171 réponses à ce sujet

[MichaelStuart]

I would prefer that I had no control over companions, other than to give then orders(like mass effect).
I liked that companions choose what clothes and skills types they had. It made be think about who to bring along(I do wish they get rid of the Arbitrary Headcount Limit).
As for being able to choose how to level your companions, I would prefer I didn't have to do it(because I hate leveling).

To sum up, I would like companions to be NPC's that I can give orders to, and not PC's that I directly control.

Modifié par MichaelStuart, 12 mai 2012 - 01:04 .

[Merlex]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I would prefer that I had no control over companions, other than to give then orders(like mass effect).
I liked that companions choose what clothes and skills types they had. It made be think about who to bring along(I do wish they get rid of the Arbitrary Headcount Limit).
As for being able to choose how to level your companions, I would prefer I didn't have to do it(because I hate leveling).

To sum up, I would like companions to be NPC's that I can give orders to, and not PC's that I directly control.

You could always use the auto leveler. I like leveling the companions. I sometimes spend more time designing builds and party combos than playing. Having them have the same abilities playthrough after playthrough, takes away from replayability. I don't want to go back to NWN1 in that way.

Modifié par Merlex, 12 mai 2012 - 01:19 .

[MichaelStuart]

To answer the original question, I prefer that companions have there own look.
In Dragon Age Origins, I thought every one looked the same.
I didn't brother me, because each had different personalities.

[AkiKishi]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I would prefer that I had no control over companions, other than to give then orders(like mass effect).
I liked that companions choose what clothes and skills types they had. It made be think about who to bring along(I do wish they get rid of the Arbitrary Headcount Limit).
As for being able to choose how to level your companions, I would prefer I didn't have to do it(because I hate leveling).

To sum up, I would like companions to be NPC's that I can give orders to, and not PC's that I directly control.

Companions in ME are almost incidental, even in nightmare you can get by just letting them do there own thing and being a distraction.While you can do the majority of DA/2 by programming the AI, there are times when you need someone to do something by assuming direct control.
Short of dumping the system and having a KOA type control of the main character, that's not going to change.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 12 mai 2012 - 07:54 .

[Vormaerin]

Vaeliorin wrote...

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. .

I think it is entirely reasonable that people don't have the skill/aptitude for everything under the sun.   There was a point in time about 20 yrs ago when I was pretty decent archer.  I wasn't nearly as good a fencer even though I think I spent more time in fencing practice than archery.

Just because its useful for Merrill to know Creation doesn't mean that Merrill is actually any good at it or that the game should be set up so that she is or could be.

I don't have a problem with NPCs having built in preferences and aptitudes.  They are NPCs, after all.

[AkiKishi]

Vormaerin wrote...

Vaeliorin wrote...

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. .

I think it is entirely reasonable that people don't have the skill/aptitude for everything under the sun.   There was a point in time about 20 yrs ago when I was pretty decent archer.  I wasn't nearly as good a fencer even though I think I spent more time in fencing practice than archery.

Just because its useful for Merrill to know Creation doesn't mean that Merrill is actually any good at it or that the game should be set up so that she is or could be.

I don't have a problem with NPCs having built in preferences and aptitudes.  They are NPCs, after all.

Tactics based RPGs offer a much larger character pool than DA/2. DA gave you versitility by allowing you more leeway in how the characters were built. DA2 did not, This tends to force certian characters into the party unless you want to make the game more difficult for yourself.

It's an easy enough thing to fix, you just fiddle with the skill trees and make sure everyone can do a bit of everything, but in different ways. I'd also give up on this idea of leaving the party somewhere and only being able to change them at specific points. The party should be available even if you don't see them  on screen (there should be a reserve party) this way you can just pull people in when you need them. In Xenoblade I could get by without Sharla (healer) in normal encounters, but she was pretty much essential for boss fights and sigs. Having to travel all the way back to a switch point would have been a complete pain.

[Vormaerin]

There's enough versatility in the group that's available to you. I completed DAO on whatever difficulty is one below nightmare (hard?) with a party consisting of my 2h warrior, Sten, Leilana, and one of Oghren, Loghain, or Shale. There's enough healing from potions if you play tactically and use your crowd control effectively.

