2816 réponses à ce sujet

[monima]

RosaAquafire wrote...

I really hated the dialogue wheel compared to the dialogue wall. It wasn't a case of my character doing completely opposite or unexpected things, so much as that the paraphrase text literally did not matter. I literally stopped reading it. I did. Maybe halfway through the game, it got better, but after about 20 dialogues I realized Hawke would legit say things like "lol at least dad'll have company" when you say "he won't be alone" after your brother dies ... whaaat? I stopped making ANY effort to play my Hawke off what she would say, and started just looking at the icons/position on the wheel. How do I want my Hawke to respond? Nice, funny, or grouchy? The only way to get an even semi-accurate read on what she would do was to look at that, instead of anything else.
.

I disliked the dialogue wheel too, I stopped reading after a while and just start picking the colour I wanted<_<
And the heart left me confused,  found myself practically in a romance with Anders before I knew what hit me ( ok maybe not that bad)

[mupchu777]

Hears the real issue with DA... lack of continuation... I invest all of the time into hawke and company and guess what... gone the next game. Same with the first I actually loved the story for DA2... the main issue I had was with the reuse of maps etc... a simple make it a combination of the 1st (gameplay, level design) and the streamlinness of the 2nd... and we have a winner...

[PsychoBlonde]

One gameplay tweak I think might be incredibly valuable:

The game needs more tradeoffs. Getting 100% crit on your rogue should mean you're going to have a mediocre defense. Or poor hit chance. Or you're going to have to spec to wear some gear that requires high non-rogue stats. SOMETHING.

My rogue Hawke, with duelist and a high dex, was basically my party tank because she had max defense and nothing could really hurt her effectively. Aveline, on the other hand, had serious trouble keeping at max defense. Heck, Rogue Hawke had the same HEALTH Aveline had, because Rogue Hawke maxed out the benefit from rogue stats and started putting all points in con.

I much prefer what DDO does, where instead of capping the *benefit* you can get, they prevent bonuses from stacking and limit the size of the bonus of any given type you can get. (Oh, and you still have that 1 is a fail 20 is a success thing no matter what, except on skills.) Does this mean that an intelligent stacker who's willing to give up a lot in some areas can make an "unhittable" character? Yes, it does. So what? If that's the way you like to roll, go for it. You still get demolished by spells and traps. Your DPS sucks, so it takes forever to kill things (and if those things heal/regenerate, forget it). Holding threat is a major problem. You're basically pointless outside of raids with a huge major disgusting boss that needs to be controlled.

Tradeoffs.

[Complistic]

I sat here for a good 5 minutes trying to think of something you could do that would make me buy the game and I came up blank. I'm sorry.

edit: I can think of things that would fix the game, but nothing you would do.

Modifié par Complistic, 20 mars 2012 - 05:16 .

[Korusus]

Mark Darrah wrote...

If the story demands a human-only (or dwarf, elf, or qunari only for that matter) than we would do that.

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

 

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

Modifié par Korusus, 20 mars 2012 - 05:19 .

[monima]

mupchu777 wrote...

Hears the real issue with DA... lack of continuation... I invest all of the time into hawke and company and guess what... gone the next game. Same with the first I actually loved the story for DA2... the main issue I had was with the reuse of maps etc... a simple make it a combination of the 1st (gameplay, level design) and the streamlinness of the 2nd... and we have a winner...

I am completely fine with a new protagonist each game, I think I am almost starting to prefer it, Makes it easier since Bioware doesnt have to focus on carrying over so many choices from previous games, and it all ends up in a bunch of cameos. However since there is a new protagonist each time, the last one should have some closure. So add an end,  finalise the story. I was  quitehappy with how the wardens story ended. 

[Relshar]

Darji wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...
If the story demands a human-only (or dwarf, elf, or qunari only for that matter) than we would do that.

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

So you limit customization for the sake of greater customization? 

I think you guys might have forgotten what that word means.

the whole problem is that Bioware has forgotten what the word RPG means or better meant for them back than.

So we are going to get to play one race in DA3?
You have just lost my order.

[triclops41]

I still love being able to tinker with my and my party's armor, weapons, and abilities. I don't mind having fewer abilities that are more useful.
DA1 had many spells and abilities that weren't of much use, so cutting them is fine.
But I want to have many different types of armor, weapons, spells and abilities to customize my character, as well as everyone in my party. I understand and appreciate that Bioware want to make their games much faster paced, but KOTOR was not slow paced and still included everything I love about Bioware games since Baldur's Gate.

