by equipping her with other gear - especially if you gave her the Arcane Warrior specialty. It did not change her personality or role in the story one iota, only her appearance, and in ways that some players might prefer.

Just exactly why this is (apparently) such a high priority is..... mysterious. Shrug.

[DarkDragon777]

Honestly, I thought the Origins characters were a lot more iconic and memorable, not because of their attire, because of their personality.

[RagingCyclone]

One of the devs already made a statement that rings far and above anything I have heard them say for a reason behind the "iconic" look---cosplay.

[Stanley Woo]

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

That's what we're going for when we talk about iconic party members.

Your #2 point doesn't really have anything to do with iconic characters. It is trying to dictate to us where we spend our resources. The point you make is not impossible, nor is it necessarily difficult to include in a game, but given finite resources and time, where do we put people and what do we have them do? Your point #2 is not a bad idea, certainly, but in Dragon Age II, we decided to put those resources elsewhere.

[Monica21]

I understand that players want to equip companions in certain ways, but strictly from a story perspective, each of your companions has a home and their own clothes or armor. This isn't party camp where you have a bunch of loot to choose from. My companions are all grownups, so I don't really care if they want to dress themselves. I figure Isabela has had enough practice dodging daggers and swords that if she's fine going out unarmored, then I'm fine with her going out unarmored.

[RagingCyclone]

@Stanley Woo...but there is one problem with some of those you mention (Superman, Spiderman, Green Lantern) in that they also have alter egos with differing looks. They are not static in always being the hero. Darth Vader is iconic because his suit is required for him to live. In fact most of those you mention have that look for a specific reason. Even Optimus Prime has several looks including one being a gorilla. Part of the iconic look you are talking about implementing also makes that character static and not vibrant. I am all for an iconic look like Morrigan had. But for all intent and purposes in the game there are times even she would not wear those clothes. Say for instance high in the mountains going for the Urn of Sacred Ashes.

[Dragoonlordz]

But whats wrong with having my Alistair running around in a giant panda costume if so desired, don't get more iconic than that. It's Alistair the giant panda guy and due to increasing the fun I would have with the character doing so would make me enjoy the game more which surely is a win for devs who wish to sell the game. Personally I like the idea of my team looking like rejects from the X-Men and coming up with cool funny name for them, saving the world dressed as monkeys or anything I desired. In the end it really did come down to the writers idea of what they should look like as opposed to the player.

All I can say is thankfully we have mods to undo the limitation of locking in persona's tied to fashion sense. I can only hope they keep releasing some sort of toolsets though get impression they don't wish to do so because that stops them selling us item packs when we create our own or lowering amount sold atleast.

Now I don't object to iconic looks but I hope they allow us to keep modding and creating our own iconic looks via toolsets. Unfortuantly I think I read somewhere that they probably won't be ever releasing toolsets again.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:17 .

[FieryDove]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

Wow superman, green lantern and spiderman in DA3!!

I disagree with some of that list like Tali and Death's Hand...the rest, hmmm.

The next big complaint in DA3 will be *You have too much movie in my *GAME*!  Just watch for it...

[Uccio]

RussianSpy27 wrote...

PLEASE DON'T START A WAR HERE. I am honestly just trying to understand the corporate strategy here and I can't seem to do it.

So BioWare is ready for a compromise where they may let us add items but not SHOW them. They are adamant about it and I still have not figured out the reason.

1)  Marketting - Could it be that having party members in non-changing attire is somehow good for marketting? I don't see how. If they need posters and TV commercials with Isabella looking the way she does, what's to stop them from doing it if  a player has a choice to change up attire around and SEE it during mid game?

2) Programming Hassle - I am sure programmers spend countless hours writing difficult code for the game. I'm no expert but if it was done in Origins, how much heavy duty unbearable weight on system specs would it be to do so again and let players see different armor/attire sets? 

3) Helping non RPG players get used to RPG -  I understand the move of DA2 and desire to try and streamline the whole process like in ME2. Fair attempt. But once you say that customization will be back, how is it a strain on a non RPG player to view with her own eyes what the armor looks on a party member? 

In KOTR and in Origins, iconic looks were there. I had those Jedi robes. I had Morrigan's clothing. But I also found it very enjoyable to see Morrigan in another attire. I mean, she can put some other magical robe on and let me view it, right? 

If they chose to just purely stick with DA2 version, I may not be a fan of that, but I would at least understand it. But once there is talk of letting us customize, why the fear of party members show what they look like in other attire? I do not get it, friends.

It is purely out of lazyness, plain and simple. Since Origins had this feature (which I see a major part of rpg experience) I see no reason for not to include it in the game. If customers, which is us, enjoyed having this feature I just cannot understand what can the dev team have against their customers opinion. They want less money? Since that has and will happen since DA2 was not nearly as succesfull as DAO.

