50 réponses à ce sujet

[labargegrrrl]

King Cousland wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

I like choice-exclusive followers. I do not like class-locked followers like Beth/Carver in DA2.

Essentially this. 

seconded.  (or would that be thirded?)

i would have picked carver over beth on every single play if they hadn't made it class dependent.  i'm sure all the rabid beth fans would have done the same in reverse.

as for choice-exclusive followers, i want them to be based not just on who i choose as companions, but what my companions would choose themselves.  for instance, if i pick up a blood mage in da3, i think it would be great if a templar companion told me to stuff it, and left.  like the logain/alistar descision in dao or the anders/sebastion pick in da2.  only MUCH earlier in the game.

i'd also like to see companions that either leave over a quest desicison, either permanently, or for the duration of that quest.  it's also fun when they turn on you, and friends become enemies.  but i digress...

[bleetman]

Limiting your ability to obtain either Handmaiden or the Disciple based on the characters gender was the single dumbest thing KotOR2 ever did.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Wulfram wrote...

If it's based on a choice by the PC, then in principle I support. Though it does have a cost in terms of resources of course.

Not so keen on the choice being because of your class or gender choice.

This.  For example, in KOTOR 2 I would've rather had the decision to pick between Disciple/Brianna or Hanharr/Mira.  At least Hanharr/Mira was based on alignment--still meta but ostensibly something based off of your roleplaying.

I'd REALLY love an either/or companion based on your plot decisions.  Anders and Sebastian being exclusive at the very end of DA2 was sort of like that, and I thought it was kinda cool.

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 26 octobre 2012 - 08:27 .

[Medhia Nox]

I liked Dragon Age Origins.

All but Morrigan and Alistair were optional...

I'd like them all to be optional.

====

I also want more than one Main Protagonist though.  I call this Ensemble Protagonist RPGs - and we used to have them in the form of the primitive Gold Box games.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 26 octobre 2012 - 08:28 .

[KingRoxas]

scyphozoa wrote...

I like choice-exclusive followers. I do not like class-locked followers like Beth/Carver in DA2.

Modifié par Kingroxas, 26 octobre 2012 - 08:28 .

[Master Shiori]

Maclimes wrote...

Sort of like Bethany and Carver?

I like the idea that choice matters, but I dislike the idea that a lot of resources (time, art, voice) went into a character that you'll only see 50% of the time.

Pretty much this.

As interesting as the whole Bethany/Carver mechanic was, I don't see much point in spending time and resources on creating a character that only a limited number of people will get to see. 

Oh sure, you could just do another playthrough to get him, but how many people actually finish the game, let alone play it twice?

[Terrorize69]

plnero wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Would be nice if some companions were limited to choices made in DAO and DA2.

Like say..

Hawkes younger sister/brother if they lived.
Mother Petrice if you sided with her in DA2.

I think making one of Hawkes siblings a companion would be interesting, however there's a chance that neither Bethany or Carver survived and I don't think it's a good idea to waste resources on a companion that a lot of people aren't going to get.

Lol thats the point of a exclusive companion

Would be interesting if your LI from DA2 was a companion, helping Cass track down Hawke and ends up helping the new PC

[BouncyFrag]

I like it. I get a lot out of using different companions for a majority of a game due to their banter and skill set. For instance, I usually wouldn't get Oghren early in DA:O since I didn't like to Orzamar first but was glad I did in another playthrough and wasn't disappointed.

[silentassassin264]

I don't mind if it is a choice exclusive type deal. And by choice I mean exclusively you pick X or Y, not, you have more renegade than paragon so so you get X instead of Y. I also don't think Bioware would do that because it is kind of a waste of resources making a full character that is removed like that. Beth and Carver for example, are gone for half of the game regardless of who you get so it does not even matter that much.

[Sharn01]

I would just like some flexibility in who I travel with. Let's face it, if you hate someone, and they hate you, your not going to hang out with each other unless you are forced to do so.

This can work in a game where you do not have complete freedom, you could be a member of the military and the person you hate could be assigned to the same unit, this is a good example where this kind of conflict can be interesting, but it doesn't work in a game where you have the freedom to choose who you travel or hang out with.