Right now Bethesda is the only one still around scratching that itch for deep customization, but they only make single player games.  I am concerned that complex party based RPGs may no longer have a champion in Bioware, and that makes me very sad.  Especially with the bad news about Obsidian, I worry that these games are going the way of flight sims.

Modifié par triclops41, 20 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mark Darrah wrote...

I agree that controller support on the PC is important.

More important, I think, is the retention of pausable tactical combat.

Action combat is not something I ever enjoy.  Forcing the player to make decisions in real-time is a serious impediment to roleplaying.  Some players might like making decisions in real-time, and I have no objection to you offering them that option.  But please do not force it on everyone.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 20 mars 2012 - 05:21 .

[CarlSpackler]

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

While as a rule roleplaying fans want multiple races, the statistics prove that most people play a human.  That was confirmed by the achievment/trophy tracking that happened with DAO.  The # of folks who completed the human noble without completing any of the others was something like 80% if I remember correctly.*  So while I think everyone can agree that multiple races with varying scenes/dialogue to represent those races is a good thing, it is admitedly difficult to want to spend a lot of time developing and catering to what amounts to the minority.  And that does not take into account the remaning 20% who also played and completed a human noble origin meaning that if you have a human only character you will still please somewhere around 90% of your market -at least to a satisfactory.

* I could of course be way off on those statistics but I seem to remember an interview with Preistly or one of the other Bioware folks talking about this.  I can only promise you that I am not utterly making this this up and recall something to this effect.

Modifié par CarlSpackler, 20 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Alodar]

DAO is amongst my top 3 favourite games ever.
DA II marks the only BioWare game I've never replayed and its DLC are the only BioWare products since Baldur's Gate was released that I haven't purchased.

I enjoyed the writing and excellent characters in both, but I didn't enjoy the game play or presentation of DAII.


What I think DA III should focus on:


Games should be fun
Your main design goal should always be to make the game fun.  If your design goals are to make a certain class weaker or make the art style more distinctive or modernize the game to pull in more folks than you can succeed in all your goals and still have an un-fun game. Games should be fun.


If you don't have a AAA budget don't try to make a AAA game
DAO's DLC, Awakening, and DA II all were on restrictive budgets. The DLC was short, Awakening was far buggier than what I expect from a BioWare game and DA II was forced to reuse maps just so it could have a reasonable length.

Since DAO the Dragon Age series hasn't had as much money/time to work with. That's fine, it's a reality of development that there are limited resources/funds, but the worst thing you can do when your budget is tight is to highlight it by trying to make a game you don't have the resources to make. Make the tougher decisions early, design the game around your budget and if necessary go retro with the graphics (or use an already built in-house engine).

 
Stop giving me the option to kill my companions
Every time I have an option to kill a companion, that means they won’t have a significant role in the next installment. Save yourselves the headache of multiple paths. Have companions leave or run or when they betray you have them get away. As soon as you give the option to kill them then you are asking for continuity headaches later on.

 
Choice – Choice is good
If DAO was choice 2.0 then DA II was choice 1.01a beta. In DA II I had my race, my voice, my weapon, my starting skill, all chosen for me. I was forced to play the prologue without the option to even choose my face.  Every choice you make for my character gives me slightly less ownership of the character. I understand that there are restrictions and certain choices have to be made, just remember that you risk alienating folks who like that choice (If I like playing as an elf and you don’t give me that option you’ve taken something away. If I want my fighter to use a bow, or any distance weapon for that matter, I should have that choice.

 
It’s my character – I should really know what they’re about to say
I understand that the silent protagonist is dead. However please give me the option to choose what my character is going to say based on the actual words not a paraphrase or tone. All dialogue appears as text for the sake of subtitles so please make it an option to right click (or hover, or shift click) on a paraphrase and see the subtitle associated with that response. Choosing a paraphrase and being surprised by what your character says drives another wedge between you and your character and is tantamount to role-watching instead of role playing.

 

Let me choose how I want to play my class
The Old Republic is a great example of this. There are four different classes, each with a choice of two very different advanced classes. Most have the ability to DPS, tank, or heal or some combination thereof. How your class plays is entirely dependent on the skills you choose. DAO had this (for mages at least), DA II not so much. (An entire class and a couple of companions with absolutely no distance weapons?)

 
Heroic Fantasy needs to feel Heroic
If all enemies scale with you, where is a sense of being powerful?  If a rat scales in power so it’s just as much of a challenge at 17th level than it is at 1st then what is the point?  I don’t want to set up combos for my companions and I don’t want a single darkspawn to be a threat – 3 or 5 or a Lieutenant or a Boss sure. But let me wade through the rabble.  Let me feel like a hero.


