791 réponses à ce sujet

[Willybot]

MorrigansLove wrote...

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

Through the same power that allows PC's/NPC's to survive mass trauma throughout many battles, but be taken out via the power of Magic Murder Knife in a cutscene. If any semblance of realism is what your after, you are playing the wrong game.

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

David Gaider wrote...

(Planescape: Torment would like to have a word with those who say that).

A) Planescape was on Infinity Engine, which had like one full plate just re-colored for everyone.
 Implementation of iconic looks there was smart and elegant, and always explained (like sword of Dak'kon was made of his will). Plot and setting quality outweighted issues with logic there.
C) More than half of companions were't humanoids, and if they were, they were really unique. You cant put armor on skull or walking TV-box. Same can be said for winged or tailed person.. though NWN2 disagrees.
D) You still could change armor for some of them.

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

[TheJediSaint]

MorrigansLove wrote...

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

Not getting hit in the first place?

[alex90c]

MorrigansLove wrote...

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?

gameplay/lore segregation

it's kinda like how Shepard can one-shot dudes in a cutscene but in actual combat you have to pump like an entire clip of ammo in to someone to kill them

[Willybot]

simfamSP wrote...

Willybot wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

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

Through the same power that allows PC's/NPC's to survive mass trauma throughout many battles, but be taken out via the power of Magic Murder Knife in a cutscene. If any semblance of realism is what your after, you are playing the wrong game.

With the power of reload and save?

Chronomancy: the greatest of all videogame superpowers!

[Wulfram]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Not getting hit in the first place?

That should be defence, not armour.

[Monica21]

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

The same way this is possible: 

Modifié par Monica21, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:28 .

[Uccio]

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.

Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

[Pasquale1234]

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!

But entirely optional.  You could have sold every piece of that armor if you were not interested in putting any of it on your companions.

And DAO gave you complete and accurate descriptions of every single piece of armor and accessory in the game, which made it very easy to quickly go through them all and choose.  DA2 gave us nameless accessories with incomplete descriptions - two items with exactly the same description, but vastly different star ratings and prices - which made it very difficult to choose among them.

[Willybot]

Monica21 wrote...

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

The same way this is possible: 

Misquote, but I must say that *is* a pretty iconic look.

[Addai]

Anomaly- wrote...

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.

Well said.

It's sacrificing player choice and customization for the value of being "cinematic."  Edit:  I don't mind followers having iconic outfits as starter equipment, but I think we should be able to change them out with loot we pick up.  This is an example of where Bioware coulda shoulda added something to the game rather than take something away from the original.

Modifié par Addai67, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:27 .

[Monica21]

Ukki wrote...
Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

Okay, are you really not going to buy DA3 based on how customizable your companion armor is? No matter if the story is better, if characters have real motivations (other than "the Veil is thin" business), or if you do have choice and consequence. The Origins companion armor model is what you're basing your future purchasing decision on?

Modifié par Monica21, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:27 .

[Monica21]

Willybot wrote...
Misquote, but I must say that *is* a pretty iconic look.

Sorry for that. But yeah, it is. If only they hadn't magically faded. 

Edited for proper quoting and stuff! 

Modifié par Monica21, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:29 .

[ipgd]

Ukki wrote...

Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

It doesn't matter whether more people prefer the Origins model or not. Bioware is the one making the game, not us. The only reason they need to justify a change is if that is the kind of game they want to make. If you don't like it, you don't have to give them your money.

[Dragoonlordz]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

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.

And Fenris was introduced as an Elf, he stayed and Elf.. What he wore could of changed he would still be an Elf. Unlike Optimus Prime, Fenris was a living being that should change his clothes on a daily basis or stink the place out.

It's a role playing game, it is easily possible to RP that it was her choice to wear something different and in the end that is what she did at an additional cost to the player through DLC. The difference between you allocating a look or devs allocating a look is just one of their choosing which is there game they can do so if wish. But don't expect me to be happy they locked out all outfits and armours from the game and all of sudden offer me the option of resolving my issue by throwing my money at them to buy the armours at extra cost afterwards.

We aren't talking one set of armour that is "iconic", because they sold you more sets so which becomes maybe now just a style theme of "iconic" which is why the fallacy of Optimus Prime or Superman is nothing but silly for simple reason the companions did change clothes/armours for an extra price.

So which is Merrills iconic look? Which will be the iconic Merrill after costume / outfit pack 5,6 or 7?



If was so people can easily recognise her, why does she look differently where the only link to being Merrill is her face. If you cut off the head almost noone who hadn't played DA2 would probably know who it was.. So unless the goal was to make it so a screenshot of a character in DA2 would only be iconic to the people who already played and bought it.