Modifié par Sharn01, 26 octobre 2012 - 08:53 .

[esper]

bleetman wrote...

Limiting your ability to obtain either Handmaiden or the Disciple based on the characters gender was the single dumbest thing KotOR2 ever did.

Seriously, that happend?

[NUM13ER]

bleetman wrote...
Limiting your ability to obtain either Handmaiden or the Disciple based on the characters gender was the single dumbest thing KotOR2 ever did.

Agreed. Especially considering I felt Discple was a weaker character and the weakest companion gamplay wise. 

I have no problem with having to pick one character over another be it through my actions up to that point or simply siding with one during the story. However linking it to gender, class or otherwise taking it out of your hands before you've even made an in-game choice is silly. 

Modifié par NUM13ER, 26 octobre 2012 - 09:05 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

I'm ambivalent. They can be kind of interesting, but the completionist in my chafes at the idea.

[esper]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

I'm ambivalent. They can be kind of interesting, but the completionist in my chafes at the idea.

I know the feeling.
Say if the rumours are right and we get Cullen and Cassandra.

The roleplayer in my really wants to say **** off to them, because I likely will try to be as pro-mage as possible on my first and most likely my main play through too and inviting two potential rivals/antagonists into the team seems stupid.

But the completetions in my thinks: But the experience, the companion quest, the banters... I have to have that...

So I really don't know what to think about it.

[Soirreb]

I hate exclusive companions. The examples I know of first hand (Carver/Bethany, Ashley and Kaidan, Javik, Sebastian, Shale, Zaeed, Kasumi) all suffer for being exclusive.  

In the case of Ashley and Kaidan, Bioware half-assed it on both characters and spent little time and effort on their post-Virmire content, gave then one short scene and an email in ME2, and made them into a distrustful idiot in ME3 before phoning it in again for their content after the Citadel siege, apart from a romance interlude. This established (in my mind) Bioware's "if they can die, phone it in for them later" attitude about characters, and it continued with Carver/Bethany in DA2. In that game, your choice of class determined which one lives for the meta reason of class balance, and whichever one lives gets only one act of content plus maybe a letter and a couple more scenes in the next acts.

With Sebastian and Javik we get two ends of the spectrum of DLC-exclusive characters: one is a pointless Scottish-sounding fop of a walking personification of fanservice with the requisite tragic past that doesn't affect or add to the story in a meaningful way on one hand, and on the other we have a manifestation of corporate greed and the embodiment of Mac and Casey shoehorning their "organics vs synthetics" manifesto (conveniently created for the third game) into the story which for the $10 price tag includes an essential portion of the story originally carved out of the base game and insight into one of the other races, but no chance to argue against the "kill all robots" tirade.

Paying extra money for a DLC character means you get a character that mechanically either overlaps with what you already have (Zaeed and Grunt, Kasumi and Tali or Mordin, Sebastian and Varric) or fills a niche that shouldn't have been opened or missing in the first place (Javik being the only Vanguard). For the story, you either get one that is kind of pointless and doesn't connect much with the story (Sebastian, Zaeed, Kasumi), or you get one that enhances the story to a point that they should have come with the base game (Shale, Javik).

Modifié par Soirreb, 26 octobre 2012 - 10:35 .

[bleetman]

esper wrote...

bleetman wrote...

Limiting your ability to obtain either Handmaiden or the Disciple based on the characters gender was the single dumbest thing KotOR2 ever did.

Seriously, that happend?

Yes. If you were male, Handmaiden joined you. If you were female, Disciple joined you. Which... was a bit odd, since Handmaiden has a significantly bigger role in the plot and - depending on your class - teaches you one of the singularly most useful passive skills there was through her ship conversations/interactions. Disciple is... just kind of there. And given that their reasons for joining you are kind of irrelevant to the character's gender, it was all a bit frustrating.

