179 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonPogo]

 I don't get this push that Bioware feels they need cosPlayers to make the game good.  Why can't they give each character their own look but also let us change them. Like take DA2 fir example. Why dot have Isabela in her "outfit" when you meet her.  This outfit will scale with her as the game goes on.  However I as the player could then change her into the leather armor I just found.  If they did this they get their "iconic" look that cosplayers can show up to things as but we as the players can also change and dress them the way we want.  Why is this such a bad thing?  Why can't it bedone?

[whykikyouwhy]

You may want to take a gander at this - Lead Writer David Gaider blogs on Follower Customization. It may address some of your concerns.

Although I'm not sure why you think that companion armor/appearance was something influenced by, or intended for, the concerns of cosplayers. 

[JasonPogo]

I have seen that. So now we can change up the "iconic" look but they will always stay in the same thing for the whole game. It is just a simple thing. People wanted to be able to change what their companions wear. Bioware wants this look for them. Why not do both? While I do think the idea in that blog is a step in the right derection i still don't see why they can't do both.

[LolaLei]

I like really the concept companion armor they showed us at PAX. But it would also be cool if when they're off duty (like between quests or in camp) perhaps their outfits are stripped down to a more basic comfortable look. So, for example, if we had a warrior companion in heavy armor then during "down time" the metal plating would be removed and he/she would be wearing basic trousers and tunic that's normally under the armor (like the Templars uniform) but still in the iconic style of their costume... if that makes sense?

Alternatively maybe something like ME3 where you can toggle between 2 or 3 outfits for each companion.

[Windninja47]

I thought the idea at Pax was a good one- really the perfect middle ground. And while I also like the whole "Casual clothes on down time" idea it would really depend on where people have their down time.

If it's like Dragon Age 2 where people have houses and such then it wouldn't make much sense to walk into Warrior McOmpanion's house to see him wearing a full set of armour.

If it was like the camp in dragon age origins however then it wouldn't make much sense to see him in silk 'jammies.

[brushyourteeth]

I'm the wrong person to ask, because I honestly don't get why people get so hung up over being able to dress up your companions. I'm much more concerned with stats. As long as I can change my protag's armor, I'm set to go.

The only reason I'd ever really be concerned with changing a companion's armor would be in a situation like Morrigan's, where I quickly got tired of seeing her sideboob. But I know I'm probably alone on that one.

[LolaLei]

Windninja47 wrote...

I thought the idea at Pax was a good one- really the perfect middle ground. And while I also like the whole "Casual clothes on down time" idea it would really depend on where people have their down time.

If it's like Dragon Age 2 where people have houses and such then it wouldn't make much sense to walk into Warrior McOmpanion's house to see him wearing a full set of armour.

If it was like the camp in dragon age origins however then it wouldn't make much sense to see him in silk 'jammies.

Oooo silk 'jammies! Is it weird that I'd like to see a companion kicking arse in jammies and bunny slippers? :-S

[LolaLei]

brushyourteeth wrote...

I'm the wrong person to ask, because I honestly don't get why people get so hung up over being able to dress up your companions. I'm much more concerned with stats. As long as I can change my protag's armor, I'm set to go.

The only reason I'd ever really be concerned with changing a companion's armor would be in a situation like Morrigan's, where I quickly got tired of seeing her sideboob. But I know I'm probably alone on that one.

Ah c'mon, you know you wanna see Cullen out of his armor!

[brushyourteeth]

LolaLei wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I'm the wrong person to ask, because I honestly don't get why people get so hung up over being able to dress up your companions. I'm much more concerned with stats. As long as I can change my protag's armor, I'm set to go.

The only reason I'd ever really be concerned with changing a companion's armor would be in a situation like Morrigan's, where I quickly got tired of seeing her sideboob. But I know I'm probably alone on that one.

Ah c'mon, you know you wanna see Cullen out of his armor!

That's..... a completely different matter altogether.

[LolaLei]

brushyourteeth wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I'm the wrong person to ask, because I honestly don't get why people get so hung up over being able to dress up your companions. I'm much more concerned with stats. As long as I can change my protag's armor, I'm set to go.

The only reason I'd ever really be concerned with changing a companion's armor would be in a situation like Morrigan's, where I quickly got tired of seeing her sideboob. But I know I'm probably alone on that one.

Ah c'mon, you know you wanna see Cullen out of his armor!

That's..... a completely different matter altogether.

Well, if he wants to run around shirtless during the evenings I have absolutely no problems with that. Infact, I'd welcome it! :innocent:

[Uccio]

Simple answer, they want to make quick buck in the hack´n slash action genre and not rpg games anymore.

Modifié par Ukki, 16 mai 2012 - 06:46 .

[Wozearly]

Filament wrote...

Because it means they all need to have identical generic bodies that can be interchangeable with any suit of armor. If I understand correctly, in DAO each armor needed to have seven variations to account for the seven body types (kossith, human male, human female, etc). So if they adopt that system again, either all humans will be the same height and shape, as I said (so no tall Anders or busty Isabela), or each companion will have a separate variation of the same armor to account for their body type. Which would be a lot more work, even without a race choice for the PC (with a race choice, forget about it). Which could mean there would only be a few armor models again, retextured over and over.

...but they seem happy to address this with the "this is what we'd like to do" part at PAX. And if the same piece of armour has to fit across several companions, they get straight back into having to remake (n) versions of the same item in the different companions' iconic variations.

Its ultimately a decision in where to spend development resource. But Bioware did pick up on lack of visual customisation as a major fan complaint from DA2.

[TheBlackBaron]

I had a similar thought, OP, back before Gaider made that blog post detailing what they're trying to do for customization in future games. I think having a default outfit that scales plus the option to equip them with looted or bought armor would be an ideal compromise, if perhaps resource intensive (but then, no more intensive than what Gaider's written about).

