179 réponses à ce sujet

[Gibb_Shepard]

David Gaider wrote...

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

It is. Possessing a visual identity is what makes iconic companions "cos-playable", in Mike's words-- as in part of the reason that such companions can be cosplayed. Visual identity is a worthy goal in and of itself.

If we were to arrange our decisions solely to service a part of the fanbase, however, I can certainly think of worse parts of the fanbase to service than a group of people who are generally friendly, engaged and who celebrate our work while asking for little in exchange. If there are other fans who really like to think their money is worth more to us than those peoples', they're certainly free to go on thinking so.

No need to be passive aggressive bro. 

Comments like these really make me feel like there are going to be a lot of spiteful elements in DA3. I guess we'll see.

On-Topic: I think the system propsed by Laidlaw is great. Provided we are actually given a decent amount of variety in how we build the companion, and not forcing us down a linear progression in which we gather the same armour pieces each playthrough.

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 17 mai 2012 - 11:08 .

[AkiKishi]

simfamSP wrote...

CosPlay aside, I think the concept is great, especially the new proposed system. As well as personality, we all have physical traits that seperate us from the rest of our community. While that statement applies to Dragon Age: Origins, it does to Dragon Age 2 also, but in a larger magnitude.

Varric had his chest-hair; Isabella had almond coloured skin; Aveline had her masculine features; Anders had his gaunt, almost 'Justice' type face and Fenris has his Tatoos.

These are details people don't seem to appreciate, and while they are not necessary, they add a layer of depth that was absent in Dragon Age: Origins. It's not only about armour customisation, but physical details that make characters stand out from one another.

Does it effect the gameplay? Yes it does. We no longer have our beloved freedom with statistical armour, which we all loved to hoard and loot. But, as a BioWare game, I think we can all agree that the main focus has been companions. Even in NWN, where all we had were mercenaries, we could still explore these characters in detail.

Now, a good counter-arguement is that physical appearence and armour doesn't make a character stand out, it's their personality and writing that do. And while you are right, I think it will come down to personal taste at the end.

The proposed system for Dragon Age 3 seems like a fine balance between what I enjoy, and what you enjoy.

While it's true that everyone has their preferences, there are times those take a back seat. For work I have to meet a certain dress code. For leisure time I can dress however I please.
If I were to hypothetically enter a combat situation and someone offered me a bullet proof vest I don't think I'd turn it down just so I could keep my "iconic" look. That goes against all common sense really and it's the same in Dragon Age 2.

There are many different ways to do both, without really sacrificing anything. It depends which way Bioware choose to go.

[abnocte]

This is nothing but my opinion, but here it goes:

1.- The only reason I can see to not allow equiping armor on companions in DA2 is to save resources during development.
I consider DA2 a rushed job, lacking in so many ways that the fact that I couldn't change my companions armor didn't make me think that they had put those "extra" resources to good use.

2.- The problem I have with companions with preset armor is that developers choose what they think is the optimal armor at each point in the game, totally ignoring each player play-style.

The two point above lead me to think that if iconic looks serve no purpose game-wise, they may serve a purpose "outside" game.
At some point I remember reading a dev saying something along the lines of how there was no way someone could cosplay as Alistair because there was nothing disctinct about him, followed by how the only cosplay he had seen of DAO was Morrigan.

I get the feeling that cosplaying has become more widespread in the last years, but obvioulsy no company would choose to use iconic looks just because cosplaying is on vogue among a part of their audience... unless you can take advantage of it. How so?

Imagine you are at a convention, and you keep seeing people with their customes, you recognize some and have no clue about what others are about. Then some days later you pass by a shelve in your local store and your eye catches something familiar: you recognize a character on the box from one of the cosplayers.
What do you do next?

Not everybody is going to react the same way, but I certainly would pick up the box and read what it is about.
Just by doing that I have become a potiential buyer.

So I don't think iconic looks has anything to do with cattering to cosplayers, but rather use them to promote the game for free.

It may seem silly but lets not forget that EA sent into the atmosphere early copies of ME3...

[Tirigon]

I thought the characters in DAO had an iconic look as well, in some cases even MORE so than in DA2 and Mass Effect.

[Sejborg]

David Gaider wrote...
Visual identity is a worthy goal in and of itself.

Why is visual identity important? 

[syllogi]

I visually identify people by their faces and voices. People around me change their hairstyles, clothes, and even body shape, and somehow I manage to remember who they are. I have loathed the idea of characters not ever changing outfits ever since I was a child and they did that in cartoons. Nowadays, even children's shows have enough faith in the audience to change up the outfits of characters, without fear of alienating viewers.

Especially in DA2, having static outfits was a poor choice, considering the passage of time. It felt more like laziness than a conscious artistic choice.

[Sejborg]

Begemotka wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
Visual identity is a worthy goal in and of itself.

Why is visual identity important? 

Well,for one,there was the visual identity of Kirkwall many people disliked....

I would say the visual identity of a game,let alone a series,is kind of....important. The visual identity of a companion within that framework might not be of equal importance to everyone,though   <_<

Well. I didn't mean the environments. Though it could have been cool if you as the Champion of Kirkwall could decide what the banners should look like, and what building that should be constructed, and what should be destroyd. Did Kirkwall have any banners by the way? I don't remember. 

Visual identity for companions might not be important for everyone - sure. But I would like an explanation as to why Bioware think it is important. And just saying it is important, is not an explanation,  I am asking for the why. 

