167 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

brushyourteeth wrote...
Yeah, anyone who has real life rivalry-ish friendships (I know I do) knows that your friend shouldn't walk away seething if that's what you really have - they ought to clap you on the shoulder and say "Hawke, you're insane, but you're a good friend to have." Varric silently scoring me down every time I'm not sarcastic didn't feel like an interesting facet to our relationship - it felt like I was starting down the road toward a breakup.

Actially, I'd say that sometimes that is exactly what would/should happen.
when you're trying to save someone from themselves, they usually dont take it well. At least not at first.

Yes, I can see my friend walk away seething after a heated argument.
But I also see him calming down after that.

[Wulfram]

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

But if there is a meter, I want to be able to see it.

[jillabender]

Wulfram wrote...

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

As I've said before, I would personally be all for getting rid of the relationship meter, and instead, simply having branching relationship paths that are tied to specific dialogue choices, in ways that are tailored to each companion. But I suspect I might be in the minority.

Modifié par jillabender, 07 septembre 2012 - 07:10 .

[esper]

jillabender wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

As I've said before, I would personally be all for getting rid of the relationship meter, and instead, simply having branching relationship paths that are tied to specific dialogue choices, in ways that are tailored to each companion. But I suspect I might be in the minority.

The problem with that is that there is a high change that it will develop into saying the exactly right thing at the right time or the friendship/romance is ruined forever with no chance to make up. It could easily end up with us having to have a walk throuhg just to get the result we want.

I also think it would lead to less conversation since, as you say, each conversation would be a 'branch' and branched are hard to do and usually mean less content because the content the game has have to be spead out.
 
And maker help us if some invisible flag is bugged.

generally I just think that pure number, a bar is easier for the game to handle and easier for us pllayers to manage without having to walk on eggshells around our companions.

[FedericoV]

jillabender wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

As I've said before, I would personally be all for getting rid of the relationship meter, and instead, simply having branching relationship paths that are tied to specific dialogue choices, in ways that are tailored to each companion. But I suspect I might be in the minority.

I was going to write a reply to the OP then I read your post and there's no need anymore. I don't know if we are in the minority but I completely agree with your suggestion. To link a relationship to numbers is completely counter intuitive in my opinion. A relationship should be organic to the story and not allow any kind of min-maxing.

[Fredward]

brushyourteeth wrote...
As a side note though, David Gaider's said that they're moving back to approval/disapproval for DAIII.

My life has lost all purpose and meaning...

[Sylvius the Mad]

FedericoV wrote...

I was going to write a reply to the OP then I read your post and there's no need anymore. I don't know if we are in the minority but I completely agree with your suggestion. To link a relationship to numbers is completely counter intuitive in my opinion. A relationship should be organic to the story and not allow any kind of min-maxing.

That would simply require we hide the meter, not eliminate the measurement.

Which is basically how dating simulators work.

[Todd23]

jillabender wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

As I've said before, I would personally be all for getting rid of the relationship meter, and instead, simply having branching relationship paths that are tied to specific dialogue choices, in ways that are tailored to each companion. But I suspect I might be in the minority.

A quick ruff-draff:
http://www.facebook....80473858&type=1

[nightscrawl]

brushyourteeth wrote...

He basically said people seemed to still feel like the rivalry path as a punishment and not a valid way to maintain a relationship, and that the approval/disapproval system seemed to be much simpler and more suited to where they're taking the next game.

I think "maintain" is definitely the key word there. If the DA2 F/R system were in DAO where the relationships were based around a crisis situation and also can happen very quickly, I think it would make more sense. A hot and heavy, whirlwind fling, type of deal. But in DA2 where the relationships build up over a period of years, I don't see the type of rival/antagonistic relationship being sustainable.

Regarding rivalry as punishment; I've said it before, I'll say it again, and I will keep saying it until Bioware gets it though their heads that part of that debacle was their own fault: lack of documentation hurts the game.

[jillabender]

Todd23 wrote...

jillabender wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It wouldn't be a horrible idea to not have an relationship meter at all, and instead let the relationship progress based on a few decisive moments rather than accumulating points for lots of little things.

As I've said before, I would personally be all for getting rid of the relationship meter, and instead, simply having branching relationship paths that are tied to specific dialogue choices, in ways that are tailored to each companion. But I suspect I might be in the minority.

A quick ruff-draff:
http://www.facebook....80473858&type=1

An intriguing concept! Did you create that chart?

[brushyourteeth]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
Yeah, anyone who has real life rivalry-ish friendships (I know I do) knows that your friend shouldn't walk away seething if that's what you really have - they ought to clap you on the shoulder and say "Hawke, you're insane, but you're a good friend to have." Varric silently scoring me down every time I'm not sarcastic didn't feel like an interesting facet to our relationship - it felt like I was starting down the road toward a breakup.

Actially, I'd say that sometimes that is exactly what would/should happen.
when you're trying to save someone from themselves, they usually dont take it well. At least not at first.

Yes, I can see my friend walk away seething after a heated argument.
But I also see him calming down after that.

