791 réponses à ce sujet

[FieryDove]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

If you put her in armor that is generic, then her look would have been generic, just like Leliana (who does sport a generic body look). If Isabela is to armor up, I would much prefer her to put on armor that's distinctly Isabela, and not just generic armor.

I understand the generic body models. It was this comment:

"We could have made the NPC body builds way more generic and allowed any armour to fit them. That certainly solves the problem of way more work but also makes the NPCs more generic."

Meaning if the NPC has generic body and generic armor they become...generic.

[bEVEsthda]

Dubya75 wrote...

I give up. Some people refuse to see the benefits to what BioWare is doing here.
I just hope it doesn't cause them (bioware) to compromise on their vision for the franchise.
And I'm outa here!

Don't feel so bad. It's not that people don't see "the benefits". Everybody doesn't appreciate the same things. I dislike iconic looks because it fundamentally goes against the things I look for in a RPG. But I perfectly understand Woo's argument about zots. And I agree with it in principle. The resources should be distributed to make the most worthwhile game as possible. And the vision of how to do that is the developers'.

Me, I'd happily see all voice acting and them movies just go down the trash bin, and resources spent on making a better game instead. But that's another vision. My vision. And it obviously won't happen.

[Range Rover]

I'm one that's not with the micro managing anymore, been playing those types of games for 20+ yrs and it gets really old. But I do believe it should still remain an option, justifies the price of the games(imo). And with the economy these days people just want to make sure their getting a bang for their buck. I just think if game devs wanna be game devs they should take all the time it takes to make a great product, if they're gonna do it might as well do it right. After all there is other areas of work one could pursue. So what I'm trying to get at here, is don't make the players option limited we know most people wont put the time in them, but there are many who will. Just don't half **** people, where I'm from that kind of mentality leads to very bad things. Either way keep up the good work Bioware, just don't forget majority of people do love options.

Modifié par Range Rover, 07 septembre 2011 - 06:44 .

[Atakuma]

Clearly the only solution to this issue, is to have the whole party consist of sassy golems.

Modifié par Atakuma, 07 septembre 2011 - 06:34 .

[Uccio]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Again, go back to one of my earlier posts. We could have done any number of things, including having NPC and PC clothing change based on whatever: which Act you're in, what area you're in, whether you're in their home base, what you equip them with. the same way you could have had tuna for lunch instead of pizza, or could have studied architecture instead of political science, or could have purchased Nike brand shoes instead of Reebok, or could have made that paper 14 pages instead of 12, or could have coloured something blue instead of red. Instead, for whatever reason, you chose to do something else.

For us, decisions are usually resource based--how do we get the most from our time and effort? All of those different NPC appearances take time and effort to implement, time and effort that has to come from somewhere. Zots were very limited in Dragon Age II, not just time-wise but for what we wanted to do with the game. We could have made the NPC body builds way more generic and allowed any armour to fit them. That certainly solves the problem of way more work but also makes the NPCs more generic. We could have spent the time and effort in making all of our armour appearances compatible with every NPC body, but some other level or animation or plot may have gotten far less attention. We could have added fewer followers, but come on! Our characters are pretty awesome, and people generally want to see more of them, not fewer!

Somewhere along the line, we decided to go with iconic/static NPC appearances and divert our zots elsewhere. Right, wrong, agree, disagree--it doesn't change what happened for Dragon Age II. Will it be different for future products? Only time (and what we decide to do withour zots) will tell.

Hello Stanley,

I have to say I still don´t get it. As bEVEsthda wrote (below) the reason for the change is not clear. Since the character customization was already in Origins it should have been relative easy to implement to the DA2. I admit I am not sofware designer (I´m a business major) but I do feel that such a change from a already popular game model was in my books a jump in the dark. Iconic look itself is a bit vague since none of the characters in the game have such history as, for example, spiderman has. These are so far one game only characters. To make this clear I´m not trying to ****** up wind here, I´m just honestly curious since we have a member of dev team here in the discussion.

bEVEsthda wrote...

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.

[bEVEsthda]

Range Rover wrote...

I'm one that's not with the micro managing anymore, been playing those types of games for 20+ yrs and it gets really old. But I do believe it should still remain an option, justifies the price of the games(imo). And with the economy these days people just want to make sure their getting a bang for their buck. I just think if game devs wanna be game devs they should take all the time it takes to make a great product, if they're gonna do it might as well do it right. After all there is other areas of work one could pursue. So what I'm trying to get at here, is make the players option limited we know most people wont put the time in them, but there are many who will. Just don't half **** people, where I'm from that kind of mentality leads to very bad things. Either way keep up the good work Bioware, just don't forget majority of people do love options.

?  ?   I'm not sure where you're going with that on this particular topic. You'll still have the option to upgrade stats by fitting armour. You just won't see that armour visually. So really there's not less "managing" (refuse to call it micro). (this is according to M.L. proposal.)

