14 réponses à ce sujet

[5trangeCase]

What if which characters you befriended/romanced and which you ignored had a potentially dramatic effect on the storyline. What if being friendly to Anders prevented him from destroying the Chantry? An example companion in this idea would be the following:

A Templar who witnessed the fall of the Circle in Cumberland, Nevarra. He appears to be diplomatic and friendly on the surface, citing his desire to resolve things based on the slaughters on both sides, but in fact, all he saw were demons fighting men in armour, he is really following the PC so he can disrupt their attempts to resolve things peacefully, only interested in the genocide of mages. But, if the players can befriend them, and show them through their actions and discussions that in fact, mages are just people too, then they come around and their personality on the surface becomes who they are. But if you aren't friends, then they always attempt to inflame discussions, and perhaps at significant moments they completely disrupt the player's attempt to resolve things. And if they are rivals, then the Templar attempts to kill the player if they are mage, and attempts to kill one of your mage allies if they aren't.

I would love that. Gameplay character development based on your relationship would be awesome as well. If they are friends then the Templar limits their lyrium usage and gains access to abilities that increase their physical awareness and agility, but if they are rivals, then they insanely start giving themselves lyrium veins, and gain abilities in that regard (I resisted). Like Vengeance vs. Panacea, and Blood of the First vs. Wrath of the Elvhen, but fixed.

I'm not sure what the writers were thinking when they decided that "I hate you" "I hate you too"  "Let's have sex" was a rational series of events....yes, I'm very aware it can happen, but I think that if you have insulted everything that a person stands for and believes in, sexy times do not follow. Murderous violence follows.

Hate on the character not being Cullen? Hate on it being another dysfunctional character? Thoughts that aren't hate?

Modifié par 5trangeCase, 18 avril 2012 - 10:40 .

[brushyourteeth]

... well I think Isabela would be okay with hate sex.

But I think this is a great idea, if the devs could pull it off. Unfortunately, for it to work the narrative would have to be mostly centered on one companion, the way it was with Anders in DAII.

[5trangeCase]

I take your point, that having every character attempting to fudge (do they have problems with words around here?) things up would get a little tired, but I think character development (gameplay and plot) for all characters would be possible, even if only one or two would have any significant impact. A Templar and a Mage, for example. The rest's changes would be visible in their interruptions in conversations, and what occurs at major points (whether they back the player or sit out, like at the conclusion of DAII). It could even be temporarily sitting out, like a sibling of a mage character not aiding a character in the purging of a hideout concealing a blood mage (or your friendship with that sibling convincing them of the danger of mages causes them to back you in that situation), but then rejoining them with further rivalry after the event. Almost all of them could have 100 rivalry and I'm out functions.

Modifié par 5trangeCase, 18 avril 2012 - 10:57 .

[brushyourteeth]

I think you're on to something there. And it doesn't seem like it would be hard -- getting to screw up Aveline's relationship if you wanted to in "The Long Road" or actually help Merrill get the mirror completed. Those are things that wouldn't necessarily change the ending greatly but would make for replayability and player control over parts of the narrative.

Of course, having your companion actions really fix things or **** them up (that's what happens when you cuss on the forums, haha) like in your Templar/Mage scenario would be really cool too. Kinda neat also to have to choose between the two of them (a la kotor II).

[LolaLei]

Sounds good to me!

[Eternal Phoenix]

The idea sounds good actually but I'd imagine this lies more within companion influence rather than a decision on the player's part.

But they should make achieving such a task tough where you have to pick a certain dialogue option which isn't obvious akin to how you can harden Alistair or that Red Haired Bard in Origins. You can only harden them when completing their companion quests and then selecting a certain dialogue choice. A hardened Alistair will marry Anora for example which is something a non-hardened Alistair won't do.

So such a system shouldn't be hard for Bioware to achieve since they did achieve something similar before. I do agree that the Rival and Friendship system needs to be worked on though otherwise they should just bring back the dislike/like bar or add another bar where a person can be rivals with you but also enemies. Don't know how that would work for Friendship though...

[5trangeCase]

While I think that it should not be obvious that you are, for example, changing the Templar's mind, I think that single comments having such an impact is a bad practice. You shouldn't realise that you are "softening" the Templar, because his personality won't appear to change (unless perhaps if he's also a romance option, he might tell you his initial motives at some point) but I think the effect should be gradual, rather than instant. Yes, it should be affected by certain dialogue choices (among other things) but missing one shouldn't be game over.