BioWare is a terrific company with amazingly talented staff.
I appreciate all the great games you've made , currently TOR and ME3 are sucking up my free time, and look forward to see what you folks do with next step in the DA franchise.


Alodar

Modifié par Alodar, 20 mars 2012 - 05:26 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Just a question regarding the protagonist to the next game. I was wondering whether or not you were going to go with a semi-defined or blank-slate protagonist?

Geralt of Rivia from TW2 is a semi-defined protagonist. Since his personality is already shaped without player input, it makes instances where the player has no input work. Geralt has a defined personality, but you yourself can still define his motivations, ideals and relationships. There is still much customization to be had, but it also allows the ability to create a character that the writers can work more with.

Hawke, imo, was too much of an "inbetweener". He didn't have nearly the customisation the Warden had, yet he wasn't defined enough to allow the myriad of auto-dialogue and character actions to work without stepping on the toes of the players.

Personally, i believe you should choose either route, and not try to split the difference. Deus Ex HR and particularly TW2 are very good examples of semi-define protagonists done right; where they allow many of the character's intrinsic traits to be left to the player. I personally like my voiced protagonists like this.

But if you do wish to go the completely blank-slate route, it will be a hard task. ME3 has stepped on many players' toes because the team suddenly decided to take many of Shepard's actions out of the control of the player. This is not something you want to do with a character that is supposed to be "ours". If you do wish to go this route, you really need to give the character to us. To allow us to define him through his actions and dialogue.

[Plaguemaster]

Dialogue wheel was an abomination. Even Deux Ex HR was aeons better with their dialogue system that allowed a lot of options. not just "Yes" "No" "Don't know" and "Investigate"
And the worst of all - not a single Investigate option have any result other than additional useless dialogue.

[Indoctrination]

Korusus wrote...

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

Despite just giving a large rant mostly consisting of accusations of BioWare being out of touch with us, I can sympathize with them on races.

For each race, you'd need new models, new assets to fit those models, new animation to deal with character interactions and heigh differences, and you'd need new voices. Humans don't sound like dwarves, and they don't sound like Dalish elves either. Not anymore. Instead of having two tracks for our voiced protagonist, you'd need six. The protagonist has more lines than anyone else in the game too, so it's a big resource commitment, I think.

There's also the lore issue. If you were paying attention, you'd notice that Thedas is a very racist place. Elves and dwarves have a hard time being taken seriously in human society. Origins got around this problem because your elf or your dwarf was a Grey Warden, a status which was larger than the societal race barriers. It would be difficult to fish up a similar excuse in future games. How can your character negotiate with the local lord for aid in the coming grand battle when his guards see that you're an elf, grab you, and then throw you into the alienage? I feel that in order to do a game with an elf or dwarf protagonist now, you'd have to do a game where the protagonist can only be an elf or only be a dwarf and tell the story completely from that perspective. Unfortunately, I don't think BioWare has the guts to do a game where you're only a dwarf or only an elf.

[Yrkoon]

CarlSpackler wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races. I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race). It's not looking good so far.

While as a rule roleplaying fans want multiple races, the statistics prove that most people play a human. That was confirmed by the achievment/trophy tracking that happened with DAO. The # of folks who completed the human noble without completing any of the others was something like 80% if I remember correctly.* So while I think everyone can agree that multiple races with varying scenes/dialogue to represent those races is a good thing, it is admitedly difficult to want to spend a lot of time developing and catering to what amounts to the minority. And that does not take into account the remaning 20% who also played and completed a human noble origin meaning that if you have a human only character you will still please somewhere around 90% of your market -at least to a satisfactory.

* I could of course be way off on those statistics but I seem to remember an interview with Preistly or one of the other Bioware folks talking about this. I can only promise you that I am not utterly making this this up and recall something to this effect.

The statistics also show that 80% of all gamers never finish any given game that they play.  Does that mean, then, that Devs shouldn't waste their resources creating decent endings to their games??

That's the logic you're operating under. It's Wrong.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 20 mars 2012 - 05:30 .

[RazorrX]

CarlSpackler wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

While as a rule roleplaying fans want multiple races, the statistics prove that most people play a human.  That was confirmed by the achievment/trophy tracking that happened with DAO.  The # of folks who completed the human noble without completing any of the others was something like 80% if I remember correctly.*  So while I think everyone can agree that multiple races with varying scenes/dialogue to represent those races is a good thing, it is admitedly difficult to want to spend a lot of time developing and catering to what amounts to the minority.  And that does not take into account the remaning 20% who also played and completed a human noble origin meaning that if you have a human only character you will still please somewhere around 90% of your market -at least to a satisfactory.