[Tirigon]

syllogi wrote...

Especially in DA2, having static outfits was a poor choice, considering the passage of time. It felt more like laziness than a conscious artistic choice.

With enough Artistic Integrity, such mortal things as washing and changing clothes are beyond you.

[AkiKishi]

Tirigon wrote...

syllogi wrote...

Especially in DA2, having static outfits was a poor choice, considering the passage of time. It felt more like laziness than a conscious artistic choice.

With enough Artistic Integrity, such mortal things as washing and changing clothes are beyond you.

It's a running joke in cartoons where the character opens his closet and there are rows of the same outfits.

[brushyourteeth]

syllogi wrote...

I visually identify people by their faces and voices. People around me change their hairstyles, clothes, and even body shape, and somehow I manage to remember who they are. I have loathed the idea of characters not ever changing outfits ever since I was a child and they did that in cartoons. Nowadays, even children's shows have enough faith in the audience to change up the outfits of characters, without fear of alienating viewers.

Especially in DA2, having static outfits was a poor choice, considering the passage of time. It felt more like laziness than a conscious artistic choice.

I'm personally totally fine with iconic looks for our companions, but I do agree with this. When we have serious time skips, cothing should change. I thought it was really neat when I first saw Aveline in her guard uniform, and it actually made sense to see her in it for the rest of the game (especially since her "home" was her workplace). The first time I saw Bethany or Carver in their new faction outfits I was totally blown away by how cool it was. I'd definitely like more of that.

If we have mix and match armor pieces that offer bonus stats on top of Bioware's iconic armors, as shown in the blog, and by the end of the game we've seen more than one iconic outfit for our companions, I don't see why that shouldn't make just about everybody happy.

[Tirigon]

BobSmith101 wrote...


It's a running joke in cartoons where the character opens his closet and there are rows of the same outfits.

It's an ongoing irony that self-ironic jokes are about the only good thing in most cartoons.

[Rawgrim]

I never felt visual identification was of any importance in DA. The characters identity is in their personality. If I wanted them to have an iconic look, I liked to create one of my own. Iconic looks are more important in games about Indiana Jones, or something like that.

[deuce985]

Outside the obvious visual identity reflecting personalities(which I personally love) another reason is battlefield identity. I prefer this myself but the main reason is definitely the RP aspect of the game and personalities for me. What they wear should reflect who they are, IMO. That's just the way I see it. Here is a game that used iconic looks and I loved it. Although you couldn't really customize their armor in Planescape:Torment, it was still great from the RP standpoint.



I prefer customization over iconic looks but I do want them back. Bioware's new blog is a perfect compromise if executed right, IMO. Bioware should give us a companion like Mort in Planescape too...

Modifié par deuce985, 17 mai 2012 - 06:29 .

[robertthebard]

Rawgrim wrote...

I never felt visual identification was of any importance in DA. The characters identity is in their personality. If I wanted them to have an iconic look, I liked to create one of my own. Iconic looks are more important in games about Indiana Jones, or something like that.

...and yet, you chose Duncan for your forum avatar.  As a curiosity, why?  My first avatar here was a toon from one of my favorite PT's in Origins, but it was causing some identity problems, since it was a female character.  My theory is that you visually identify with him, or his plight.

[Rawgrim]

robertthebard wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

I never felt visual identification was of any importance in DA. The characters identity is in their personality. If I wanted them to have an iconic look, I liked to create one of my own. Iconic looks are more important in games about Indiana Jones, or something like that.

...and yet, you chose Duncan for your forum avatar.  As a curiosity, why?  My first avatar here was a toon from one of my favorite PT's in Origins, but it was causing some identity problems, since it was a female character.  My theory is that you visually identify with him, or his plight.

I just picked one. Plain and simple.

[FieryDove]

Rawgrim wrote...

I just picked one. Plain and simple.

But...the beard! Hawke never stood a chance vs Duncan Beard ™. No iconic armor needed. imho

[deuce985]

I picked Hawke as my avatar because he identifies with me and looks like me...minus the scar across my eye...

Modifié par deuce985, 17 mai 2012 - 10:31 .

[Morroian]

LolaLei wrote...

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

Well in TOR you have the spectacle of players tanking in slave girl outfits. 

[In Exile]

Tirigon wrote...

I thought the characters in DAO had an iconic look as well, in some cases even MORE so than in DA2 and Mass Effect.

Morrigain totally did, what with her unique robes only she could equip.

[JasonPogo]

Ok first thing my cosplay comment was just me being snarky and I never ment it to be taken seriously. That was my bad.

Secondly I kinda have to say while their new system seems like a step in the right direction I find it kind of ironic that they choose to use a Warden and a Seeker as their examples. There are two characters that are stuck in permanent armor that looks just like all the other Wardens and Seekers in the DA universe. Way to be iconic....

Modifié par JasonPogo, 18 mai 2012 - 08:56 .

[AkiKishi]

In Exile wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

I thought the characters in DAO had an iconic look as well, in some cases even MORE so than in DA2 and Mass Effect.

Morrigain totally did, what with her unique robes only she could equip.

There were gaps in when you got upgrades to those robes though so unless you underequipped for most of the mid game you would be dressed in generic robes (don't get me started on hats).

I think it comes down to whether or not you like the iconic look. In Morrigans case I did , in Isabellas not so much. I don't see the new system really adressing that too much. What they have posted so far is about as generic looking as you can get anyway.