[Anomaly-]

I'll just quote my post from another thread.

Anomaly- wrote...

I much prefer the way Origins did it, with everything essentially equippable by everyone, provided they meet the requirements. I really don't get the whole 'iconic look' thing.

First of all, I play these games for the progression and choices/strategy, not to play dress up. Personally, I'm a lot more concerned with whether these new gloves offer better protection than my previous ones, rather than if they match my boots better. That said, it is kind of special when they do, but that's what set bonuses are for. Secondly, why not focus more on companion faces and personalities/mannerisms being unique? Typically, that's how people become recognizable. This would also help to improve other aspects of the game, such as story and romances. The whole iconic look thing is as if to say you wouldn't recognize your own friends unless they wore the same clothes every day. And finally, seeing my companions in the same gear they were in when we started doesn't make me feel like we've had much of an adventure. I feel much less sense of progress.

Modifié par Anomaly-, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:21 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Ukki wrote...

It is purely out of lazyness, plain and simple. Since Origins had this feature (which I see a major part of rpg experience) I see no reason for not to include it in the game. If customers, which is us, enjoyed having this feature I just cannot understand what can the dev team have against their customers opinion. They want less money? Since that has and will happen since DA2 was not nearly as succesfull as DAO.

I am personally against the limitation of player choice via armour and such and object to the lack of toolsets being released now so we can undo that lock out. But I do not think was lazy just limited time they invested in it's creation to meet deadline. I also think your wrong about the money aspect, they make more money from selling you costume packs and item packs then not doing so and hence the stopping of releasing toolset to create our own I think.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:22 .

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out?

As often as plot requests that. When he is out of being all "super", he wears suit. Meeting parents, he wears sweater. Trying to avoid cryptonite - wears lead armor. Becomes older - switches to black and white. Travels into the future losing all his powers - grows hair and be-...
..arh, RagingCyclone beat me.

Right, I'll express my personal opinions on that then. First - it's fooking fantasy man, a genre where you find powerful artifacts, grow from poor to wealthy, from rags to plate armor. Remember how special it was in AD&D to loot for coppers just to get enough for your first plate mail for a fighter? It's all about outgrowing yourself, and your enemies, and promoting characters into something greater.
Second - items distribution is something rarely getting special attention to, but that's actually very important. And when you get ten plate mails being a mage and your own f***** brother rejects to wear something better than pages tunic it's really annoying.
And third - Minsc, Edwin and Jan-turnip-Janses had portraits, some VO and generic dolls. How are they less iconic than those bare footed elves, huh?

Modifié par DamnThoseDisplayNames, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:25 .

[Dubya75]

FieryDove wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

Wow superman, green lantern and spiderman in DA3!!

I disagree with some of that list like Tali and Death's Hand...the rest, hmmm.

The next big complaint in DA3 will be *You have too much movie in my *GAME*!  Just watch for it...

Stanley's point missed by a mile...

[Monica21]

Ukki wrote...
It is purely out of lazyness, plain and simple. Since Origins had this feature (which I see a major part of rpg experience) I see no reason for not to include it in the game. If customers, which is us, enjoyed having this feature I just cannot understand what can the dev team have against their customers opinion. They want less money? Since that has and will happen since DA2 was not nearly as succesfull as DAO.

I might get run off the forum for this, but I actually found equipping eight companions to be incredibly tedious. "Where's that armor? Is x stat boost better than y stat boost?" Until I got certain things like the Warden Commander armor for Alistair then it was just a lot of inventory blah.

[RagingCyclone]

I would even go further with iconic figures with Han Solo. His iconic look is the white shirt and black vest, many people know him that way. But during A New Hope he appears in a stormtrooper suit. In Empire Strikes Back we first see him in a parka with goggles, and then later in the white shirt but a black jacket not the vest. In Return of the Jedi he's back in the white shirt and vest, but later on Endor he is wearing a camo overcoat. Do any of these changes make him less Han Solo, or less recognizable? No. But he still has the iconic recognition of wearing the white shirt and black vest.

[FieryDove]

Dubya75 wrote...

Stanley's point missed by a mile...

Not at all.

Have a nice day.

Monica21 wrote...

I might get run off the forum for this, but I actually found equipping eight companions to be incredibly tedious. "Where's that armor? Is x stat boost better than y stat boost?" Until I got certain things like the Warden Commander armor for Alistair then it was just a lot of inventory blah.

We needed an option in DA2 to equip/compare gear on all companions at once like in Origins. I am more of a looks person. I would rather wear good looking gear vs uber stat gear. But I do like choices in gear...more the merrier. But that is just me. Others do not no problem.

Modifié par FieryDove, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:27 .

