98 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

Six is the absolute limit, but as Fast Jimmy said, diversifying the roles of companions to fight on other fronts for you seems like a more suitable approach with a 9+ group of people.

And to be honest, with six companions it feels like overkill. Only for bosses I can see that working. Truth be told, I liked the final battle with Meredith because we had about 10 people on your side fighting with you, including some surprises like Donnic and Zevran.

[Firky]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I was actually pretty amazed how quickly I got through that game now that I wasn't a 10 year old with no clue what the heck I was even supposed to do.

http://www.ultimaaie...-the-speed-run/ Here you go. I love this. It's like a thoughtful semi-speedrun. And for charity, too.

On topic. Yeah. I'd happily, happily take old school graphics if it brought more meat. I don't mind 4 companions in Dragon Age. I do miss the six of Baldur's Gate most keenly in stuff like battles against dragons.

But, again, in BG the classes were more diverse, so you needed to bring six or you'd be sorely missing something, like priest spells or whatever. Actually, even with six you were always missing something. Replay value.

Number of companions is connected to lots of other factors, I guess.

[MichaelStuart]

I like to be able to take all my companions with me.

[Zio Blackfyre]

Being able to take all your companions with you would be awesome. It doesn't make sense to just leave some of your companions behind. Like in DA2 when you were at the Deep Roads and you had to just take three party members. So yeah, more party members would be awesome.

[Ophir147]

No more than 3 people plus the Protagonist ofc. I understand that people like their Bioware characters, so do I, but having all of the characters with you all the time cheapens their impact and decreases replayability. Also, if you brought too many people in, it would require either making the characters that we can use drastically weaker or turning the entire battlefield into a cluster[coitus] of carnage, and that's not really what I like about strategic arr pee gees.

[BronzeMartin]

I like just having 4 party members, but I would like to be able to change my party members out whenever and whereever. It is just a hassle to have to quick travel to a certain spot to change my party up. Heck, do it like FF XII and let me swap party members in and out during battle.

[BENIIICHAT]

More is great but I'm fine with 3 companion like DAII. Just add some quest/battle that include other companion to fight along PC like Suicide Mission in ME2 or Final Battle on DAO.

[Urazz]

3 to 6 at the most. Though if you have a 6 man party then that should be the max amount of party members as well in my opinion.

[DarthLaxian]

well, i would love the option of bringing more party members (also there should still be some you can keep at camp, either because you do not like them (i for example dislike sten, i sometimes hate leliana (also i love her mostly...but her religious/chantry crap makes me wanna stick something pointy and made of steel into her sometimes!) etc. sometimes one or the other companion goes on my wits, so i leave them next time i chose my party!)...there should be side missions (important ones at that, for example two deals (feast with the empress, and a shady deal for example...or the hunt for a traitor, that can't be interrupted or any number of things) for these companions you left behind (that means you have to leave a viable party, thus not taking all tanks, all healers etc.

greetings LAX

Modifié par DarthLaxian, 05 novembre 2012 - 03:11 .

[LilyasAvalon]

One of each class at least, so 6 for me. Diversity is important for me.

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 05 novembre 2012 - 03:17 .

[MattH]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I don't have a problem with a party of four (I'd love a party of five or six, but that's not a hill I'm ready to die on) but what I'd really want is more sections like in the first assault on Denerim DA:O, where the entire group is fighting at once, even if they would be operating outside my control.

Sections like the Suicide Mission in ME2 would be great, as well. Times in the game where you can order certain party members to assume certain roles, which you lead a normal sized party in a coordinated effort/attack at the same time. This could expand the size of the 'party' to be all of your companions, while at the same time not overloading the console hard-limit of four playable characters on screen at once.

I agree with this, I'm happy with the party size of four, but I would like some missions that involve the entire group to be involved in.

[freche]

It's okay with three companions though I would like to see it upped to four.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Imp of the Perverse wrote...

Just to clarify, you're talking about a game that looks like this.

It looked a bit better on a non-console platform, but yes.

[samgurl775]

If there is a limit on the type of specializations a companion can have (like Anders was the only healer in DA2, wtf) then I'd like four companions to make balance easier. But if it goes back to DAO style, three is perfectly fine.

