Realmzmaster wrote...
If the number bothers some gamers all that is necessary is a little switch (check box etc) that allows you to turn off the number or progression bar much like what is done to remove the quest arrow above the recipient. It would be set to on by default and you can switch it off if so desired.
Guest_Nyoka_*
Nomen Mendax wrote...
A friendship system doesn't have to use numbers, as was suggested by Reidbynature you could track all of the PC's responses to conversations and derive information from them. It would be more complicated than a numeric system, and likely be a source of bugs and probably wouldn't be worth the effort but it is certainly possible. I once played with a system like that for a course project (in knowledge representation).
Modifié par BobSmith101, 21 mai 2012 - 09:36 .
Gibb_Shepard wrote...
The rivalry system didn't even make any sense. You are a complete ass to your followers/ Constantly insult them, question their competency and risk their lives, yet they are loyal to you?
DAO's system made far more sense. Sure it could be explloited, but that can be remedied in future installments.
JustifiablyDefenestrated wrote...
The way I envision it, attempting to create dialogue trees that encompasse multiple conversations would be almost labrynthine--not that I've ever attempted to, so maybe not. In ME, the only thing that really changed up the conversations were plot-decisions and romances--each conversation was its own unit, independent of other conversations (again, disregarding romances). DA2 was a touch more complex than that with the inclusion of Rivalry.
Nomen Mendax wrote...
A friendship system doesn't have to use numbers, as was suggested by Reidbynature you could track all of the PC's responses to conversations and derive information from them. It would be more complicated than a numeric system, and likely be a source of bugs and probably wouldn't be worth the effort but it is certainly possible. I once played with a system like that for a course project (in knowledge representation).Realmzmaster wrote...
The system in TW (which does not exist) would still boil down to numbers. The computer program will assign a number or range of numbers to the morality. The system is based on numbers. Whether those numbers are transparent or not is a different matter.
Reidbynature wrote...
So you can reload and do it 'right'? Couldn't you just look online for a walkthrough for the way you want to play the game? Besides I don't think they mean a hidden stat so much as that the relationships flow naturally from conversation and aren't tied to a good/bad friend/rival system.
Gibb_Shepard wrote...
The rivalry system didn't even make any sense. You are a complete ass to your followers/ Constantly insult them, question their competency and risk their lives, yet they are loyal to you?
DAO's system made far more sense. Sure it could be explloited, but that can be remedied in future installments.
Vormaerin wrote...
No, it means that you probably don't get any feedback about whether or how much you annoyed your companion.
Vormearin wrote...
Mass Effect mostly has on/off switches because the game just assumes you are friends. But in a few cases, it does have a hidden integer system. For example, Ashley in ME3. There's a bug where her friendship integer affects the ambient dialogue in the Engineering deck.
How is that an improvement?
vormearin wrote...
I suppose the devs could do nothing but write dialogues trees with massive flags and call backs to previous conversations, but that would be insane.
Modifié par Reidbynature, 21 mai 2012 - 10:31 .
Modifié par Realmzmaster, 21 mai 2012 - 10:41 .
I can't turn them off, but they don't control what I do, either. I have had to take the hard road in some quests because of that, and I don't care. My character does what they think they should do, for good or ill, and if my party members don't like it, they can pick up their wages and get on their merry. I don't play the "tact" game irl, and I'm sure not going to role play it to get some pixels in the pixel sack.SUMpTHY wrote...
One of the major downsides I've heard about Dragon Age II's friendship/rivalry system (which imo was a vast, vast improvement from DA:O's approval system) is that a lot of people assumed that rivalry points were a bad thing which got me on to the line of thinking that maybe they shouldn't be coloured in red which got me to thinking why we need them at all. Mass Effect works fine without giving you a number to quantify your friendship with squadmates (I get that Dragon Age's friendships probably have more depth to them but still).
I don't think you need an on-screen thing to tell you whether a character approves or disapproves when the way they react does that just fine. Also I don't like having on-screen notifications telling me stuff I can't tell from their reactions (If you've played The Walking Dead game there's an option to turn off those things telling you how character feel about your actions which I did straight away), for example when there's characters like Varric, Isabela, Zevran or Sten whose motivations and opinions of the PC are harder to read then being told exactly how they feel takes away from the immersion a little bit. Like you shouldn't be able to tell whether a character likes you 74 or a character dislikes you 36. (I know you could say the same thing about stats or whatever but it's easier for the Warden/Hawke to know that they're stronger/more agile/better at magic than before (represented by a two point gain in the menu, than the Warden knowing that Sten likes him 5 more after giving him a cake).
You'd also get less complaints about being "forced" into romances because players are too busy playing to maximise friendship points instead of making the choices they would if they didn't get -10 approval points. The way I see it is that this will only hurt people who meta-game and that isn't how you should be playing these games IMO
Sorry if this has been brought up before or I'm rambling. I'm really tired right now
Reidbynature wrote...
Because you're incapable of telling angry and happy apart? Or do you just want the ability to quibble over 5 or 10 points of angry or happy?.
Turns out I wasn't accounting for bugs. How about that? Well if it has crippled ME3 with bugs then we can't use that. I suppose if the like-o-meter is bug free then we'll just have to put up with it..
I honestly don't care how it's done. I just don't want a game that seems to treat companion relationships like a mini-game where you get scored on and rewarded for being liked. They should be more than that.
Realmzmaster wrote...
Nomen Mendax wrote...