[LolaLei]

5trangeCase wrote...

While I think that it should not be obvious that you are, for example, changing the Templar's mind, I think that single comments having such an impact is a bad practice. You shouldn't realise that you are "softening" the Templar, because his personality won't appear to change (unless perhaps if he's also a romance option, he might tell you his initial motives at some point) but I think the effect should be gradual, rather than instant. Yes, it should be affected by certain dialogue choices (among other things) but missing one shouldn't be game over.

Yeah, perhaps he's "softened" or "hardened" depending not only on your choosen dialogue but your actions throughout the game, if he gradually grows to respect or love you (if you romance him) then over time the companions outlook on life and beliefs can be influenced enough to perhaps stop or encourage them to do certain things. It shouldn't be obvious though, it's always more fun when someone pleasantly surprises you, or shocks you to your very core by doing something bad that you hadn't expected.

Modifié par LolaLei, 19 avril 2012 - 01:27 .

[5trangeCase]

LolaLei wrote...

5trangeCase wrote...

While I think that it should not be obvious that you are, for example, changing the Templar's mind, I think that single comments having such an impact is a bad practice. You shouldn't realise that you are "softening" the Templar, because his personality won't appear to change (unless perhaps if he's also a romance option, he might tell you his initial motives at some point) but I think the effect should be gradual, rather than instant. Yes, it should be affected by certain dialogue choices (among other things) but missing one shouldn't be game over.

Yeah, perhaps he's "softened" or "hardened" depending not only on your choosen dialogue but your actions throughout the game, if he gradually grows to respect or love you (if you romance him) then over time the companions outlook on life and beliefs can be influenced enough to perhaps stop or encourage them to do certain things. It shouldn't be obvious though, it's always more fun when someone pleasantly surprises you, or shocks you to your very core by doing something bad that you hadn't expected.

I would not want it to be something easily missed. People complain about Fenris and Anders constantly going on about their individual "pet peeves" and not changing their minds in ten years. If they include this kind of character development, it should eventually be clear that the character has evolved.

P.S. To the people who complain about the lack of change in Fenris' and Anders' characters, I would say that it would be contrary to their character for them to change. One is possessed by a demon of Vengeance that is utterly consumed with retribution for mages, and the other was tortured and enslaved by mages, surrounded for his entire memory by the decadence and corruption of magic. I would not expect either character to change for as long as they lived.

[Maria Caliban]

Friendship is based on agreement with someone's philosophy. Rivalry is based on disagreement.

For your example, he should disrupt the PC on the Friendship path, as you've agreed with his objections to mages, and work with the PC on the Rivalry path, as you've convinced him there's a better way.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 23 avril 2012 - 09:35 .

[SerTabris]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Friendship is based on agreement with someone's philosophy. Rivalry is based on disagreement.

For your example, he should disrupt the PC on the Friendship path, as you've agreed with his objections to mages, and work with the PC on the Rivalry path, as you've convinced him there's a better way.

Shouldn't that depend on what the PC is doing, though? If you keep agreeing with his objections about mages, then it seems like you should be able to act accordingly, and thus end up on the same side.

[brushyourteeth]

LolaLei wrote...

5trangeCase wrote...

While I think that it should not be obvious that you are, for example, changing the Templar's mind, I think that single comments having such an impact is a bad practice. You shouldn't realise that you are "softening" the Templar, because his personality won't appear to change (unless perhaps if he's also a romance option, he might tell you his initial motives at some point) but I think the effect should be gradual, rather than instant. Yes, it should be affected by certain dialogue choices (among other things) but missing one shouldn't be game over.

Yeah, perhaps he's "softened" or "hardened"

[Reznik23]

Bloody good idea!

[TEWR]

I'll just leave this here, as it's sort-of related if not completely related.

Back then, I thought it was a good idea. These days, I'm not so sure how good an idea it was. At least in terms of player agency, implementation, and whatnot.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 24 avril 2012 - 06:13 .

[Chrumpek]

I thought it would be there from the start, you know like 'my choices matter' crap and oh my was a surprised ...