[Dragoonlordz]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

FieryDove wrote...

So if I put Izzy in a leather armor to give her some protection that would have made her generic? I just can't fathom this line of thinking. Zots I understand. This not so much.

If you put her in armor that is generic, then her look would have been generic, just like Leliana (who does sport a generic body look). If Isabela is to armor up, I would much prefer her to put on armor that's distinctly Isabela, and not just generic armor.

What do you think Isabella was wearing? It was leather and cloth.

Leather armour is not generic just because it's leather and it is not less iconic just because someone wears it.

There was nothing iconic about Bethany's outfits etc either, they wern't [RP] made one off by her own hand for her own self, I am pretty sure the place if [RP] she bought from like all stores, stocked more then one of them. Isabella isn't the only woman in the DA universe to wear cloth top and leather bottoms. Like said it was merely for marketing and possibly lack of time.

They sell you costume packs so they win regardless because you buy those sets and they have your money. The difference is those sets were locked out of DA2 even though play through it again and see for yourself all those equipment drops you could equip and change the way your Hawke looked were for any class you picked.

I guess they did not want to make anyones Hawke "iconic then" just everyone else, while benefitting from selling you those extra costumes and armour after retail release. Hawke is the main protaganist of the title yet he wasn't locked so feel free to explain to me why the most important character in the title is the one who is not iconic.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 06:46 .

[Willybot]

Atakuma wrote...

Clearly the only solution to this issue, is to have the whole party consist of sassy golems.

Or dancing ponies. Everyone loves dancing ponies.




They even have iconic looks and the occasional alternate costumes! Win-win, I say.

[berelinde]

Actually, I really like the idea of followers wearing something different in camp/home base. If we're going to have fewer outfits for them, that might make them seem more like real people.

[alex90c]

Iconic!

[Dragoonlordz]

simfamSP wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

In the end the result was sacrificing a gameplay mechanic/feature and system for mere PR/marketing visual appearence. I don't like that trade off personally.

I am very greatful for it, remembering how tedious it was in Origins to filter through hundreds of bits of armor trying to dress my characters in the best possible (stat-wise) armor.
Good riddens I say!

Just because there is a choice you can make, noone put gun to your head and forced you to make it.

Tedious to you was fun to me. Same reason planet visiting was tedious to some in ME and fun for me, replaced with planet scanning was tedious to me but fun for others. But removal of a feature that you were not forced to use in the first place just for marketing purposes is just wrong imho.

But what was fun exactly? The "visual" aspect of different items and armours. Or the statistic aspect of it? Because the latter might be implemented.

Who says you have to enjoy only one of two?... Please don't try to somehow railroad me into a corner it won't work. It is just as possible to enjoy both. If I want a giant panda suit Hawke then thats what I want and would find it fun, if I want some better stats that may improve the ease of which I complete the game which can be implied as fun but not the same kind. Stats aren't fun in themselves, them implementing only that would not make it vastly more fun, likewise outfits that sometimes help sometimes don't in fights can both be fun, the lack of such things removes some of the fun for both cases.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 06:49 .

[Newnation]

RagingCyclone wrote...

@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.

Not really, once you see them in their secret identities you rarely see them wearing something different from comic to comic unless its intergral to the plot (ex. if they're going to bed or lounging around). Otherwise Clark Kent is mostly always in a blue (usually blue), black, or grey suit when he's not Superman. Also, Optimus Prime has always had a similar look in almost all of his incarnations. The Optimus you're talking about that was a gorilla is a completely different character.

The thing about having someone look iconic means having one specific look. Vader's look was what made him iconic. When the people that first seen A New Hope some forty years ago seen Darth Vader for the first time his costume, swagger, and voice are what made people remember him....then they try to ignore the prequels.

Modifié par Newnation, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:00 .

[TheBlackBaron]

Willybot wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Clearly the only solution to this issue, is to have the whole party consist of sassy golems.

Or dancing ponies. Everyone loves dancing ponies.




They even have iconic looks and the occasional alternate costumes! Win-win, I say.

I'd be okay with this. 

...Even if I'm still rather disturbed by Pinkie Pie wearing an Old West prostitue outfit. 

[BubbleDncr]

I like iconic looks of party members.

I was actually glad to only have to worry about customizing the armor of my companions, and just myself. It's so tedious to always have to stock up on armor you find, then go back to camp and make sure everyone has the best armor possible on.

Besides, my companions are their own people. They should dress how they want, not how I want them to dress.

[Dragoonlordz]

simfamSP wrote...

Becuase of how bad of an idea it would have been to have locked Hawke's gear. The only purpose companion gear has served was for stragetic and statistic features only. BioWare are best known for it's companions. And if they seek to make them stand out a little more then so be it.

Even if they do use marketing schemes (without a doubt) to sell you outfits (ME2) as you mentioned before. There is no gun pointing at your head for you to actually buy the stuff.

No **** sherlock, the OP asked why I said why whether you agree with me or not.

