171 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

I loved the unique skill trees.

Except for Anders being the only healer.

[deuce985]

I'm kinda neutral on that. Sylvius way isn't so bad but the defined skill trees for the companions didn't bother me in DA2 either. It definitely makes sense from a RP standpoint.

I suspect if Bioware did that again in DA3 class restrictions on companion armor would likely happen. They can allocate the necessary resources for iconic looks. Definitely would cut their workload down. Going that route, why would they allow a companion to wear robes if their defined role was Aveline being a tank? So really the only armor they'd have to worry about on Aveline is armor models for plate.

If they do go to the skill trees for companions, I hope they're fleshed out a bit more than DA2.

Speaking of Bioware...has anybody seen any other devs on here besides David lately? I haven't seen Mike since he commented over the blog from David. Must be busy.

Modifié par deuce985, 11 mai 2012 - 05:23 .

[AkiKishi]

The best way would be different but sorta equal ( I say sorta because it's not exactly a science).

If I use Xenoblade as an example, you have 2 "tanks"
Reyne is a classic tank, large ammount of hp's heavy armour etc.
Dunban is an agility tank, dodges rather than soaks and does more damage.

Reyne can stack spike (damage shield) which makes him perfect for punching above your weight. Dunban can hack through stuff very quickly which makes him ideal for standard stuff. But both will get the job done.

In DPS you have Fiora who is like a whirlwind, low damage at an insane speed and Shulk who has very high spike damage. Equipped corrcectly Fiora can heal faster than she's damaged, but has lower hps and special and spike attacks (damage shields) are deadly.

Rikki is sort of jack of all trades and like Anders in DA2 Sharla is the only dedicated healer. In truth I could never have done the game at the level I did without her, she's that useful.

So while Xenoblade got most of it right, the healer thing still means you need Sharla any time your challenging above your level (she's the only multi healer and with downs single heals won't cut it). Never really disliked any of the characters, which is a definate plus.

FFX's sphere grid (really not a favourite of mine but it does work) incorporating the stats into the skill tree is another method. Comes in two flavours, basic and advanced. Basic gives each character a more defined path where as advanced leaves you to build the characters how you see fit.
Having everything in one path removes the guess work, you won't have to have X str at some point in the game to equip something you don't even know exists when you create the character.

What you don't want to happen is for the only character capable of the role being a character you loathe.
Two of each class should more or less cover it ,with each one doing things in a different way.

Just for example

Warrior - Tank
Warrior - DPS
Rogue - Tank (agility)
Rogue - Archer
Mage - classic healer/spirit healer
Mage - blood healer (see it as aura based leeching health/mana consistent rather than spike) Damage shields, vampiric weapon enchants etc.

Generally the spike healer will fit more with the rogue tank. It won't get hit as much, but when it does get hit it will hurt. Blood healer will be able to keep the smaller constant damage a warrior tank takes under control in most cases just by leeching/enchanting. Some sort of long cool down spike heal will cover the rest.
Spirit healer I see as a little more idiot proof , but less interesting.

Melia ,the "mage" of Xenoblade can spike heal by sacrificing hp's and keep various fields up by summoning elements. Interestingly her elements are also her attack, which means if you fire them off for damage, you lose the buff effect.
Summoning a water element will keep up a regen field, shooting it will drain hps from the enemy and give it to her. It's a very interesting style to play.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 11 mai 2012 - 06:15 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vormaerin wrote...

err, not really.   There were no tanking skills for rogues.   Yeah, you could pump their strength up instead of Dex, but they wouldn't be a warrior.     No matter how you built Leilana, she wouldn't match Alistair as a tank.   Same with Varric relative to Avelline.

Leliana's ability to scout ahead and strike from stealth was very effective at drawing initial aggro.

She couldn't tank in the same way as Alistair, but she could tank very well.

And I didn't say she could be an optimal tank.  But if you're not playing on Nightmare (and I certainly wasn't - I don't see the appeal of Nightmare at all), you don't need an optimal build.  You just need a servicable build, and DAO certainly allowed that.

Heck, you really couldn't make Fenris anywhere near as good a tank as Avelline.  You probably could get Sten or Oghren to be tanks, but I think you'd need a respec to do it.

As I said, it didn't work as well in DA2, but not for any lore-related reason.  The game was restrictinve seemingly just to be restrictive.