I think maybe that was a core problem with the rivalry system - you'd get rivalry points for doing things that your companions literally disapproved of (like turning a blind eye to slavery) and you'd get rivalry points for telling them you thought their life was headed in the wrong direction. Absolutely not the same sort of thing at all. Seems to me it would have been better to have approval/disapproval for the first AND rivalry/friendship for the second, OR only had your specific companion's quest and dialogue affect their friendship/rivalry.

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
As a side note though, David Gaider's said that they're moving back to approval/disapproval for DAIII.

My life has lost all purpose and meaning...

Sorry!!  

[Arthur Cousland]

If the "approval meter" is removed, then I don't want companions leaving the game for good at a certain point if their approval isn't at a specific amount. I like knowing where I stand with certain things, when they have long lasting conseqences.

[Sylvius the Mad]

nightscrawl wrote...

Regarding rivalry as punishment; I've said it before, I'll say it again, and I will keep saying it until Bioware gets it though their heads that part of that debacle was their own fault: lack of documentation hurts the game.

It troubles me that BioWare, when faced with a good mechanic that is misunderstood through a lack of documentation, will, rather than keeping the feature but documenting it, decide to replace the feature with something they think won't need documentation.

The lack of documentation shouldn't be a design goal.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Actially, I'd say that sometimes that is exactly what would/should happen.
when you're trying to save someone from themselves, they usually dont take it well. At least not at first.

Or ever.  I can't imagine ever thinking that was okay.

[Plaintiff]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
What do you mean you don't see their facial expression? The camera pans to the one talking in cutscenes. Then you have the tone of voice (which in itself tells much).

The characters do not give their input in every single scenario.

The characters do not give their input in every single scenario.

The characters do not give their input in every single scenario.

Without the meter, I'm being denied information. Just like I was denied information when DA:O repeatedly failed to tell me:
"WARNING! THIS LINE WILL CAUSE THE GAME TO ASSUME YOU ARE IN A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS CHARACTER!"

Well I do. You don't give a crap about immersion, and I don't give a crap about what you want.

Herpderp. Your stellar debate skills have swayed me. If you were going to get butthurt about opposing opinions, why did you make a thread?

*I* want it to be closer to real life. I like to be faced with some of the challenges it provides.

Challenges like dragons, apparently!

If you want real life, it's right outside. Go get it. A simulation is not necessary.

I don't want health bars for enemies (how the hell is the Warden suposed to know that?) Something like "wounded/badly wounded/near death" would be much better.

And that would be represented how, exactly?

I don't want to know exactly down to the last digit how a NPC feels about me. What, is the Warden psychic and can now read minds?

Well why not? He never opens his mouth so clearly he has the ability to project thoughts directly into people's brains. Makes sense that it would work both ways.

Ever had a friend that keeps annoying you and you'd  want nothing more than to puch him out, but you hold yourself back and smile anyway? Well, you can't really have that with a visible bar.

No I have not. When people frustrate or upset me, I cease contact with them. When I talk with people, I say exactly what I mean. Because I am not a moron.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 08 septembre 2012 - 04:25 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Plaintiff wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
What do you mean you don't see their facial expression? The camera pans to the one talking in cutscenes. Then you have the tone of voice (which in itself tells much).[/quote]

[quote]The characters do not give their input in every single scenario.[/quote]

Without the meter, I'm being denied information. Just like I was denied information when DA:O repeatedly failed to tell me:
"WARNING! THIS LINE WILL CAUSE THE GAME TO ASSUME YOU ARE IN A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS CHARACTER!"[/quote]


No, you are just being blind. And not knowing EVERYTHING is part of the charm.
Thet cute girl next door - does she just like you and flirts with you out of devilish fun or does she really like you?

You don't always get perfect answers in real life. That's what gives it gravitas.

Frankly, anyone who pays attention to the party NPCs and what they say, should have little trouble staying o ntheir good side.



[quote]
Herpderp. Your stellar debate skills have swayed me. If you were going to get butthurt about opposing opinions, why did you make a thread?[/quote]

You started this line of reasoning. I'm just following it trough.


[quote]
[quote]*I* want it to be closer to real life. I like to be faced with some of the challenges it provides.[/quote]
Challenges like dragons, apparently!

If you want real life, it's right outside. Go get it. A simulation is not necessary.[/quote]

And if you want to slay dragons go sleep..or read a book.
I'm sorry, but you dont' have a monopoly on deciding what exactly one form of entertainment should provide.



[quote]
[quote]I don't want health bars for enemies (how the hell is the Warden suposed to know that?) Something like "wounded/badly wounded/near death" would be much better.[/quote]
And that would be represented how, exactly?[/quote]

Letters..above enemy heads. Because that's something one CAN reasonably gauge. I can tell if someone is injured. I can't tell "one more hit with my dagger and he's dead"


[quote]
[quote]I don't want to know exactly down to the last digit how a NPC feels about me. What, is the Warden psychic and can now read minds?[/quote]
Well why not? He never opens his mouth so clearly he has the ability to project thoughts directly into people's brains. Makes sense that it would work both ways.[/quote]

Seriously?
Come back to me a with a proper argumnet pls.