* I could of course be way off on those statistics but I seem to remember an interview with Preistly or one of the other Bioware folks talking about this.  I can only promise you that I am not utterly making this this up and recall something to this effect.

Could that bias in playthroughs have had anything to do with the fact that a Human Noble was the only one who could gain the throne?  How many played human mage compared to elven mage?

[Vovea]

I thought Dragon Age II was all right. It doesn't have the replay value that Origins has but Hawke has more of a personality. If the next Dragon Age goes this same route for the protagonist I think they need to expand on this; an option to react to dramatic events with more emotional dialogue choices. There were times I wanted to smack Hawke on the head for being a robot at times.

I wasn't a fan of jumping into combat right away. Some time in Lothering giving an idea of Hawke before they became gang leader would have been nice. Lothering's destruction would have probably felt like a bigger deal if you could have seen it.

I thought the combat was quite fun, minus the staff twirling and exploding bad guys. I'd like to see the pace and mobility stay the same but without the over the top fighting styles.

Also, closure. Dragon Age: Origins had a really satisfying ending. I liked reading what happened to everyone and finding out what was the result of all the choices my character had made - good and bad. Dragon Age II's ending wasn't awful, to some extent I found out what happened to Hawke through Varric, but I'd have liked some reasons why everyone 'eventually left the Champion's side'.

Modifié par Vovea, 20 mars 2012 - 05:28 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Q: Will we be going to silent protagonist?
A: A few months back, I noted that we'd be continuing on a voiced protagonist. We feel the voice improves the overall experience, thought we know that some of your disagree. Sorry!

Can you not make the voice optional?  Or at least encode the audio files such that modders could disable the PC voice only (without removeing the NPC voices)?

STILL, we have, however, heard feedback on paraphrase clarity. What I've often seen is feedback that the paraphrases fail when your character DOES something unexpected. Would you folks agree that moments of action or major choice are the issue that most needs to be addressed?

No, I would not agree. 

Every instance of the jarring, unexpected behaviour needs to be addressed.  The PC can literally NEVER do something the player doesn't want him to do.  As soon as that happens even one time, the player loses confidence in his character's behaviour, and will forever fear a similar event happening again.

The player must ALWAYS know what his character will do.  One surprise is too many.

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Deeper dig: is the issue that you didn't know what you'd say, or that you did or said something unexpected?

Those are equivalent statements.  If ever I don't know what the PC will say, I cannot expect a specific line or delivery of that line. 

You cannot achieve the goal of having the PC never say things that were unexpected without telling the player in advance what will be said (and how it will be said, given that you're voicing the PC again).

[Korusus]

CarlSpackler wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

While as a rule roleplaying fans want multiple races, the statistics prove that most people play a human.  That was confirmed by the achievment/trophy tracking that happened with DAO.  The # of folks who completed the human noble without completing any of the others was something like 80% if I remember correctly.*  So while I think everyone can agree that multiple races with varying scenes/dialogue to represent those races is a good thing, it is addmitedly difficult to want to spend a lot of time developing and catering to what amounts to the minority.  And that does not take into account the remaning 20% who also played and completed a human noble origin meaning that if you have a human only character you will still please somewhere around 90% of your market -at least to a satisfactory.

* I could of course be way off on those statistics but I seem to remember and interview with Preistly or one of the other devs talking about this.  I can only promise you that I am not utterly making this this up and recall something to this effect.

That's why DA2 had a lot of the problems it had.  It was designed by focus group and statistics.  Not allowing for multiple races and railroading the player into a predefined character is part of what was wrong with DA2.  DA will never be Mass Effect.  They have to stop trying to do that.  The more they start taking away options, the more the game slilps into this railroading mindset.  So yes, while 80% of the players may never use the elf character option, the fact that it's there is indicative of BioWare's mindset and the freedom and options the game allows.

It's worth the effort in my opinion (and you don't even have to have the origins which I suspect) 

[triclops41]

CarlSpackler wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

While as a rule roleplaying fans want multiple races, the statistics prove that most people play a human.  That was confirmed by the achievment/trophy tracking that happened with DAO.  The # of folks who completed the human noble without completing any of the others was something like 80% if I remember correctly.*  So while I think everyone can agree that multiple races with varying scenes/dialogue to represent those races is a good thing, it is admitedly difficult to want to spend a lot of time developing and catering to what amounts to the minority.  And that does not take into account the remaning 20% who also played and completed a human noble origin meaning that if you have a human only character you will still please somewhere around 90% of your market -at least to a satisfactory.