That and Handmaiden was voiced by Grey DeLisle hnnngh gief

Anyway. As far as Dragon Age goes, I wasn't a massive fan of how Bethany/Carver worked in terms of which one you got and which one you didn't and how quickly one was taken away from you in the first place, but I'm not especially opposed to the idea. I felt more companions should've walked at the end of DA2 depending on my choice than just Anders or Sebastian. Aveline's throw-down-her-sword-walk-out-YOU-ARE-NOTHING-TO-ME-HAWKE was a pretty great scene.

Modifié par bleetman, 26 octobre 2012 - 10:01 .

[Eveangaline]

so long as we still can have a large amount of companions per game (not 8 companions but you can only have 4 a game because they're mutually exclusive), then I'm all for it

[MichaelStuart]

I'm ok with it, as long as its the result of in game choices

[esper]

bleetman wrote...

esper wrote...

bleetman wrote...

Limiting your ability to obtain either Handmaiden or the Disciple based on the characters gender was the single dumbest thing KotOR2 ever did.

Seriously, that happend?

Yes. If you were male, Handmaiden joined you. If you were female, Disciple joined you. Which... was a bit odd, since Handmaiden has a significantly bigger role in the plot and - depending on your class - teaches you one of the singularly most useful passive skills there was through her ship conversations/interactions. Disciple is... just kind of there. And given that their reasons for joining you are kind of irrelevant to the character's gender, it was all a bit frustrating.

That and Handmaiden was voiced by Grey DeLisle hnnngh gief

Anyway. As far as Dragon Age goes, I wasn't a massive fan of how Bethany/Carver worked in terms of which one you got and which one you didn't and how quickly one was taken away from you in the first place, but I'm not especially opposed to the idea. I felt more companions should've walked at the end of DA2 depending on my choice than just Anders or Sebastian. Aveline's throw-down-her-sword-walk-out-YOU-ARE-NOTHING-TO-ME-HAWKE was a pretty great scene.

I am so schocked beyond words, really. That.... I have no words. At least with Bethany and Carver it is about them having to prove something/ wanting to live up to their big sister.

I agree with the ending. Aveline first of should not be nice and wait and see if Fenris betrays me or not. She should base it off her own opinion of me, the same with Merill (though it is possible for both Merill and Anders to leave). 

And Aveline should be a little easier, really. I really thought I had her to betray me last time, after her act three quest. She had the neutral conversation and basically said that Hawke and her wasn't friend anymore, but she still freaking sided with Hawke. Maker take you Aveline, beteay me already:pinched:

[labargegrrrl]

esper wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

I'm ambivalent. They can be kind of interesting, but the completionist in my chafes at the idea.

I know the feeling.
Say if the rumours are right and we get Cullen and Cassandra.

The roleplayer in my really wants to say **** off to them, because I likely will try to be as pro-mage as possible on my first and most likely my main play through too and inviting two potential rivals/antagonists into the team seems stupid.

But the completetions in my thinks: But the experience, the companion quest, the banters... I have to have that...

So I really don't know what to think about it.

the rolplayer in me is deligted at the idea of making my mage pc be the one to order those two around, actually.  i had a lot of fun doing that with magehawkes and fenris.  it's got a lot of potential for childish, petty revenge.

[Bondari the Reloader]

King Cousland wrote...

JWvonGoethe wrote...

I'd like to see it more often, and I'd also like the option not to recruit certain companions if it doesn't make sense for my PC to do so - Wynne, Sten and Zevran are good examples of what went right in Origins with this. Those characters added a lot, but if recruiting them doesn't make sense then I'll see them on another playthrough.

The worry about exclusive companions is that it can end up being presented as a binary choice, or, as others have said the choice can be removed completely from the player (in a bad way), eg if it is based on the PC's class - this occurred with Bethany/Carver in DA2.

So I think it is difficult to do well, but definitely worth it.

I agree with this. Hawke's relationships with companions sometimes felt forced, simply because I had little choice over who could and couldn't join me, I had no choice over who to boot out or keep (apart from Anders and Isabela), and (while I do believe it was an improvement over approval/disapproval) the friendship/rivalry system just wasn't realistic in some cases. 

If I'm playing as a hardline Andrastian, I don't want to be anywhere near Merrill. Likewise, if my character is a libertarian mage, why would Fenris want to associate with me? 