[quote]
[quote]Ever had a friend that keeps annoying you and you'd  want nothing more than to puch him out, but you hold yourself back and smile anyway? Well, you can't really have that with a visible bar.[/quote]
No I have not. When people frustrate or upset me, I cease contact with them. When I talk with people, I say exactly what I mean. Because I am not a moron.[/quote]

So every human being should act like you?
Because you know ALL poeple do act that way in real life...

How can people betray trust and turn on eachother otherwise? Something that happens in real life.
People lying, people being misunderstood, people being duplicious, poeeel holding back - it all hapens.

You'd cease all contact with poeple who annoy you? So much for working on a relationship. Sometimes you just have to bear it an smile...for the greater good.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 09 septembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[coles4971]

Maybe rather than health bars the enemy just goes down and then the party member's next hit is just an execution move?

Y'know ... like Gears of War. Gets rid of the need for a health bar anyway.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
As a side note though, David Gaider's said that they're moving back to approval/disapproval for DAIII.

My life has lost all purpose and meaning...

lol

Life is convincing, persuasion, approval and disapproval. Deal with it.  

[eroeru]

brushyourteeth wrote...
Varric silently scoring me down every time I'm not sarcastic didn't feel like an interesting facet to our relationship - it felt like I was starting down the road toward a breakup.

Yes! Varric was actually really annoying, he doesn't have one good reason why he mocks all that isn't sarcastic, as opposed to the one-dimensional hatred from Fenris or Anders. His resentment of all that isn't a ****** seems rather shallow, and dumb.

---
As to your comment about hiding stuff in order for it to be "more complex", well that doesn't hold water. A complex system is still complex, transparancy or not.

Modifié par eroeru, 08 septembre 2012 - 10:28 .

[Arius23]

 

brushyourteeth wrote...

I think maybe that was a core problem with the rivalry system - you'd get rivalry points for doing things that your companions literally disapproved of (like turning a blind eye to slavery) and you'd get rivalry points for telling them you thought their life was headed in the wrong direction. Absolutely not the same sort of thing at all. Seems to me it would have been better to have approval/disapproval for the first AND rivalry/friendship for the second, OR only had your specific companion's quest and dialogue affect their friendship/rivalry.

That is a good point.  Perhaps three measures would be best:  Friendship for when they agree with your decisions, Rivalry for when they disagree but respect your decisions, and Disapproval for when you make an egregious decision which may result in a companion leaving the party or turning against the PC at some point in the game. 

Arthur Cousland wrote...

If the "approval meter" is removed, then I don't want companions leaving the game for good at a certain point if their approval isn't at a specific amount. I like knowing where I stand with certain things, when they have long lasting conseqences.

If the meter is removed and a companion does leave at some point, it should at least be extremely clear that they are at odds with the PC from past interactions so that it isn't unexpected.  Or, the companion should threaten to leave and the PC given a chance to straighten things out with him/her if the player really does want the companion to stay.

[Nomen Mendax]

Arius23 wrote...

 

brushyourteeth wrote...

I think maybe that was a core problem with the rivalry system - you'd get rivalry points for doing things that your companions literally disapproved of (like turning a blind eye to slavery) and you'd get rivalry points for telling them you thought their life was headed in the wrong direction. Absolutely not the same sort of thing at all. Seems to me it would have been better to have approval/disapproval for the first AND rivalry/friendship for the second, OR only had your specific companion's quest and dialogue affect their friendship/rivalry.

That is a good point.  Perhaps three measures would be best:  Friendship for when they agree with your decisions, Rivalry for when they disagree but respect your decisions, and Disapproval for when you make an egregious decision which may result in a companion leaving the party or turning against the PC at some point in the game. 

I like a lot of these idea, and the cool diagram posted by Todd23, but they all add complexity.  The big advantage of a single scale is that it's much easier to deal with and will result in less errors than more complex systems.  I'd still like to see a different and more complex system but I can see why Bioware would be wary about implementing one.

On a different note I'm tired of people complaining about the flirt icon.  IMHO there is absolutely nothing wrong with it as it is telling you that your character is intending to flirt, which is pretty much necessary given how vague many of the paraphrases are.  The problem is that flirting always works (except for Aveline) and will always result in a romance and never in disapproval (not that there was disapproval in DA2).

[nightscrawl]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Actially, I'd say that sometimes that is exactly what would/should happen.
when you're trying to save someone from themselves, they usually dont take it well. At least not at first.

Or ever.  I can't imagine ever thinking that was okay.

Oh I don't know... Imagine you do an intervention for someone who is an addict, or harming themselves in some way. If they get better, they very well might thank you for it later on. In a way, this sort of happens if you do a rival with Merrill. She (depending on choices) eventually realizes that you were trying to help her all along.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I agree that a linear scale doesn't come close to capturing realistic relationship conditions. I would love to see a scale with three or four measures.

[Cyne]

Oh yes! It would help a lot. So would hiding the emoticons next to each dialogue option. I like not knowing exactly where a choice will lead me, it makes the game much more interesting.