337 réponses à ce sujet

[Joy Divison]

In Exile wrote...

What? I... it's... 

So... if DA:O didn't have an isometric camera but otherwise was the same game, it wouldn't be an RPG? Because DA:O for the 360 didn't, and now all of a sudden I'm curious as to where you are from and if your people come in peace.

I am not claiming its not an RPG.  I am disputing your contention that DA2 plays the same "under the hood" on PC as DA:O.

Why people are arguing over a label I have no idea and I don't care.  Go ahead and call DA:2 an RPG all you want, that doesn't fix ACT III, doesn't better explain Meredith and Orsino, doesn't give Hawk meaningful choices, and doesn't the player an iso-camera angle.

[Herr Uhl]

Joy Divison wrote...

In Exile wrote...

What? I... it's... 

So... if DA:O didn't have an isometric camera but otherwise was the same game, it wouldn't be an RPG? Because DA:O for the 360 didn't, and now all of a sudden I'm curious as to where you are from and if your people come in peace.

I am not claiming its not an RPG.  I am disputing your contention that DA2 plays the same "under the hood" on PC as DA:O.

Why people are arguing over a label I have no idea and I don't care.  Go ahead and call DA:2 an RPG all you want, that doesn't fix ACT III, doesn't better explain Meredith and Orsino, doesn't give Hawk meaningful choices, and doesn't the player an iso-camera angle.

How did this change the mechanics of combat? Other than being an inconvenience.

[Il Divo]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

In Exile wrote...

What? I... it's... 

So... if DA:O didn't have an isometric camera but otherwise was the same game, it wouldn't be an RPG? Because DA:O for the 360 didn't, and now all of a sudden I'm curious as to where you are from and if your people come in peace.

I am not claiming its not an RPG.  I am disputing your contention that DA2 plays the same "under the hood" on PC as DA:O.

Why people are arguing over a label I have no idea and I don't care.  Go ahead and call DA:2 an RPG all you want, that doesn't fix ACT III, doesn't better explain Meredith and Orsino, doesn't give Hawk meaningful choices, and doesn't the player an iso-camera angle.

How did this change the mechanics of combat? Other than being an inconvenience.

It doesn't.

[Yrkoon]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

You mean you used mana clash on Gaxkang really fast, before he had a cast to cast any spells. Removing Mana Clash does not change what DA:O is. [/quote]
Oh, I'd say it changes a thing or two.....  under the hood.






[quote]You can kill any boss in DA2 'quickly'. The damage being capped in no way changes this. [/quote]
BS. The damage cap is part of the fail-safe mechanism to insure that bosses cannot be killed quickly. Every boss in DA2 has a pre-defined "phase" script that the developers decided cannot be broken simply because the player  chooses to think outside the box with his/her tactics and powergaming.  Whether or not one likes these changes is irrelevant.    What matter is that it IS a change  under the hood.



[quote]




[quote]Gave me a feeling of power and satisfaction that's pretty difficult to describe to  someone who measures  the "difficulty" and "awesomeness" of boss battles by how many times he gets to mash  the attack button.   [/quote]It's true.[/quote]
'course it's true.  I don't do falsehoods.




[quote]




[quote]You're almost there!  I believe the  preferred term currently being used is "streamlining".  Now EVERY move is like  a finishing move!   Remember...  when you press a button, something awesome has to happen.[/quote]
Which, of course, goes back to that whole thing you do when you don't tell the truth and pretend Bioware is doing something else so you can rag on DA2. Like with the companion armour thread. [/quote]
Aww, did I hurt your little feelings?  I'm sorry Exile, that I 'ragged' on  your beloved game.  Oh and the companion armor thread had nothing to do with anything that bioware  is doing



[quote]





[quote]Right right.  The difference, of course, even beyond the fact that a glancing blow is still a hit  with damage, rather than a miss with none (nice try though!),  is that unlike defense in DA:O  (where you could actually SEE the effects), Glancing blows in DA2 did not have their own animation.  They COULDN'T have their own animation, because  it would go against  "teh awesome" to swing your huge colorful sword and just  slightly nick your opponent's shoulder guards..[/quote]

First, in DA:O, there is no difference in animation between missing and hitting.[/quote]
Wow!  I should take this comment of yours to one  of the dozens of  2-h build threads on the DA:O forums and let the masses there shred it to ribbons.   First off, I said *defense* animations.  Not attack animations.  But while we're on the subject, One of the HUGE facepalm moments  people complain about when playing a two-handed warrior in DA:O is when you sit there and watch your 2h warrior miss by a mile.    There's also  the receiving end animation, where people discuss the downfalls of taking the evasion  talent for their rogue because of the way it increases the frequency of the dodge animation (defense animation)... which in turn hurts  their  DPS because their character is busy doing the animation rather than attacking.    Good god.