Modifié par samgurl775, 05 novembre 2012 - 06:51 .

[LinksOcarina]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Lovin' dem consoles right about now.

As a life-long PC gamer, I think that's a bit unfair.  Even people who play PC may not have rigs powerful enough to handle too much stuff on the screen.  I mean, I have a pretty beefy rig, but games like SWTOR would start chugging if too may characters were on the screen.

It's a memory issue. Consoles have 500 mb, while i'm pretty sure it's impossible to actually buy RAM for PC that's less than 2gb. And that 2gb worth of RAM would probably be about $20. 

So no, i don't think i'm being unfair. I'm no elitist, i'm just pointing out an obvious hindrance. I think i remember one of the ME3 devs saying they couldn't even add a holster weapon animation due to the 500mb memory limit. I mean, come on. MS needs to get their **** together and release the 720. It's been nearly 8 years!

As a guy who crossed over to consoles after PC costs became, well, inconvienent for me and my rigs, the issue doesn't bother me too much. After all, we have seen the glass ceiling of 12 already, albiet two were DLC characters with little to them in Mass Effect 2.

Is the amount of people you have in your little army really an issue? What makes them shine is the characterization over the numbers, its why Skyrim fails as an example for me because the 60+ guys you get following you are pack mules and cardboard cut-outs. 

As for Microsoft, the Kinect was part of their plan to keep the console going for another 2-3 years. Other than Nintendo most game companies are now trying to get the success of the PS2 model by having the system run for at least 8-10 years before bringing a new one. This is why Sony and Microsoft keep revamping the look of the system and add new features and add-ons, they want to keep it going as long as possible.

Chances are this will become the norm until cloud gaming becomes the norm, then we shall see console systems disappear almost all-together once everything is digital. At least, thats my bet for 20 years down the road. 

[BlackGrifon]

i think it should be like in dungeon siege 2 where depending on the difficuly you had a 4, 5, 6 man party . A 5 man party is better you can bring a rogue a two handed warrior, a tank, a healer and a combat mage, a 6 man party would allow you to have the full set the dual weld and archer. i didn't realy like taking up a slot for the mabary, now if we get the choice for a diffrent pet like a griffon, a tamed dragon or something exotic not a lame dog, don't get me wrong i'm all for mens best frend and all but i want something better if i'm going to take up a slot.

Modifié par BlackGrifon, 10 novembre 2012 - 12:50 .

[Petr0nella]

BlackGrifon wrote...

i didn't realy like taking up a slot for the mabary,

This is why I never took the dog anywhere in DA:O. I did like that you could summon the dog in DA2 - on the 2 occasions that I remembered that was an option...

now if we get the choice for a diffrent pet like a griffon, a tamed dragon or something exotic not a lame dog, don't get me wrong i'm all for mens best frend and all but i want something better if i'm going to take up a slot.

A dragon. That I can ride. 

[Darkstorne]

I would love to see more party members in key situations at least. Mass Effect 2's suicide mission was an incredible moment for me, because for once squad selection made sense. I remember how great it felt splitting my companions up into a primary and secondary team, supporting Tali in the tunnels/vents system, fighting inside of Samara's biotic barrier... man, it felt awesome. And everyone was doing their part.

Conversely, look at the defense of Redcliff town in DA:O - You spend most of the day building up the militia's morale, hiring extra muscle, resupplying weapons and armour, setting up traps, all the while being told you're against the odds and need all the help you can get. Then you choose your squad, and it goes something like this:

"Alistair, Morrigan, Sten, you're with me. Wynne, Lelianna, Oghren, Zevran, Shale, Dog, sit around the fire and toast marshmallows until we get back. I know we need all the help we can possibly get, but for some reason I am incapable of issuing orders to more than three people at once. Maker knows why I'm trying to amass an army."