Noone is forcing me to buy them (oufit packs) and I choose to not do so, people are free to buy them if they want them thats up to them. But the timeline of what occured is simple enough ~They released game with 'locked appearances' of companions, they got criticized but no way of knowing if what followed was due to that or whether was planned from start (just no way of knowing at all) and then started 'selling' to you new appearences. They lost nothing but gained your money from locked>started selling. That is factual as it was exactly what happened. not making excuses and without even needing to add bias, thats just what happened and if want to buy such things thats up to you.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:48 .

[Range Rover]

simfamSP wrote...

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

(Planescape: Torment would like to have a word with those who say that).

A) Planescape was on Infinity Engine, which had like one full plate just re-colored for everyone.
 Implementation of iconic looks there was smart and elegant, and always explained (like sword of Dak'kon was made of his will). Plot and setting quality outweighted issues with logic there.
C) More than half of companions were't humanoids, and if they were, they were really unique. You cant put armor on skull or walking TV-box. Same can be said for winged or tailed person.. though NWN2 disagrees.
D) You still could change armor for some of them.

A) Much like Origins but ofcourse there were like what... 6?
Agreed, but their armour wasn't necessarily done that way. Dak'kon's blade was just about it.
C) Agreed. But Annah, Dak'kon, Fall-from-Grace and some might even argue Vhailor could have implemented so.
D) Annah and Fall-from-Grace from the Lower Ward shopkeeper but that's about it. And nothing change visually.

NOTE TO ALL SMARTASSES:

Planescape Torment in my favourite game. I love it to bits and will easily place it at the best RPG ever made.<3<3<3<3<3<3

 It's just really sad to see what became of Black Isle studios. One could only imagine what stuff they would be putting out now if they were still around. Just shows bad things can happen to the best of them.

[Willybot]

ipgd wrote...

Ukki wrote...

Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

It doesn't matter whether more people prefer the Origins model or not. Bioware is the one making the game, not us. The only reason they need to justify a change is if that is the kind of game they want to make. If you don't like it, you don't have to give them your money.

Pretty much ^this in the end. Those who disapprove of their decisions when making the game can take the same actions they may have done when DA2 came out: not purchase the game, pass on their feedback to others, etc. No matter what we say on these boards, it is ultimately Bioware's decision to make whatever they wish; just as it's our decision what to do with their product when they're done.

[bEVEsthda]

ipgd wrote...

Ukki wrote...

Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

It doesn't matter whether more people prefer the Origins model or not. Bioware is the one making the game, not us. The only reason they need to justify a change is if that is the kind of game they want to make. If you don't like it, you don't have to give them your money.

Or alternatively put: The developers see the whole picture, as they want it. It's fine to say one wants this and this and this, but what it really comes down to is what one rather wants. I'm totally with Woo if he says it a question of prioritizing. There's no problem imagining that there are better ways to spend develop resources. (That doesn't mean I totally expect Bioware to spend them as I would have wanted. I don't. But the point is still valid.)
In 'In Exiles' poll-thread I said I couldn't vote because I didn't think I had enough information. Taking Stanley Woo's statements at face value, I would now have to come down on the side of M.L. previous proposal.

That doesn't mean I like it. And I'm quite worried that there is a DA-vision of some fantastic FF-scape/comic-book world behind it all, with fantastic characters, Fenris  and Flemeth  just being the start of it all. All that talk about Green Lantern, Spiderman etc doesn't bode well.

[Uccio]

Monica21 wrote...

Ukki wrote...
Hello David,

So the question in this point would be then are these people more numerous than people who prefer the Origins model from the DA fanbase and how much it affects their future as DA customers. As much I have had discussion about DAO and 2 among fellow gameplayers there have been much more support for the Origins way than DA2. I know it is subjective but still I feel it is a important aspect.

Okay, are you really not going to buy DA3 based on how customizable your companion armor is? No matter if the story is better, if characters have real motivations (other than "the Veil is thin" business), or if you do have choice and consequence. The Origins companion armor model is what you're basing your future purchasing decision on?

No, not entirely no. But, I have also decided that I will not buy another DA2 type of game. That is not why I became DA fan orignally. Now how much the other aspects will affect if I buy the game or not along with this feature will be determined when/if the next game will be published.

[ipgd]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Let Ukki ask his question (this is the right place afterall)!

That is the answer the developers have always given to any person who suggests majority opinion should dictate how they build their games.

Modifié par ipgd, 07 septembre 2011 - 07:50 .