In both games, I used mods that let me set every ability for every character starting at level 1.  Sten makes a terrific archer, and I prefer Carver with a shield.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vormaerin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

And the unique skill trees need to go away.  I hate those unique skill trees.  I used a mod in DA2 to give everyone all of the available skill trees for their class.  Isabela could use a bow and Merril could be a Force Mage and it was good.

This we just aren't going to agree on.  I don't want everyone to do the exact same thing.

So don't have them do the same thing,

Being able to do something doesn't require that you do it.  I'm just suggesting that the player should be able to choose.

I don't think Isabella should fight the same as Varric.

So don't have her fight that way.  If any two DAO characters fought the same, it was because you elected to have them do so.

I think how they fight is part of their personality

I certainly wouldn't dispute that, but I don't see why we should, on every playthrough, be forced to experience the same personalities again and again.

and personality is what I want from Bioware NPCs.

You seem to want BioWare's pre-written personalities, in particular, and no one is sayiong you shouldn't be allowed to have that.

But why would you want to be forced to have that?

If i just want interchangeable combat bots, there are plenty of other games that give that.   For me, the tactics are in figuring out how to use Isabella effectively, not polymorphing her into someone else via a mod.

I think the tactics are only interesting as an extension of the roleplaying.  How would this specific character approach this problem?  If I'm required to play each character the same way every time, then the answer to that qusetion can't ever change.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vormaerin wrote...

Look what he said. He didn't want unique skill trees and modded the game so Varric and Isabella had the same options. There's no reason to allow Bethany to be a blood mage, for instance. It undermines the story and her character.   Isabella has been established as a duellist and melee fighter from the very beginning of her existance in the game.   Turning her into an archer might suit your playstyle, but it doesn't suit her character or in game background.

And if that's important to you, then don't do that.

Why do you care how I use Isabela?  What harm does it do you if I can teach Sebastian the All Hands on Deck ability?  You don't have to do it, so it doesn't affect you at all unless you do it, too (but you've said you don't want to, so that problem goes away).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

Of course for Sylvius the 'inconsistency' is probably more important than freedom or BioWare's vision for a character.

Inconsistency is never okay.

[wright1978]

No i liked the unique look of companions in DA2.

[Vaeliorin]

Vormaerin wrote...
Look what he said. He didn't want unique skill trees and modded the game so Varric and Isabella had the same options. There's no reason to allow Bethany to be a blood mage, for instance. It undermines the story and her character.   Isabella has been established as a duellist and melee fighter from the very beginning of her existance in the game.   Turning her into an archer might suit your playstyle, but it doesn't suit her character or in game background.

I would make the argument that it suits her just fine in certain situations because Isabella (and the other characters) are not morons. There are very obviously times when having multiple (or any) melee characters is bad, and at such times it is unreasonable for characters to be unable to use certain weapons. Unless you think it's reasonable for warriors and Isabella to just stare at the High Dragon when it's on top of the cliff?

I'm somewhat more ambivalent when it comes to the issue of character specializations, though I have to admit I found it frustrating that Varric was a better archer (skill-wise) than the PC could be, and that Fenris was a better two-handed tank (again, skill-wise. The inability to give him armor made him overall inferior.) That doesn't mean I think the PC should be better than everyone else, mind you, just that everyone should potentially be able to be on equal footing.

[Uccio]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

Look what he said. He didn't want unique skill trees and modded the game so Varric and Isabella had the same options. There's no reason to allow Bethany to be a blood mage, for instance. It undermines the story and her character.   Isabella has been established as a duellist and melee fighter from the very beginning of her existance in the game.   Turning her into an archer might suit your playstyle, but it doesn't suit her character or in game background.

And if that's important to you, then don't do that.

Why do you care how I use Isabela?  What harm does it do you if I can teach Sebastian the All Hands on Deck ability?  You don't have to do it, so it doesn't affect you at all unless you do it, too (but you've said you don't want to, so that problem goes away).

I have asked the same thing earlier but did not get any answer (don´t remember if it was from him). As I see with our approach there are two ways to play the game, either put stats like you want or autoupdate it like the game suggests, everyone wins. Vormaerin in the other hand wants to play the game only one way and wants to force others to do so also. What is the matter with these people?!

If I want to make Leliana or Isabela (if it would be possible) to be a tank I don´t see why it would be someone elses concern.

[FaeQueenCory]

This is actually where I favor DA2 over Origins for once.

I like the unique looks for the companions..... But on the other hand, I dislike just how very dissimilar to everyone else they are. Which is why I liked Aveline's look... because she looked like the City Guard she is supposed to be.