[quote]
Second, in DA:O you know your attack stat, and your defence stat, but you don't know the defence stat of any mook, making it - as it turns out - impossible to know what your chance to hit is. DA2 actually corrects this by giving you your hit % for all classes of enemies. [/quote]
Which is pointless, since all your attacks hit.....


[quote]





[quote]Because   DA:O was all about Ogres and their Boulders.  There were no other enemies in the game.  Right?  Therefore, lets   render  the entire  confusing dodge statistic redundant for the sequel,   And  instead, lets allow even the most non-dextrious mage  to be able to get out of the way of  ANY enemy's physical attack,  in melee, any time he wants by simply  moving around.   Derp.[/quote]

And... we're back to the falsehoods. 

1) In DA2, only physical attacks are frontloaded in this way. Arrowsauto-track and depend on your dodging. [/quote]
I said  physicial, melee attacks.  And that's all I said.  Do I have to correct your reading comprehension too?

[quote]
2) You said: ''Dodging blows is now a skill governed by the player's real-life dexterity, rather than any in-game statstic '' about DA2, which isn't true. The melee hits were reworked on proximity. [/quote]
In other words,  exactly what I said.   if you see the guy swinging his sword simply   take a  couple of  steps to the side and you're safe.  Do I have to show you a video of the Arishok fight?
 

[quote]




[quote]Not symetrically no.  It did level scaling in a much more creative and varied manner.[/quote]All of which amounts to a different way of handling the difficulty and goes to balance. [/quote]
Or to use your lingo, it amounts to a   change under the hood... something you claim didn't happen.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:33 .

[Stanley Woo]

Everwarden wrote...
True, but the choices you make on what to put into said game will determine whether or not it's actually a game people want to play. Bioware seems to be hard-lining on certain fairly unpopular decisions. You have the right to do that as a company, but don't be shocked if sales aren't strong. 

To give a couple examples of unpopular decisions that have been confirmed to be set in metaphorical stone:

1. Not being able to talk to your companions except during their quests. Mr. Gaider has made it perfectly clear that the 'cinematic presentation' of companion interaction isn't possible unless scripted, and thus in a particular pre-set location. He also made it clear that this style is going nowhere. Not a dealbreaker, but I don't think many people outside of Bioware prefer this method. 

2. Companion armor being fixed for 'stylistic' reasons. Granted, this isn't something I personally care about at all, but I've seen a lot of dislike over this decision. 

3. The art direction. More specifically, the art direction regarding elves and darkspawn. I'm sure -someone- out there likes the changes (that someone is likely a Bioware employee), but I can't remember ever seeing anything positive regarding these changes from a non-Bioware employee. Yet Bioware is sticking to its guns on this and refusing to admit that the style shift might have been a mistake.

Be careful you're not letting confirmation bias blind you to the opinions of those you may disagree with. Since release, I have indeed seen people on this very forum support and even enjoy the three items you list. Now whether this represents a majority or minority is something else entirely, but we don't have the luxury of only reading positive responses or only reading negative responses. It all has to figure (in some way, shape or form) in future decision-making.

And this should go without saying, but for some reason needs to be repeated every so often: whether we agree with an idea, opinion or suggestion, has no bearing on whether it will appear in a future product, since a game is composed of a huge series of decisions and ideas crammed together in an effort to meet certain goals (the project's "vision," if you will).

[Eudaemonium]

Everwarden wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
 Remember that we are (and have to be) the ultimate arbiters of what we put into our game, 

True, but the choices you make on what to put into said game will determine whether or not it's actually a game people want to play. Bioware seems to be hard-lining on certain fairly unpopular decisions. You have the right to do that as a company, but don't be shocked if sales aren't strong. 

To give a couple examples of unpopular decisions that have been confirmed to be set in metaphorical stone:

1. Not being able to talk to your companions except during their quests. Mr. Gaider has made it perfectly clear that the 'cinematic presentation' of companion interaction isn't possible unless scripted, and thus in a particular pre-set location. He also made it clear that this style is going nowhere. Not a dealbreaker, but I don't think many people outside of Bioware prefer this method. 