In the end they decided that it's more important, for whatever reason, for each character to look "iconic" than to have the option to put Morrigan in massive armor. I happen to disagree with that.

[Maria Caliban]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Although I'm not sure why you think that companion armor/appearance was something influenced by, or intended for, the concerns of cosplayers. 

"Iconic looks are for cosplayers" is another version of "Dragon Age II was made for CoD players."

The idea is that real role-players would never want that.

[brushyourteeth]

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

[hussey 92]

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Why?  It seems probable to me.

[brushyourteeth]

hussey 92 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Why?  It seems probable to me.

haha - fair enough. For one thing, it takes quite a bit more effort to come up with different character models with signature armor than it does to create one model per race per gender that you can slap a few reskinned armor models on. They must find it super cool or story enhancing to do the former rather than the latter.

Also, I may in all actuality be pretty naive about how these things work, but I'm not sure how Bioware could profit from encouraging cosplay. Sure, they could sell costumes, but that hasn't happened yet.

I really got the impression that M-Law just found it to be a fun aspect of company/fan interaction.

[Atakuma]

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Mike Laidlaw has said no such thing. It was used one time as an example of the positives of iconic looks by  Epler or someone.

Modifié par Atakuma, 17 mai 2012 - 12:15 .

[hussey 92]

Ukki wrote...

Simple answer, they want to make quick buck in the hack´n slash action genre and not rpg games anymore.

^exactly

[hussey 92]

brushyourteeth wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Why?  It seems probable to me.

haha - fair enough. For one thing, it takes quite a bit more effort to come up with different character models with signature armor than it does to create one model per race per gender that you can slap a few reskinned armor models on. They must find it super cool or story enhancing to do the former rather than the latter.

Also, I may in all actuality be pretty naive about how these things work, but I'm not sure how Bioware could profit from encouraging cosplay. Sure, they could sell costumes, but that hasn't happened yet.

I really got the impression that M-Law just found it to be a fun aspect of company/fan interaction.

But Origins did have Ionic looks (Morrigan's robes for example) DA2 just made it so you could only have those ionic looks.

And people will always be cosplaying to games like Halo and Gears of War (casual games).  Bioware just wanted to get in on that by pushing the Ionic looks.  

Basically, ionic looks equal: cosplay, comic books, figurines, slurpee cup ads, ect.  All things that have nothing to do with the game itself

[brushyourteeth]

Atakuma wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Mike Laidlaw has said no such thing. It was used one time as an example of the positives of iconic looks by  Epler or someone.

M-Law's twitter.

hussey 92 wrote...

But Origins did have Ionic looks (Morrigan's robes for example) DA2 just made it so you could only have those ionic looks.

And people will always be cosplaying to games like Halo and Gears of War (casual games). Bioware just wanted to get in on that by pushing the Ionic looks.

Basically, ionic looks equal: cosplay, comic books, figurines, slurpee cup ads, ect. All things that have nothing to do with the game itself

Seriously, those two thoughts aren't gelling together for me. Either DA has always had iconic looks suitable for cosplay or iconic looks are some new evil that the DA devs are milking for extra marketing reasons.

I totally get a player being upset about having their armor options taken away, I really do. And you're right - companions have had signature outfits from the beginning (though not poor Sten. that peasanty prison outfit did him no justice). But without the kinds of preset iconic armors we had in DAII, we would have never had Aveline's beefy arms or been able to keep Varric's chest hair. All the jokes about Fenris' spiky armor or Anders' feather pauldrons would have fallen completely flat. I'm just saying that iconic armors have their strengths too, and I don't think the devs' choice to go with them is based on "money, money, money!" (pictures Mike Laidlaw twirling a long, oily moustache).

I think the DAIII system sounds like a great compromise, and I pretty much refuse to pour hateraide on it until I've played the game and given it a chance.

[hussey 92]

brushyourteeth wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

Mike Laidlaw has said repreatedly that he wants the game to provide opportunities for cosplay.

But to say that Bioware would make the decision to give companions signature armors is simply for cosplay is more than a little ridiculous.

Mike Laidlaw has said no such thing. It was used one time as an example of the positives of iconic looks by  Epler or someone.

M-Law's twitter.

hussey 92 wrote...

But Origins did have Ionic looks (Morrigan's robes for example) DA2 just made it so you could only have those ionic looks.

And people will always be cosplaying to games like Halo and Gears of War (casual games). Bioware just wanted to get in on that by pushing the Ionic looks.

Basically, ionic looks equal: cosplay, comic books, figurines, slurpee cup ads, ect. All things that have nothing to do with the game itself

Seriously, those two thoughts aren't gelling together for me. Either DA has always had iconic looks suitable for cosplay or iconic looks are some new evil that the DA devs are milking for extra marketing reasons.

I totally get a player being upset about having their armor options taken away, I really do. And you're right - companions have had signature outfits from the beginning (though not poor Sten. that peasanty prison outfit did him no justice). But without the kinds of preset iconic armors we had in DAII, we would have never had Aveline's beefy arms or been able to keep Varric's chest hair. All the jokes about Fenris' spiky armor or Anders' feather pauldrons would have fallen completely flat. I'm just saying that iconic armors have their strengths too, and I don't think the devs' choice to go with them is based on "money, money, money!" (pictures Mike Laidlaw twirling a long, oily moustache).

I think the DAIII system sounds like a great compromise, and I pretty much refuse to pour hateraide on it until I've played the game and given it a chance.

I get your point, but to me Varrics chest hair wasn't worth the loss of custimizable armor.

Ionic looks do have their strengths in games like Assasins Creed but it wasn't needed (or wanted) for Dragon Age.