I understand the restrictions inherent in having so many detailed characters on-screen, and all the CPU and RAM issues related to managing the tactics a player has set up for each party member, but I'd love to see the companions who aren't in your core team be there as additional support for important moments where it makes sense for the story - either similar to how Mass 2 handled the suicide mission, or the moments in both DA:O and DA2 where companions and friendly faces rushed to your side and followed their own orders in the climactic fights. It just makes sense, and doesn't leave me desperately trying to ignore the game mechanic limitations that have just slapped me in the face.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

First I want to thank Mr. Gaider, Mr. Shumacher and others for taking the time to explain things in a serious and thoughtful manner in these forums. Whether or not I always agree with what is said I appreciate and respect the effort made. Sometimes in these forums debate can be heated and I imagine the temptation to snark can be a bit like a chocoholic eyeing the last double chocolate chip brownie.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I am fine with four party members, me and three others. I always assumed that when I left people at camp it was because somebody had to guard it. Maybe somebody injured in a previous battle needs to heal more, somebody else needs to repair armor, whatever and those people would guard our stuff. Let's face it, I don't want to have a long hard day fighting dragon cultists only to come back to camp and find bandits have cleared us out and we don't have a tent to sleep in or a single bite to eat. (Those bandits would probably leave Alistair's stew behind, LOL). Even in my fanfic I leave people in camp.

In DA2 they aren't collecting dust, they actually have lives. If Isabela and Varric were with you all the time, when would they write their friendfics? Fenris needs his brooding time with occasional bursts of dance choreography, Aveline is captain of the guard, Anders has patients and Merrill has her mirror. DAO was more flexible in choosing your characters on nightmare mode because you could load up on health potions of various levels and not take a healer. The cooldown was for each type of potion (lesser health, potent health, etc.) instead of take one potion and all have a cooldown.

That said, I liked the scenes where I could give the non-tagalong companions directions, like before the showdown at the end of DA2, or where some of us are going directly to the archdemon and the others are guarding the gate. I also liked the bar fights where Isabela and Varric would join in, effectively increasing the size of my party. I think a few more encounters like these interspersed through the game would be fun.

Quite frankly, I liked leaving some party members behind. Either I was tired of bickering between two of them or I was annoyed. When Wynne comments on my relationship I always leave her behind for a while. I'm trying to fight darkspawn, I don't need disapproving glares.

I don't like less than four. There might be times when I choose to only take one or two, but I don't want to be limited to only taking one or two. I did enjoy, on the PC, having all my rogues summon animals and my mage animate the dead. That was a nice way to briefly increase the size of my fighting party. Even though I hate spiders I would summon them. 

An active party of five might be okay. I'm not sure if I would want more than that, though. 

[Pelle6666]

4 is pretty good. 3 in ME worked fine but the banter is better with 4 in my opinion.

[Bernhardtbr]

Minimum 3, maximum 5.

6 worked in BG 2 only barely, many companions felt very bland because there were so many of them, it was impossible to create interesting situations and dialogue for everyone.

Also, Bioware should scrap the old model of "1 character, 1 special quest" and if possible include more than one interesting situation for everyone.

[Chaos Lord Malek]

I would prefer if it go down to 2 companions with you. Mass Effect was made great in this, that you didn't require healers or tanks. Even DA2 can be finished without healer or tank of course, but its damn hard. I manage to down most of the game with 3 rogues (Hawke, Isabella and Varric) + Bethany/Anders but some fights were ridicules - like Meredith or Corypheus.

[RedWulfi]

Keep 4. Too many will cause problems with conversations. Considering in DA2 depending on who you had changed the conversation. For example: Hawke romances Fenris. If you have Anders in the party as well as Fenris they regularly fight over Hawke. If you also have Isabela in party she includes herself in the conversation. There are so many ways a single conversation can go depending on who you have. If we have say 2 party members like in ME, conversations wouldn't spread out as much.

[Zeta42]

You could have four companions in NWN2 and it wasn't that bad. But there was a three companions limit in Act 1 and it was expanded to four so Shandra wouldn't be occupying one of the three party slots, like the "locked" companions in DA when you were doing their personal quests. What I'm saying is that a party of four companions would be OK, just don't make it cheap. Make it matter, like do so because the combat is more difficult or it is somehow connected to the plot.

Modifié par Zeta42, 10 novembre 2012 - 06:12 .