A friendship system doesn't have to use numbers, as was suggested by Reidbynature you could track all of the PC's responses to conversations and derive information from them. It would be more complicated than a numeric system, and likely be a source of bugs and probably wouldn't be worth the effort but it is certainly possible. I once played with a system like that for a course project (in knowledge representation).Realmzmaster wrote...
The system in TW (which does not exist) would still boil down to numbers. The computer program will assign a number or range of numbers to the morality. The system is based on numbers. Whether those numbers are transparent or not is a different matter.
Yes, it is possible. It simply is not worth the effort or the amount of resources it would consume. Just because something is possible does not mean it should be done. It would be a programming nightmare and still would require assigning a numeric value to the outcome of the conversation. A computer does not know what good means without assigning a range of number to the word for comparison purposes. You are still back to the need to construct IF staements to account for all the actions and conditions.
I believe in the KISS method. Do not add unnecessary complexity for the sake of adding complexity.
Not really, I was thinking about a system which could also give feedback about choices made by the player, and which could reason about how an NPC felt. In other words an expert system with a knowledge base (the decisons made by the player) and a reasoning system. Note I'm not seriously suggesting they implement this (although it would be kind of cool), as it clearly wouldn't be worth the effort.BobSmith101 wrote...
Nomen Mendax wrote...
A friendship system doesn't have to use numbers, as was suggested by Reidbynature you could track all of the PC's responses to conversations and derive information from them. It would be more complicated than a numeric system, and likely be a source of bugs and probably wouldn't be worth the effort but it is certainly possible. I once played with a system like that for a course project (in knowledge representation).
That's just a flag system. It's numeric because Bioware wanted it numeric. They wanted people to be able to reload if they made a wrong choice. Not find out they made a wrong choice 40 hours later.
Most JRPGs are based around flags it's not like they are rare or anything new.
Nomen Mendax wrote...
Not really, I was thinking about a system which could also give feedback about choices made by the player, and which could reason about how an NPC felt. In other words an expert system with a knowledge base (the decisons made by the player) and a reasoning system. Note I'm not seriously suggesting they implement this (although it would be kind of cool), as it clearly wouldn't be worth the effort.
Guest_Begemotka_*
BobSmith101 wrote...
Nomen Mendax wrote...
Not really, I was thinking about a system which could also give feedback about choices made by the player, and which could reason about how an NPC felt. In other words an expert system with a knowledge base (the decisons made by the player) and a reasoning system. Note I'm not seriously suggesting they implement this (although it would be kind of cool), as it clearly wouldn't be worth the effort.
While not specific to friendship the Walking Dead game does this. When you make a choice it says XXXX will remember your response. Later XXXX's attitude will indeed be changed by what you previously did.
While you know you did something (it's indicated) you are never told what or how it changed things, so it's not really any different to a flag where you have no idea what the consequences are till it's too late to do anything about it.
Harvest Moon does something along the same lines when you gift someone. Different responses give different points, but you never see those points. It's kind of obvious though that "wow for me,really" ? and "umm what's that"? mean that one option is better than another.
Or a scoff. Something to give you an idea as to where they stand on the issue.
Begemotka wrote...
Yep,something along those lines would be nice.
Like they did with the companions` reactions to gifts in DAO.
That same method could have been used for generally indicating NPC approval / disapproval instead of "Sten disapproves -5". The mechanic is the same,but they could have replaced the numeric values popping up with Sten saying "NO"
Perhaps they could have given metacommunication a bigger role - a scowl,a smile,a raised eyebrow,what have you.
But if you implement an expert system you could ask the NPC why they did or didn't like you and they could explain it to you, by reasoning about all the decisions you'd made. You could therefore get feedback about their attitudes to you (not necessarily in dialogue as this might be kind of odd).BobSmith101 wrote...
Nomen Mendax wrote...
Not really, I was thinking about a system which could also give feedback about choices made by the player, and which could reason about how an NPC felt. In other words an expert system with a knowledge base (the decisons made by the player) and a reasoning system. Note I'm not seriously suggesting they implement this (although it would be kind of cool), as it clearly wouldn't be worth the effort.
While not specific to friendship the Walking Dead game does this. When you make a choice it says XXXX will remember your response. Later XXXX's attitude will indeed be changed by what you previously did.
While you know you did something (it's indicated) you are never told what or how it changed things, so it's not really any different to a flag where you have no idea what the consequences are till it's too late to do anything about it.
Harvest Moon does something along the same lines when you gift someone. Different responses give different points, but you never see those points. It's kind of obvious though that "wow for me,really" ? and "umm what's that"? mean that one option is better than another.
BobSmith101 wrote...
Not sure we are quite there with respect to body language and facial animations... It would probably come out over exagerated and end up looking quite wrong.
mopotter wrote...
I did like the way DA:O did this, without the gifts buying their affection:).
And I agree the rivalry system, which I found interesting, but it made me think they all needed to see a therapist about this - he/she treats me like crap but I love/respect them anyway. I liked parts of DA:2 where without the right amount of friendship karma they didn't side with me, but DA:O did this with Zev when he attacked me later in the game.
I really would like some NPC's who will only join me if we agree about things, good or bad and if they don't agree they either try to kill me or just say not interested and a couple you can change their minds, turn them to your viewpoint as it were. i want it all.
SUMpTHY wrote...
BobSmith101 wrote...
Not sure we are quite there with respect to body language and facial animations... It would probably come out over exagerated and end up looking quite wrong.
I have to agree with this. Facial expressions are something that current video games really can't do without ending up in the uncanny valley. Even when they use motion capture it can look terrifying (LA Noire anyone).
Retour en haut