I said they win because you buy what was locked out/not available in the core title. I have not bought the 'stuff' because I sold DA2 already given how poorly it was made in truly vast amount of areas I deemed it not worthy of keeping in my high quality title collection. This doesn't mean I can't make input into what I would like for DA3 or what I saw as wrong with DA2.

Do you even realise the contradiction your making?

"The only purpose companion gear has served was for stragetic strategic and statistic features only."

"BioWare are best known for it's companions. And if they seek to make them stand out a little more then so be it."

Read what you wrote and take a moment to think about what you said...

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:01 .

[SunTzuz]

Wasn't it mentioned that a goal was to maybe let you have the default (iconic) look thats enough to get to end game on normal (no companion inventory management essentially).

I'm not against iconic looks, but the outfitting companions shouldn't be locked or restricted. I really can't see why there just can't be an game option to turn on/off iconic looks on companions.

But if they do a number of restricted looks, I can see it now: new companion outfit DLCs for $10

[RagingCyclone]

Newnation wrote...

RagingCyclone wrote...

@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.

Not really, once you see them in their secret identities you rarely see them wearing something different from comic to comic unless its intergral to the plot (ex. if their going to bed or lounging around). Otherwise Clark Kent is mostly always in a blue (usually blue), black, or grey suit when he's not Superman. Also, Optimus Prime has always had a similar look in almost all of his incarnations. The Optimus you're talking about that was a gorilla is a completely different character.

The thing about having someone look iconic means having one specific look. Vader's look was what made him iconic. When the people that first seen A New Hope some forty years ago seen Darth Vader for the first time his costume, swagger, and voice are what made people remember him....then they try to ignore the prequels.

Yes, I was six when Star Wars came out, and your points about Darth Vader were right and gave me nightmares. (I was also afraid of the water that summer because of Jaws and I still would like the black Trans Am like the Bandit had), but Han Solo was still my favorite from that movie. I already posted about his iconic look.  And I won't get into Indiana Jones and the many looks besides the fedora and whip.

Modifié par RagingCyclone, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:01 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Newnation wrote...

RagingCyclone wrote...

@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.

Not really, once you see them in their secret identities you rarely see them wearing something different from comic to comic unless its intergral to the plot (ex. if their going to bed or lounging around). Otherwise Clark Kent is mostly always in a blue (usually blue), black, or grey suit when he's not Superman. Also, Optimus Prime has always had a similar look in almost all of his incarnations. The Optimus you're talking about that was a gorilla is a completely different character.

I'll point out that even Oprimus Primal had the distinctive face plate and head shape of the other Optimuses throughout history. 

Even further, they didn't change the look of Optimus Prime within the context of the show itself. He can't decide one day to become a bear, or a cheetah, or an alligator within the same show. He was introduced as a gorilla, and he stayed a gorilla. Optimus Prime in the original show was a semi truck, and stayed a semi truck. He didn't become a porsche or a jet or an oil rig. He was a truck, and stayed a truck. There were no interchangeable parts between him and other Transformers.

Similarly, I would not be amiss if Isabela changed outfits between time jumps or games. But there's a pretty big difference between changing looks between entire series and changing looks at the whim of the viewer.

[David Gaider]

bEVEsthda wrote...
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.

But we have said why. We want our major characters to have their own distinctive look. I can certainly see why there might be people who see little value in that, but I believe it would be a mistake to suggest that nobody sees value in it... or that in order for a CRPG to qualify as such party appearances must be customizeable (Planescape: Torment would like to have a word with those who say that).

I find it more likely that a lack of customizability in other areas added to this could make one feel restricted, perhaps, and I believe Mike has already spoken of plans to find some middle ground when it comes to companions and equipment-- but going back to generic bodies for all NPC's isn't in the cards. Doing that would lose something that we consider valuable (subjective as that may be), and I believe there are other avenues where we'd like to focus on efforts with regards to choice and customizeability in the game as a whole. Perhaps Mike will speak more on that in time.

[MorrigansLove]

David Gaider wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
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.

But we have said why. We want our major characters to have their own distinctive look. I can certainly see why there might be people who see little value in that, but I believe it would be a mistake to suggest that nobody sees value in it... or that in order for a CRPG to qualify as such party appearances must be customizeable (Planescape: Torment would like to have a word with those who say that).

I find it more likely that a lack of customizability in other areas added to this could make one feel restricted, perhaps, and I believe Mike has already spoken of plans to find some middle ground when it comes to companions and equipment-- but going back to generic bodies for all NPC's isn't in the cards. Doing that would lose something that we consider valuable (subjective as that may be), and I believe there are other avenues where we'd like to focus on efforts with regards to choice and customizeability in the game as a whole. Perhaps Mike will speak more on that in time.

Just wondering, how would Isabella survive any battle when she isn't wearing any armour whatsoever?

[Wulfram]

edit:nevermind

Modifié par Wulfram, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:14 .