I would have liked for them to be a little more.... "normal", I guess? I dunno... It's hard to articulate.
I guess they just look too out of place compared to all the cookie-cutter NPCs...
I guess I just have a problem with the over use of the full body mesh random NPC... If they go back to Origins' everyone having a unique face (when not helmeted).... I think the companion's wouldn't stand out so much and look so alien to everyone you fight.

[Merlex]

wright1978 wrote...

No i liked the unique look of companions in DA2.

I liked it as well. They are companions not player characters afterall. Being able to influence a companion's build makes sense to me. But choosing what they wear, what their style has to be? That would take away from their personallities, at least for me. Though it would have been nice to see more changes over the decade, the game takes place in.

[Uccio]

^ I disagree. The way I see it is my gameplay and story. I get to choose what any of my team members wear in order to survive. Its my team after all, you disagree, you leave.
I don´t mind if Bio makes it possible to lock companions with "iconic looks", for the people who like such thing but in my gameplay I want to be the one in charge of everything.

[Merlex]

Ukki wrote...

^ I disagree. The way I see it is my gameplay and story. I get to choose what any of my team members wear in order to survive. Its my team after all, you disagree, you leave.
I don´t mind if Bio makes it possible to lock companions with "iconic looks", for the people who like such thing but in my gameplay I want to be the one in charge of everything.

Dictator .

I understand what you are saying. Survival is important. Though i liked the individual looks, i hated the upgrades. I would like Bioware to expand the rune choices to many of the bonuses we see in armor available to Hawk. Then add rune slots to the companions armor as they progress in levels. That way we can 'build' their armor, and let them have their style.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Merlex wrote...

I liked it as well. They are companions not player characters afterall.

They're both.

They are Hawke's companions.

They are my player characters.

[AppealToReason]

I liked that in 2 you could see a piece of armor or the outfit and know who someone was. It sets things to be instantly recognizable vs generic heavy/light armor in a different red/grey/blue scale.

I would like to see it changed a bit though. Like when you looted the companion upgrades, change their apperance to reflect that. So for instance, you find say some kind of a belt for a squadmate, then change the squadmates appearance to portray the discovery of the new belt

[Sylvius the Mad]

A new belt? I want to be able to take someone who wears leather armour and put her in plate armour. If she still wears a distinctive cloak over her armour, fine, but let me change the actual armour.

And please let helmets be visible on all characters. I don't want to see an uncovered head on anyone weaing a helmet. It's okay if the helmet looks different from character to character, but the helmets should absolutely not be invisible.

[Dave of Canada]

You can tell a story with unique appearences, appearences mean a lot in a visual medium. I'm a huge fan of the Dragon Age 2 system and advocated it since it's inception, however I find the suggested "next thing" plan to be a perfect compromise between DA:O and DA2.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The perfect compromise is what the Diversified Follower Armor mod did for DA2. You could keep the iconic appearances, or you could swap in regular armour for generic appearances.

The DA3 proposal, while vastly better than vanilla DA2, still doesn't allow generic appearances.

[Vormaerin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

They are my player characters.

That's where we disagree. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vormaerin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

They are my player characters.

That's where we disagree.

Then why do I get to choose what abilities they learn, or what tactics they employ?  Why can I control them even when my main PC is unconscious?

Because they're player characters.  They're just not player-created.

[Merlex]

Filament wrote...

I happen to like the unique skill trees. What it adds to their character is more than a fine tradeoff for the 'freedom' to make Wynne a blood mage, I think. Of course for Sylvius the 'inconsistency' is probably more important than freedom or BioWare's vision for a character.

I like them too, but only as specializations. Taking away basic class trees, took some replay value away. Bethany made sense, being an apostate she didn't learn in the conventional ways. Varric loves Bianca, so that made sense. But Merrill not having creation? Sebastian is cornered by whatever, and he can't pull out a daggar?

[Merlex]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

They are my player characters.

That's where we disagree.

Then why do I get to choose what abilities they learn, or what tactics they employ?  Why can I control them even when my main PC is unconscious?

Because they're player characters.  They're just not player-created.

Not completely. If they don't like your choices, they can leave or even attack you. You can't take control of them to stop them.

Training them and having influence over some of their choices; is not the same telling them what to wear, or what they have to look like.

Modifié par Merlex, 12 mai 2012 - 12:30 .