I only used Anders when I absolutely had to because he was mandatory for the quest, though I always used Bethany when she was around. Otherwise, I made do with potions.

[AkiKishi]

Vormaerin wrote...

There's enough versatility in the group that's available to you. I completed DAO on whatever difficulty is one below nightmare (hard?) with a party consisting of my 2h warrior, Sten, Leilana, and one of Oghren, Loghain, or Shale. There's enough healing from potions if you play tactically and use your crowd control effectively.

I only used Anders when I absolutely had to because he was mandatory for the quest, though I always used Bethany when she was around. Otherwise, I made do with potions.

What level was that ? And did you have the dog?

[nightscrawl]

I'm looking forward to the proposed DA3 method, especially as it means our pals won't be wearing exactly the same clothing over the course of the game. I liked the distinct looks of the companions in DA2, but the lack of armor changing over the years really bugged me.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Merlex wrote...

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.

Right. They can choose to leave the party, in which case they are no longer under my control.  But as long as they're in the aprty, they are mine to do with as I see fit.

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.

It's exactly the same.  I, the player, someone who exists outside their reality, controls their behaviour.  How is one aspect of their behaviour different from another?

[Sylvius the Mad]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I would prefer that I had no control over companions, other than to give then orders(like mass effect).
I liked that companions choose what clothes and skills types they had. It made be think about who to bring along(I do wish they get rid of the Arbitrary Headcount Limit).
As for being able to choose how to level your companions, I would prefer I didn't have to do it(because I hate leveling).

So you want a single-character game rather than a party-based game.

Yes, I would agree that in a single-character game the player shouldn't have direct control over things like tactics and levelling.  NWN is an excellent example of this.

But Dragon Age, so far, has been all party-based.  In a party-based game, you play the whole party.  If you don't want to play a party-based game, then don't, but don't ask it to be something it was never trying to be.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'd also give up on this idea of leaving the party somewhere and only being able to change them at specific points. The party should be available even if you don't see them  on screen (there should be a reserve party) this way you can just pull people in when you need them.

That's a terrible idea.  Where are these characters when you're not using them?  Are they following you around everywhere you go?  Can you see them?  Why aren't they taking part?

In both DAO and DA2, I neer swapped out party members without visting them (either in the camps or in their homes), because I didn't see why they should always just be lurking around waiting for the exact moment I needed them.

[Xewaka]

Vormaerin wrote...
I don't have a problem with NPCs having built in preferences and aptitudes.  They are NPCs, after all.

That's why each companion had an specific, "unique" specialization tree (Isabela's Swashbuckler, Merrill Blood of the First, Varric's Bianca, Aveline's Guardian, Fenris' Lyrium magic, Sebastian's Prince Archer and Anders' Vengeance). To further limit it by removing core class features is pointless and needlessly hampers character builds and party flexibility for no real gain. It isn't even further characterization, as it is provided by the aforementioned specific especialization trees.

Modifié par Xewaka, 14 mai 2012 - 08:05 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vormaerin wrote...

There's enough versatility in the group that's available to you.

Enough versatility for what?

For you to claim this you have to assume what the objectives of other players are, and that's exactly the mistake BioWare keeps making.

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'd also give up on this idea of leaving the party somewhere and only being able to change them at specific points. The party should be available even if you don't see them  on screen (there should be a reserve party) this way you can just pull people in when you need them.

That's a terrible idea.  Where are these characters when you're not using them?  Are they following you around everywhere you go?  Can you see them?  Why aren't they taking part?

In both DAO and DA2, I neer swapped out party members without visting them (either in the camps or in their homes), because I didn't see why they should always just be lurking around waiting for the exact moment I needed them.

Why do these character gain XP the same as others when they are not there? How you rationalise it , well that's up to you. But since the system is already abstract it makes no difference if you can call them instantly or not.

Nothing stopping you doing that. I find it far more rational to see them as doing similiar things "offscreen" as back up for the onscreen party. It explains why they still get experience.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Why do these character gain XP the same as others when they are not there?