2. Companion armor being fixed for 'stylistic' reasons. Granted, this isn't something I personally care about at all, but I've seen a lot of dislike over this decision. 

3. The art direction. More specifically, the art direction regarding elves and darkspawn. I'm sure -someone- out there likes the changes (that someone is likely a Bioware employee), but I can't remember ever seeing anything positive regarding these changes from a non-Bioware employee. Yet Bioware is sticking to its guns on this and refusing to admit that the style shift might have been a mistake.

I am not a Bioware employee and I liked all of these features. I've also seen many others that are happy with them, or at least indifferent. Some people like certain designs and dislike others (prefering old hurlocks and new genlocks, for example). I think you're employing some confirmation bias here. Having some 'generic' questions to ask copanions in the field might have been nice, but I didn't miss one system over the other. I probably prefer DA2's.

[Everwarden]

Stanley Woo wrote...
Be careful you're not letting confirmation bias blind you to the opinions of those you may disagree with.

I don't think I am. Those aren't my personal gripes, I tried to pick the ones that are nearly universally derided and that Bioware is still defending. 

Those aren't -my- complaints, those are mostly things I actually don't care about. I didn't even care about the recycled environments (though they are a symptom diagnosing the 'rushed game' disease).

My problems are actually ones I don't think everyone would agree with.

I, for example, absolutely despise having a voiced protagonist. Not on principle, but because of what has to be taken away in order to make that work. Race options, knowing what your character is actually about to say, having a character that can even be called 'yours'.. the list goes on. That said, I won't pretend that this opinion is universally accepted just because I think this way. Every poll I've seen on the issue has been an even split, more or less. 

Modifié par Everwarden, 17 octobre 2011 - 08:43 .

[uberdowzen]

Everwarden wrote...

I don't think I am. Those aren't my personal gripes, I tried to pick the ones that are nearly universally derided and that Bioware is still defending. 

Those aren't -my- complaints, those are mostly things I actually don't care about. I didn't even care about the recycled environments (though they are a symptom diagnosing the 'rushed game' disease).

My problems are actually ones I don't think everyone would agree with.

I, for example, absolutely despise having a voiced protagonist. Not on principle, but because of what has to be taken away in order to make that work. Race options, knowing what your character is actually about to say, having a character that can even be called 'yours'.. the list goes on. That said, I won't pretend that this opinion is universally accepted just because I think this way. Every poll I've seen on the issue has been an even split, more or less. 

I'm not sure they are universlly derided though. I don't mind any of those 3 things. I'd rather have the more scripted companion conversations (I personally prefer them to Origins' 2 camera angles during companion conversations) and if the only thing that has to be lost is the ability to suddenly want to talk about someone's feelings in the middle of a dungeon, I'm honestly OK with that.

Companion Armour, again I'd be tempted to say this isn't univerally hated. I'm a fan, it gives companions a unique appearance which I like. I'm not saying everyone likes it but its not universally hated.

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

[Everwarden]

uberdowzen wrote...

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

Fair enough. That's two I've come across in favor of the changes. 

[KilrB]

Everwarden wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

Fair enough. That's two I've come across in favor of the changes. 

The voiced protagonist isn't a deal-breaker for me, but is has GOT to be done better.

The other three are.

If I cannot talk to my companions whenever and where ever I want ...

If I cannot give them that spiffy new armor I found but can't use myself ...

If the butt-ugly elves and the dorkspan are still around ...

and ...

(about twenty more common complaints here)

My money will be spent elswhere.

I do NOT like tacoburgers Sam I Am ...

(Edit for spelling)

Modifié par KilrB, 17 octobre 2011 - 10:20 .

[bEVEsthda]

Everwarden wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

Fair enough. That's two I've come across in favor of the changes. 

But then again, both uberdowzen and  Eudaemonium liked DA2.
They both belong to that small (perhaps not on this forum, but get the gist of any other channel...) group from which Bioware almost exclusively select that feedback they hope will help them create a DA3 that will be better received than DA2.

The logic of that approach escapes me. But when I tried to do threads that focused on what particularly those, who didn't like DA2, liked or disliked about DA2, my threads were immediately locked.

