145 réponses à ce sujet

[Shevy]

Masha Potato wrote...

How does restricting companions apply to restricting player's freedom? You are free to do whatever nonsense you like to your PC, but other characters are just that, OTHER characters, they do have a mind on their own. Well at least it would logically work this way

If the game provides me a good reason as to why that character has a fixed combat role/weapon, I'm gonna accept it. That was the case with Varric.
But by not providing a reason I don't see the point of limiting these characters. You could do it in Origins and it didn't harm the companions personality/appearance, did it?
I want to be able to build the team the way I imagine it will work best. In DA II you were forced to use Aveline or Anders, if you can't abdicate a tank or healer. Regardless if you like those characters personality or not. And here I'm limited in my freedom.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Masha Potato wrote...

How does restricting companions apply to restricting player's freedom? You are free to do whatever nonsense you like to your PC, but other characters are just that, OTHER characters, they do have a mind on their own. Well at least it would logically work this way

The player-created character also has a mind of his own, but I get some measure of control over it.  Why should the other player-controlled characters be any different?

[Realmzmaster]

I do not get the idea where posters say they were forced to use Aveline or Anders? Many of my parties consisted of three rogues with Merril as the mage Mage Hawke with Merrill and two rogues.
In the early going you had to use Aveline because you did not have that many companions. Anders is not essential especially in the first Act there was Bethany. If you played a mage Hawke Anders was most definitely was not necessary.

I am all for customization but not for the reasons that some are presenting.

[bleetman]

You aren't really forced to use Aveline.

You aren't technically forced to use Anders, but doing so severly gimps your party. He's singularly better than any of the others regardless of how many other mages you have, because Haste is that good. Depending on the circumstances, how important that is varies.

[Rawgrim]

The lack of customization pretty much broke DA2 for me. I played on one of the harder difficulties (I forget wich one), and YES, that forces you to use certain companions. I was playing a dualwielding magic rogue, wich meant i needed a tank. Only option was Aveline. Ergo: My criminal rogue was forced to bring the captain of the guards with him on all missions...yeah. Since Bethany leaves in mid-game, i was also forced to bring Anders along for healing. Even if my character was pro Templar.

Also: try doing the deep roads as an archer, while wanting Bethany to become a gray warden. That leaves you with Varric, Anders and Bethany. Good luck with that one on Nightmare difficulty.

Lack of customization not only gimps your party, but it messes up the roleplaying as well. As your character is forced to bring people along on missions, that he (in character) wouldn`t even want to be associated with.

[Vicious]

I fully support this idea. It makes no sense at all that Fenris can't pick up a shield. After all, Sten could use a bow. The way DA2 worked is just another step in the wrong direction of having the PC and the other characters bound by different rules.

Pretty much what he said.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Rawgrim wrote...

The lack of customization pretty much broke DA2 for me. I played on one of the harder difficulties (I forget wich one), and YES, that forces you to use certain companions. I was playing a dualwielding magic rogue, wich meant i needed a tank. Only option was Aveline. Ergo: My criminal rogue was forced to bring the captain of the guards with him on all missions...yeah. Since Bethany leaves in mid-game, i was also forced to bring Anders along for healing. Even if my character was pro Templar.

Also: try doing the deep roads as an archer, while wanting Bethany to become a gray warden. That leaves you with Varric, Anders and Bethany. Good luck with that one on Nightmare difficulty.

Lack of customization not only gimps your party, but it messes up the roleplaying as well. As your character is forced to bring people along on missions, that he (in character) wouldn`t even want to be associated with.

Having to bring specific companions along on required quests is something that needs to stop.  I don't mind if side-quests require companion A or companion B (or even companions A and B together), but main quests shouldn't ever do that.

No companion should be mandatory.

[Il Divo]

Meh, I'd prefer Bioware take the Jade Empire approach to customization, that is to say, none at all: unique outfits, unique weapons, and no player control. I find customizing anything outside of my own PC to be very boring and would prefer not to have resources devoted to companions instead.

[Realmzmaster]

bleetman wrote...

You aren't really forced to use Aveline.

You aren't technically forced to use Anders, but doing so severly gimps your party. He's singularly better than any of the others regardless of how many other mages you have, because Haste is that good. Depending on the circumstances, how important that is varies.

Haste is good but not necessary, I have 15 complete playthroughs. Did not use Haste until the 14th playthrough. Not using haste makes you think about the tactics that your companions possess. Never have my parties depend on any particular spell or ability. I reach the end of the game with a variety of different parties. In my opinion DA2 is not badly designed in that regard.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 11 octobre 2012 - 02:55 .

[Rawgrim]

Il Divo wrote...

Meh, I'd prefer Bioware take the Jade Empire approach to customization, that is to say, none at all: unique outfits, unique weapons, and no player control. I find customizing anything outside of my own PC to be very boring and would prefer not to have resources devoted to companions instead.

Then maybe action games would be more to your liking? 99 percent of party based roleplaying games have customization, after all.

[Realmzmaster]

Nizaris1 wrote...

If want to say about "I"

- I want to buy a robe at shops and then give it to Merill, Bethany and Anders to wear
- I want to buy a decent modest armor or clothing and give it to Isabella to wear it

But i can't, therefore DA2 is badly designed

The existence of those shops are a WASTE

What about other players? In your opinion (which is an I) it is badly designed.  IMHO which is my I it is not. I can only speak for my enjoyment and myself. Since the only point I experience belongs to me. Since I am spending my money and not yours why what you want be a consideration to me? I only want change if it enhances my experience. If what you want detracts from that experience why would I want it?
Yes it is about I because I am the one spending my money.