[LobselVith8]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

The difference is that those were superheroes who are wearing disguises, and Hawke's companions are supposed to be characters living their lives in a city-state. It just seems odd that "real" people are consistently wearing the same clothes for seven years. That's why Clark Kent wears different clothes to work, it's why Bruce Wayne wears different suits, it's why Hal Jordan or Kyle Rayner wear different clothes when they aren't in disguises meant to hide their identity. I get your point about the looks being "iconic," but I think it's somewhat jarring that their looks remain stagnant for nearly a decade.

Stanley Woo wrote...

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

I'm starting to see where the inspiration for the Band of Three came from.

[Dubya75]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

That's what we're going for when we talk about iconic party members.

Your #2 point doesn't really have anything to do with iconic characters. It is trying to dictate to us where we spend our resources. The point you make is not impossible, nor is it necessarily difficult to include in a game, but given finite resources and time, where do we put people and what do we have them do? Your point #2 is not a bad idea, certainly, but in Dragon Age II, we decided to put those resources elsewhere.

I LIKE IT! I LIKE IT A LOT!
The thing that bothered me the most about Origins was the uniform look all the characters had. As boring as watching paint dry!
This was fixed in DA2. Woohoo! (no pun intended Mr Woo)
What I think BioWare is doing in DA3 is make different VISIBLE outfits available for all characters within their individual styles. Sweet!

[Salaya]

 As much as some people like this direction for equipment, and being aware of the impact on gameplay, the idea of emphasize iconic looks over variety is the exemplifictaion of the "new" philosophy in Dragon Age: it's better to make a cool looking game than a game with good gameplay. This, of course, is completely subjective; but my point is that  now everything in the franchise looks like as some kind of bad-try-of jrpg (note that I love jrpgs).

We can hear some of the explanations for the new directions on gameplay and art..., but at the end, I always feel that the only true reason is that they want to appeal wider audiences by negating the core elements of wcrpg. And I'm afraid that we have reached a point in wich the final product is far from being a wcrpg. Naturally, lots of people would disagree, since all the terms I use are vague and very subjective... but, in any case, I'm sure there is people who inditifies with me. 

I wish more people could grasp the beauty of playing wcrpgs, but not this way. Over sized boobs, flashy animations and incredibly dull gameplay, are not the only ways to seduce more public. 

Modifié par Salaya, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:26 .

[Dubya75]

Salaya wrote...

 As much as some people like this direction for equipment, and being aware of the impact on gameplay, the idea of emphasize iconic looks over variety is the exemplifictaion of the "new" philosophy in Dragon Age: it's better to make a cool looking game than a game with good gameplay. This, of course, is completely subjective; but my point is that  now everything in the franchise looks like as some kind of bad-try-of jrpg (note that I love jrpgs).

We can hear some of the explanations for the new directions on gameplay and art..., but at the end, I always feel that the only true reason is that they want to appeal wider audiences by negating the core elements of wcrpg. And I'm afraid that we have reached a point in wich the final product is far from being a wcrpg. Naturally, lots of people would disagree, since all the terms I use are vague and very subjective... but, in any case, I'm sure there is people who inditifies with me. 

I wish more people could grasp the beauty of playing wcrpgs, but not this way. Over sized boobs, flashy animations and incredibly dull gameplay, are not the only ways to seduce more public. 

Please explain how visual appearance influence gameplay?
In my experience, the appearance of my characters has no impact on gameplay at all, only stats of armor and weapons impact combat, but the rest of the gameplay? It really makes no difference.

Modifié par Dubya75, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:32 .

[bEVEsthda]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

That's what we're going for when we talk about iconic party members.

Your #2 point doesn't really have anything to do with iconic characters. It is trying to dictate to us where we spend our resources. The point you make is not impossible, nor is it necessarily difficult to include in a game, but given finite resources and time, where do we put people and what do we have them do? Your point #2 is not a bad idea, certainly, but in Dragon Age II, we decided to put those resources elsewhere.

Yes, but why do you want it? The question remains unanswered. I, at least, already understood what iconic look is. I do not see it as desirable for these party crpgs though. And while you did answer what you want to achieve, you still didn't answer why.

The "point #2": At some point you should maybe look into associative modeling. Saves tons of work and makes anything possible. 
I do grudgingly accept a resource argument though, if that is the case with your current tools and assets. There are better things to do with limited resources, either I will agree with how you spent them or not. I always understood that the re-used environments in DA2 was something Mike slipped into, in an effort to make the game longer. And I agree with that decision, (as the choice being a shorter game) even if it's a disaster from a point of PR and precedent. ...Much as I dislike DA2.

[Dragoonlordz]

Dubya75 wrote...

Please explain how visual appearance influence gameplay?

Got nothing against you as you know, but it is an aspect of gameplay much like a selection of skills or moving up, down, left or right on the screen. It's a gameplay mechanic therefore it's adding or removing does influence gameplay. I think what you meant was how does it effect plot, because gameplay it does effect.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 05:32 .