So it's either that or they're selecting the feedback which will back the decisions they've already made. The logic of that approach is less puzzling. But it sure beats me why no one is alarmed by the fact that the selected feedback mainly represents those who were already largely fine with DA2.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 17 octobre 2011 - 05:39 .

[alex90c]

I can live with 1. and 2. since they were both in Mass Effect (though tbh I'd prefer the ME system where new dialogue opens at certain points, rather than "you have received a new quest - talk to Anders!"), but I'm seriously not digging the art style. Derpspawn, those ... elves ... spiky armour, unnaturally smooth skin and MotA apparently having goblins just doesn't sound good at all. I've played enough generic fantasy, and I saw Dragon Age as a way to get away from that (until DA2); one thing which I think applies to both DA:O and DA2 is that Bioware might want to expand their colour pallette - while there were areas in both games (well the Legacy DLC for DA2 anyway, everything in the main game was pretty naff) which were beautiful (which all just happened to be the ruined areas like the temple in the Brecilian Forest and the Grey Warden prison), I felt Legacy especially really made the lack of vibrant colours stick out like a sore thumb since it was just more browns, greys, blacks and beige.

[Everwarden]

bEVEsthda wrote...

But then again, both uberdowzen and  Eudaemonium liked DA2.
They both belong to that small (perhaps not on this forum, but get the gist of any other channel...) group from which Bioware almost exclusively select that feedback they hope will help them create a DA3 that will be better received than DA2.

That's actually an excellent point I hadn't thought of. Bioware is selecting a biased sample. 

Sadly, if Dragon Age 3 bombs (which it likely will if they continue with the Dragon Age 2 style), they won't get another attempt in the series to rush frantically back to the Origins style. EA typically shuts down studios that produce two flops in a row. 

[John Epler]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Everwarden wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

Fair enough. That's two I've come across in favor of the changes. 

But then again, both uberdowzen and  Eudaemonium liked DA2.
They both belong to that small (perhaps not on this forum, but get the gist of any other channel...) group from which Bioware almost exclusively select that feedback they hope will help them create a DA3 that will be better received than DA2.

The logic of that approach escapes me. But when I tried to do threads that focused on what particularly those, who didn't like DA2, liked or disliked about DA2, my threads were immediately locked.

So it's either that or they're selecting the feedback which will back the decisions they've already made. The logic of that approach is less puzzling. But it sure beats me why no one is alarmed by the fact that the selected feedback mainly represents those who were already largely fine with DA2.

Let's be clear. Your topics that were locked had the following titles:

'Is there any game out there that has more retarded armor design than DA2?'
'DA3 will fail because...'
'All the recent idiotposts? What's the deal?'
'Ok, folks, stop posting here.' (a complaint about the registered forums)

If you don't see the problems with those thread titles, then I don't think you understand the concept of reasoned, balanced discusison rather than simply looking for a chorus of yes-men.

And then 'What DA2 haters think DA2 did right'. Which started off with a fairly confrontational tone, and then degenerated into insults and bickering.

So let's not pretend that we've been mercilessly censoring you. The majority of the topics you've made have stayed open, just like anyone else who had problems with DA2. If you truly feel that this forum is being censored to only include the positive comments, well, I don't think we're looking at the same boards, frankly. It's simply not a statement I can agree with in any fashion.

And you simply don't know what channels we're taking feedback from. You're correct in assuming that once a board turns into 'DA2 is the worst and the people involved with it should be fired/die', we probably aren't going to be paying as much attention to those people and posts as someone saying 'I didn't like DA2, and here are the reasons why'.

[TEWR]

John Epler wrote...
You're correct in assuming that once a board turns into 'DA2 is the worst and the people involved with it should be fired/die', we probably aren't going to be paying as much attention to those people and posts as someone saying 'I didn't like DA2, and here are the reasons why'

There's one thing out of many I didn't like about DA2 that has yet to be addressed: Hawke's reactiveness and not taking a believable action only to end up failing.

Take for instance the ending of MotA. The DLC itself was solid up until the ending where if I choose the anti-Qunari option, Hawke just goes "Gimme". When he's told "no", he goes "Welp I tried".

That's not believable. Why couldn't there have been a fight with her where she eventually incapacitates Hawke and runs away? Or why couldn't a whole bunch of Qunari who had been tracking her down for doing what she did come in then?