[cJohnOne]

Whoa, We haven't even discussed unique looks versus generic looks. At any rate some unique looks are nice like Varric and Morrigan. Keeping them in the same uniform makes sense to me. You just want to change their looks around for customization sake?

[wright1978]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Having to bring specific companions along on required quests is something that needs to stop.  I don't mind if side-quests require companion A or companion B (or even companions A and B together), but main quests shouldn't ever do that.

No companion should be mandatory.

Disagree think Deep Roads Expedition was an interesting plot point and it makes complete sense that Varric is tied to it. As long as it is used sparingly i have no problem with this.

[Rawgrim]

wright1978 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Having to bring specific companions along on required quests is something that needs to stop.  I don't mind if side-quests require companion A or companion B (or even companions A and B together), but main quests shouldn't ever do that.

No companion should be mandatory.

Disagree think Deep Roads Expedition was an interesting plot point and it makes complete sense that Varric is tied to it. As long as it is used sparingly i have no problem with this.

It does make complete sense, yes. BUT he could just as easily been with the expedition in the way his brother was, instead of taking up a party slot.

[wright1978]

Rawgrim wrote...

It does make complete sense, yes. BUT he could just as easily been with the expedition in the way his brother was, instead of taking up a party slot.

He really has to be a companion for his personal arc of his brother betraying him to happen.

[Rawgrim]

Nizaris1 wrote...

If want to say about "I"

- I want to buy a robe at shops and then give it to Merill, Bethany and Anders to wear
- I want to buy a decent modest armor or clothing and give it to Isabella to wear it

But i can't, therefore DA2 is badly designed

The existence of those shops are a WASTE

This is actually a very good point. In DA2, due to lack of customization options, i ended up being VERY rich very quickly. The only one I bought anything for was Hawke, and i only did that rarely, since the best equipment was actually found during quests, and not in shops. i couldn`t buy armour or even equip armors on my companions, so i ended up having to just sell 99 percent of everything i found. Somewhere during chapter 2 i just stopped looting alltogether, for the most part, since I didn`t need for anything. The only time i actually had to save money for something, was for the deep roads expedition. Thats it. it made the game alot easier, thats for sure.

Lack of customization also lead to alot of tactics and strategy options being removed for the game as well. Properly equipping party members, and experimenting with it was a must in games like BG2. So basically what lack of customization does, is this:

1. You end up being forced to use certain companions, even if your character would never associate with the person at all. So roleplaying itself gets messed up.

2. You get rich way too fast. Removes difficulty.

3. A portion of the strategy and tactical options are removed, making the game even easier.

4. It looks dumb, in most cases. Isabela attacking a dragon, or an army of archers while she is only wearing a shirt and boots. Immersion suffers. The "belivability" of the story.

5. It feels like the developers are holding my hand while i am playing. Making sure can`t screw up, or get stuck in a difficult fight. Simplifying everything, to the point where you can actually beat the game simply by buttonmashing. And i beat it on hard using no tactics at all, and this is the first rpg where i have even managed to do that.

[TEWR]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Merrill is a blood mage. I don't think that blood magic and healing magic run parallel so having Merrill with a healer skill set might not make sense, despite how the act of healing/nurturing may fit her personality.

2 things:

1) The lore of DAO -- which holds just as true for DAII -- explicitly states that Merrill knows healing magic, taught to her by Marethari. It is, in fact, this healing magic that Merrill used -- amplified by her use of blood magic -- to cleanse the shard she had of the Taint. Reason being: this healing magic was the same type that Marethari used on Mahariel that managed to weaken the Taint temporarily -- when it was in an unamplified state -- and Marethari tells Mahariel that Merrill's magic would be able to do the same thing if he grew weaker.

2) Nothing in the lore states that healing and blood magic cannot be used in conjunction. In fact, the lore -- and the first thing I stated -- says quite clearly that they can be used together to be more effective.

So I have to disagree that Merrill being able to be both a blood mage and a healer doesn't work. Aside from gameplay restrictions -- which would really only apply to her when she's healing so she can't be going "Use blood, regain blood, use blood, regain" and not the party -- there's no reason why a person cannot be both a healer and a blood mage.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 octobre 2012 - 09:30 .

[TEWR]

wright1978 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

It does make complete sense, yes. BUT he could just as easily been with the expedition in the way his brother was, instead of taking up a party slot.

He really has to be a companion for his personal arc of his brother betraying him to happen.

Make him the fifth party member, so to speak.

Personally, I disagree with Sylvius on that regard as I don't mind it, but that isn't to say there weren't other ways to do it. Legacy had Varric accompany Hawke regardless of whether or not he was in the party.

No reason the Deep Roads segment couldn't have done the same thing, while making him an NPC that's helping you out like Zevran, Nathaniel, Donnic, or Cullen do.

Using his same animations and a few skills, of course. And ideally, in a combat system that was far more balanced then DAII.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 octobre 2012 - 09:50 .

[Face of Evil]

I don't recall DAO's Merrill knowing any healing spells aside from this corruption-cleansing spell that you mentioned. And I wouldn't be quick to label that as "healing." I would say there's a difference between mitigating the effects of a metaphysical "corruption" and actually closing a wound or mending a broken bone.

I don't know why people say they were "forced" to have Aveline or Anders in the party all the time. I sure as hell didn't. Granted, it was smart to have at least one party member from each class accompanying you, but Merrill was the sole mage in my party most of the time.