* I could of course be way off on those statistics but I seem to remember an interview with Preistly or one of the other Bioware folks talking about this.  I can only promise you that I am not utterly making this this up and recall something to this effect.

That makes a lot of sense, but what about the fact that most people played as a male Soldier in ME2?  Should they make that concession as well in the interest of efficient use of resources?  I am not saying that I have all the answers and I know that it is a tough call.  In DAO, I never played a human.  I played a dwarven noble and a city elf.

[ZeshinX]

Korusus wrote...

Mark Darrah wrote...

If the story demands a human-only (or dwarf, elf, or qunari only for that matter) than we would do that.

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

 

Mark, surely you see that the fans want multiple races.  I don't understand what the point of having a dialogue with you guys is if you're bound and determined to repeat the mistakes of the past anyway.  

For all your talk of wanting to listen to feedback, you guys sure seem to have already made your minds up about a lot of things (voiced protag, dialogue wheel, single race).  It's not looking good so far.

It's usually how it works.  They can't really approach the community until they have something to approach them with.  This usually (but not always) implies that DA3 is far enough into production that a baseline engine and system is in place, to allow them to start collecting ideas beyond what they've come up with in-house.  Whatever feedback is given to them is implemented based on how feasible it would be to introduce into the engine/mechanics, or how it can mesh with the method they choose to tell their story.

I'm sure they've also factored in feedback from DAO and DA2...but we are a fickle and impossible to please community, so BW will certainly do what they're able to do in terms of using said feedback, but at the end of the day, they'll make and market what they want to make and market based on what they think (with whatever stats they use to come up with that) will net them the largest profit.

'Tis the business of art:  trying to make the most money in a medium where every customer likes something different.  It's not a job for the timid, that's for sure.

BW's been making games for some time now, and they're pretty damn good it at, I think.  Don't mistake my intent here, I'm no BW apologist (I'm sure they have a department for that lol).  I personally found DA2 to be a giant, steaming pile of made-too-fast poopie.  My point is simply that while BW asks for feedback/ideas, there are some things that just can't be done by the time they ask us, whether its strictly based on limitations of their mechanics/game engine or it contradicts their more intangible design choices (theme, story, etc).

[CarlSpackler]

Yrkoon wrote...

The statistics also show that 80% of all gamers never finish any given game that they play, therefore,  Devs shouldn't waste their resources creating decent endings to their games??

That's the logic you're operating under. It's Wrong.

First of all keep in mind I'm not arguing against multiple races I think they're a fantastic idea I'm simply saying I understand why they may not focus dev time here.

Also you're equating the game having an ending and the game containing multiple races to be of equal importance there which is not the case.  EVERY gamer regardless of whether they actually finish the game* or not expects the game to have an ending.  An ending in of itself is a necessary ingredient of a Bioware rpg, multple races are not.

*I'm defining game here as a story-driven rpg, we expect a resolution to the story regardless of what we may think of the quality of the ending. 

[Morgora]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Yes, you did miss something. You missed the blatantly inaccurate stereotyping that these two are engaging in. Obviously, nothing about DAII looked even vaguely like what is stereotypically thought of as a Japanese game.

There is no reason to attack my opinion in this manner. In my opinion, there are certain aspects to the art and style in DA2 that have Japanese influence. I did not say that DA2 was a typical Japanese game.

[katiebour]

No expansion? No Ostwick? (

My heart is broken. (((((((

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mark Darrah wrote...

An advantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

Then please let us dress the companions.  Don't enforce iconic looks.

Honestly, look (and I'm sure you have already) at the implementation of iconic looks in the Diversified Followers Armour mod for DA2.  That allowed iconic looks for the companions without enforcing iconic looks for the companions.

I can assign the entire party's skills and tactics.  I can tell them what weapons to use, where to go, and who to kill.  But not what to wear.  That's a pointless restriction.

Though, allowing us to dress the companions would eliminate the design savings of a single PC race, unless all of the companions were that same race, as well.

But, frankly, being able to outfit the entire party is much more important to me than a wide variety of wearable clothing.  Particularly if you enforce class-based appearances again.  In DA2, in Hawke is a mage then all of the non-mage armour in the game because wasted design zots.  You generally don't like to include content players don't see, but by denying us access to the companions' clothing slots that's exacftly what you're doing.