In DAII and MotA, Hawke doesn't even try to do something and end up failing. He just goes "Meh". And that's one of the primary things a lot of people on here disliked about DAII.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:06 .

[bEVEsthda]

JohnEpler wrote...
And then 'What DA2 haters think DA2 did right'. Which started off with a fairly confrontational tone, and then degenerated into insults and bickering.

The way I remembered it, the reason you gave for locking that thread wasn't insults and bickering. But I do agree that the thread failed, simply because people posted unserious things like "the uninstall", etc. But if there were any insults and bickering, then it must have been the precious DA2 fans attacking.

So let's not pretend that we've been mercilessly censoring you.

That's not what I was saying. I was infering you wasn't interested in a particular angle on constructive criticism.

 The majority of the topics you've made have stayed open, just like anyone else who had problems with DA2. If you truly feel that this forum is being censored to only include the positive comments, well, I don't think we're looking at the same boards, frankly. It's simply not a statement I can agree with in any fashion.

And a statement I never made.

And you simply don't know what channels we're taking feedback from.

Interesting. Good.

You're correct in assuming that once a board turns into 'DA2 is the worst and the people involved with it should be fired/die', we probably aren't going to be paying as much attention to those people and posts as someone saying 'I didn't like DA2, and here are the reasons why'.

And you think I've been involved with those boards? If you check my posts more carefully, you will find that if I ever posted in a such thread it would have been to defend M.L's person, or the choices he made (from where he was).

And since you're on your high horse: I do think the forum is moderated in a biased manner. I see DA2 fans behave in much worse manner than I ever did when I was banned (or I'm completely mistaken about the reason why I was banned). But I also think you're entitled to do that. It's your forum. I'm just a guest. And, ultimately, It's not me that takes the damage of that.


P.S. Thinking about it, I think you may have not understood that when I speak about what 'selection' Bioware has made, I refer to what developers have said about future directions, and also what I've read between the lines of what has been said.
I'm not refering to censoring on the forums. But I would have thought that to be clear? The part of the threads was just an example. You're not interested in finding out explicitly what those who didn't like DA2, didn't like about DA2, or liked. You're only interested in flaws that DA2 fans agree on. And those are seemingly the only ones that will get "fixed"?

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:24 .

[John Epler]

bEVEsthda wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...
And then 'What DA2 haters think DA2 did right'. Which started off with a fairly confrontational tone, and then degenerated into insults and bickering.

The way I remembered it, the reason you gave for locking that thread wasn't insults and bickering. But I do agree that the thread failed, simply because people posted unserious things like "the uninstall", etc. But if there were any insults and bickering, then it must have been the precious DA2 fans attacking.

That right there? Referring to the 'precious DA2 fans'? That's exactly what I'm talking about. How is that constructive? And precisely how do you think that's going to read to anyone who isn't already on your side of the fence? It's unnecessarily confrontational and does little to frame the discussion in a reasonable fashion. That is what I am talking about.

So let's not pretend that we've been mercilessly censoring you.

That's not what I was saying. I was infering you wasn't interested in a particular angle on constructive criticism.

 The majority of the topics you've made have stayed open, just like anyone else who had problems with DA2. If you truly feel that this forum is being censored to only include the positive comments, well, I don't think we're looking at the same boards, frankly. It's simply not a statement I can agree with in any fashion.

And a statement I never made.

Then I misinterpreted your post. Fair enough, but it's certainly not the first time you've accused us of censoring the forums to support a particular viewpoint. However, in this case, I apologize for misreading what you wrote. Mea culpa.

You're correct in assuming that once a board turns into 'DA2 is the worst and the people involved with it should be fired/die', we probably aren't going to be paying as much attention to those people and posts as someone saying 'I didn't like DA2, and here are the reasons why'.

And you think I've been involved with those boards? If you check my posts more carefully, you will find that if I ever posted in a such thread it would have been to defend M.L's person, or the choices he made (from where he was).

And here you are misinterpreting sometihng -I- said. I've never suggested that you posted on those sorts of boards, nor have I accused you of posting those sorts of topics. However, they do exist and I wanted to make a clarifying distinction between negativity (indeed, there are boards out there which are primarily negative and still remain constructive) and hostility. The latter is quickly disregarded, while we still look at the former for reasons and to try and get a better understanding of where we can improve in the future.