They shouldn't.  Certainly not risk-free.

Nothing stopping you doing that. I find it far more rational to see them as doing similiar things "offscreen" as back up for the onscreen party. It explains why they still get experience.

Risk-free.  Despite doing these off-screen things, they somehow never acquire new loot or gear, and never suffer injuries or die.

If there's some risk-free means of gaining XP, why isn't the PC doing it?

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 14 mai 2012 - 06:59 .

[abnocte]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I wish the iconic looks went even further than they did.

Here's my favorite example of iconic looks for everyone:

I recently replayed PS:T and I realized that the only reason DA2 fixed looks bothered me was because I kept running into armor nobody in my party could use. In PS:T there isn't a single armor to loot ( you could buy Anna and Grace new vests though).

I think Bioware really needs to cut down on loot, and the most galling proof is that they added a "junk" tab to the inventory in DA2

Other than that I prefer the generic looks if only because I have a hard time imagining that, other than nobles and rich merchants, people in a medieval setting have the time and money to fully custumize their attires to their liking.

I want plate armor to look the same regardless of who is wearing it and I think that there's no need to customize the full appearance of an armor to make it distinct between companions, like a companion that always wears a bandana, or the same earrings, or a special bracelet on top of the armor or the same boots or belt....

As I see it, the new way to handle armor is going to take lots of resources, so we either get less companions or less armor ( please let it be armor ).

This is only my opinion but... the only reason I can imagine to want iconic looks is more a marketing ploy than anything else: they want people to promote their game by dressing up as their favorite character during conventions, if the character doesn't have iconic looks people can't relate it to the game. As easy as that.

Too bad that my favorite character in previous Bioware games was my own...

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Why do these character gain XP the same as others when they are not there?

They shouldn't.  Certainly not risk-free.

Nothing stopping you doing that. I find it far more rational to see them as doing similiar things "offscreen" as back up for the onscreen party. It explains why they still get experience.

Risk-free.  Despite doing these off-screen things, they somehow never acquire new loot or gear, and never suffer injuries or die.

If there's some risk-free means of gaining XP, why isn't the PC doing it?

Like staying at home/base and still gaining levels ? Which is exactly what they do in Bioware games.
Making them available rather than needing devices like swap points changes nothing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

[b]Like staying at home/base and still gaining levels ? Which is exactly what they do in Bioware games.

Yes.  Why can't the PC do that?

Making them available rather than needing devices like swap points changes nothing.

Yes it does.  It negatively affects credibility.  Where are they when I'm not using them?

[Nerdage]

Perhaps they train while the PC's 'on duty'?

abnocte wrote...

This is only my opinion but... the only reason I can imagine to want iconic looks is more a marketing ploy than anything else: they want people to promote their game by dressing up as their favorite character during conventions, if the character doesn't have iconic looks people can't relate it to the game. As easy as that.

That was my impression too.

Can't say I ever had a problem recognizing companions in combat before; largely because I knew where I'd just told them to go, what I had equipped on them, and the yellow circle at their feet. If anything negatively affected orientation in combat it was removing the top-down camera, but then consoles never had that in the first place so perhaps that's why.

As for cosplayers, I'm not sure why they should influence the game design so strongly so that reason always struck me as a convenient excuse rather than a proper reason.

The system they've proposed looks like a good compromise though. I'd hope the armour pieces look more similar across characters than they did in the concepts but still a nice idea.

[Sylvius the Mad]

nerdage wrote...

Perhaps they train while the PC's 'on duty'?

My problem here is that BobSmith wants them all to be avauilable right now no matter where the party happens to be.

If they're constantly following along just off-screen, then they're not off gaining XP somewhere else.

[Nerdage]

Couldn't you just say that, when you swap out a party member, your character does go and fetch them even if the player doesn't have to do it? Hard to represent without seeing time pass but it's plausible enough.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Honestly, as long as there is somewhere I can go to find my party members, I don't care where I'm allowed to swap them out. I simply won't swap them out unless I've gone to see them.

This is how I played DA2. This is how I played DAO. If it lets me, this is how I will play DA3.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 15 mai 2012 - 09:33 .