I agree with both of these. Since my Warden got along with all of her companions, this wasn't an issue for me in DA:O, but it definitely was in DAII. My Hawke didn't trust Merrill at all and figured that since he was harboring her mage sister and an apostate in Anders she didn't want the added headache of hanging around a blood mage as well. She brought Merrill to Kirkwall because she was afraid of breaking her promises to the Dalish and Flemeth, but she told Merrill in the alienage that they were not going to be friends and she didn't want to see her again. I never went to see Merrill again, nor did I do any of her companion quests that kept popping up in my journal. Yet, at the end of the game, suddenly Merrill is there telling Hawke she will fight by her side?

More on topic, I like the idea of exclusive/restricted companions as long as our options are dictated by roleplaying elements (in game choices, or maybe background choices). If we can change our companions to fit the roles we want for our party like in DA:O, as opposed to the set combat abilities in DAII, then overlapping roles becomes less of an issue. I understand the concern that exclusive companions may not have as much story/dialog, but as long as they don't feel like afterthoughts I'm okay with some companions being more important/prominent than others.

[esper]

labargegrrrl wrote...

esper wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

I'm ambivalent. They can be kind of interesting, but the completionist in my chafes at the idea.

I know the feeling.
Say if the rumours are right and we get Cullen and Cassandra.

The roleplayer in my really wants to say **** off to them, because I likely will try to be as pro-mage as possible on my first and most likely my main play through too and inviting two potential rivals/antagonists into the team seems stupid.

But the completetions in my thinks: But the experience, the companion quest, the banters... I have to have that...

So I really don't know what to think about it.

the rolplayer in me is deligted at the idea of making my mage pc be the one to order those two around, actually.  i had a lot of fun doing that with magehawkes and fenris.  it's got a lot of potential for childish, petty revenge.

I did like my main Hawke's and Fenris grudging respect for each other. (And my main Hawke just loved to act like she was proven right), but Hawke was a personal person with no army and just friend. If we are leading an army and investigation group, inviting people from the opposite side or from a side you know you would side against if you could, does seem rather stupid. (Of course we the recruitment situations might give as a good enough excuse)

[Terrorize69]

Would be cool if you got a companion depending on the choice of who you sided with in DA2.

Sided with Mages: Get a Ex-Circle mage who fled to Orlais after the mage victory in Kirkwall. The mage wishes that war is not the answer and wants to aid in any attempt at peace.

Sided with Templars: Get a Ex-Templar who felt that the what happened at Kirkwall was too extreme and the Order lost its way, seeking redemption in Orlais

[Quething]

bleetman wrote...

Yes. If you were male, Handmaiden joined you. If you were female, Disciple joined you. Which... was a bit odd, since Handmaiden has a significantly bigger role in the plot and - depending on your class - teaches you one of the singularly most useful passive skills there was through her ship conversations/interactions. Disciple is... just kind of there. And given that their reasons for joining you are kind of irrelevant to the character's gender, it was all a bit frustrating.

My understanding is that Disciple was originally supposed to collect holocrons with female Exile, and they would boost stats all datacron-style, making up for the gameplay discrepancy. Well, part of the gameplay discrepancy, since he'd still be a soldier with no Wis or Cha who becomes a Consular.... anyway it got left on the cutting room floor with, like. The ending. So.

Back on topic, I'm in the "like the principle, too wary of the execution" camp at this point. The idea of making a choice that makes a gameplay impact that tangible, like Virmire or Alistar v Loghain, is incredibly appealing. The reality of the effort BioWare put, or rather didn't put, into the Hawke siblings and the Virmire Survivor, is discouragement enough to make me think it's a bad idea nonetheless.

Modifié par Quething, 27 octobre 2012 - 12:32 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Leoroc wrote...

 What are your thoughts on playthrough exclusive companions? For example in Kotor2 you could get Hanharr OR Mira and Handmaiden OR Disciple but not both. Me being someone who playsvthrough three or four times I love em.

I like having "And/Or" companions. It adds to the replay value.