And since you're on your high horse: I do think the forum is moderated in a biased manner. I see DA2 fans behave in much worse manner than I ever did when I was banned (or I'm completely mistaken about the reason why I was banned). But I also think you're entitled to do that. It's your forum. I'm just a guest. And, ultimately, It's not me that takes the damage of that.

And how many of those insults are reported to admins or moderators? Bear in mind that moderating these forums is not the full-time job of -anyone- who does it. We have other things to take care of which, as a rule, take priority. As a rule, the people who get banned are banned because someone reports them, and while I have a couple of 'pro' DA2 people who seem to do it, there's really only a single 'anti' DA2 person who reports things to us with any regularity. And generally, those people are taken care of. I've certainly banned my share of 'pro' DA2 people who were unable to remain polite and civil, but I can only do so if people tell me about them. If you have specific instances where you find yourself concerned, then please, let me know.

[Beerfish]

Taco shell - Aveline, strong, hard and crusty on the outside but serves and important function to hold things together.
Hot salsa - Isabela, hot spicey and bites the tongue but very pleasurable.
Sour cream - Fenris, sour puss and brooding that would spoil milk but a nice addition in any case.
Burger with taco sauce - Carver and Bethany however who could imagine a taco with either burger or sauce removed before you can eat it?
Lettuce - Merrill, a touch of light naivete to a serious taco, some green to go with the strong mixtures.
Grated Cheese - Varric, so many potential cheesy flavors, the taco would just not be the same without the cheese.
Onions - Anders, Onions can be an integral part or not, usually a love hate thing with most connoisseurs. Often leaves a bad after taste when nearly finished.
Napkin - Sebastien, not really an important part of the meal but one can wipe their mouths when they are done.

As you can see DA2 is exactly like a taco.

[Everwarden]

Beerfish wrote...
As you can see DA2 is exactly like a taco.

I think you're taking the analogy just a bit too literally. 

...so, Bethany is edible? I'm having a really, really hard time not making a dirty joke about that. A really hard time.

On a completely unrelated tangent, another reason to hate Dragon Age 2 is that the only attractive female in the party is your sister. Yep. That's cold, right there. That's like bad-pun-dropping Mr. Freeze in an industrial freezer cold. I'm starting to think Bioware hates me personally and did that to spite me. 

Modifié par Everwarden, 17 octobre 2011 - 07:31 .

[Il Divo]

Everwarden wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

I'm still undecided about the art style but I'm sure I'm not alone in not deriding it.

Fair enough. That's two I've come across in favor of the changes. 

Add a third in favor of squad-mate' specific armor. On the other hand, I found the art style change unnecessary and the companion conversation set-up very disappointing.

[Xewaka]

Everwarden wrote...
I think you're taking the analogy just a bit too literally. 
...so, Bethany is edible? I'm having a really, really hard time not making a dirty joke about that. A really hard time.
On a completely unrelated tangent, another reason to hate Dragon Age 2 is that the only attractive female in the party is your sister. Yep. That's cold, right there. That's like bad-pun-dropping Mr. Freeze in an industrial freezer cold. I'm starting to think Bioware hates me personally and did that to spite me. 

Since when is Aveline Hawke's sister?

[MozartsGhost]

Isabella may not be to everyone's taste but to say she's unattractive? Were we playing the same game?

[Everwarden]

MozartsGhost wrote...
Isabella may not be to everyone's taste but to say she's unattractive? Were we playing the same game?

Isabella was a bit over-endowed for my taste. Also, I hate the lip ring. And the diseases. Though I suppose if one removed those elements she'd be a pretty spicy Rivaini treat.

As for Merrill... well, she's cute, but (ironically) in a little sister way. And she looks thirteen. 

Bethany, on the other hand, is David Gaider going back in a time machine and changing the hottest character in the game into an unromancable tease to spite the Dragon Age 2 haters for whining about the Leliana retcon.  

[Siansonea]

Well, gee, if Taco Bell thought they could sell 1,000 tortilla hamburgers, as opposed to 100 tacos, I really couldn't blame them for switching to the tortilla hamburger model. Learn to cook.

[Everwarden]

Siansonea II wrote...

Well, gee, if Taco Bell thought they could sell 1,000 tortilla hamburgers, as opposed to 100 tacos, I really couldn't blame them for switching to the tortilla hamburger model. Learn to cook.

Unfortunately, the tacoburger only sold 50, and most of those were bought because people thought they were going to be normal tacos.