213 réponses à ce sujet

[nightscrawl]

AshenSugar wrote...

Sounds to me that you're treating the Friendship/Rivalry thing as a system that needs to be 'gamed' in order for you to 'win', carefully working out the required sequence of events the min/max the system in order to get the highest bonus score.

Doing this severely limits yourself as you'll be constantly choosing options that provide the best possible 'score', rather than ones that are natural to your character. Far better (in my opinion) to just go with the flow. If they disapprove of your actions, so be it - You're character is being true to their beliefs regardless.

This depends on your view of limiting yourself. People have goals, even if that goal is as simple as "I want to get a rival Anders to side with the templars." You don't actually have to be contrary to your character's beliefs if you orchestrate things correctly, which can include switching out companions during the middle of a quest chain. There are enough points to be had throughout the game that you are free to make "mistakes" (this is having points opposite of your goal with a certain person), but still have your desired outcome in the end.

Having said all of that, in addition to what is in my previous post, I didn't do ANY of this in my first play, which was completely blind. After that is when I started having more fun and experimenting.

[fchopin]

I liked neither the friendship or approval rubbish in DA2 so did not use it, i picked what looked like the best text option for my style.

[Sable Rhapsody]

I really liked the F/R system. It has its problems, but generally speaking I thought the problems of the F/R system were less egregious than DA:O's reputation problems. At the very least, DA2's approach really extended replayability, as opposed to the older disapproval that would just lock out content. Anders and Merrill were the ones where I noticed the most difference in their dialogue.

[Sabariel]

I would've liked it more had "rivalry" made any real sense.

"I dislike you and everything you stand for! You also gave Fenris back to Danarius!! ...I like/respect you anyway! Let's have sex!"

[daft inquisitor]

 I liked the Friendship/Rivalry system myself. I thought it was great, and showed relationships in a different way than any BioWare game before them.

However, I think part of me wants to go back to the BG system. Having companions isn't about them liking you, it's about them being indebted to you for helping them with their problems, and tagging along as repayment.
...wait, isn't that one of the complains people had about DA2? :innocent:

Sabariel wrote...

"I dislike you and everything you stand for! You also gave Fenris back to Danarius!! ...I like/respect you anyway! Let's have sex!"

Yeah, this never made sense to me. If it's really that big of a moral decision, it shouldn't just be brushed off as, "I don't like what you did, but I respect your judgement." If someone was really upset about you selling someone into slavery, that should be a deal-breaker like it was in DA:O.

Keep the Friendship/Rivalry system, but tack it on to the DA:O system. I think they would work extremely well together in tandem. That way, if you REALLY ****** SOMEONE OFF, they have the option of just abandoning you for being an awful human being, but you also get the whole breadth of the relationship if they don't see eye-to-eye with you but still respect your opinions. It does happen in real life, people. I have a few friends like that myself.

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 04 janvier 2013 - 10:04 .

[leighzard]

Although the Friendship/Rivalry system isn't perfect, I prefer it to approval. It gave a greater variety of interactions. If Leliana didn't like you she just wouldn't talk to you, but if Fenris doesn't like you (or rather respectfully disagrees with your actions) it opens up a different line of the story. I especially love the perspective rivaling Anders gave me on his character that being his friend didn't.

What I really like about the whole series is that the slider isn't based on a general moral principle of good and evil, like previous incarnation of light side/dark side, open palm/closed fist, paragon/renegade. You can be a real ass and get Morrigan's approval. I also like that it's relative to all the different companions, not a fixed objective reputation. In the real world, people have differing perceptions of an individual's legacy and reputation.

[nightscrawl]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

It has its problems, but generally speaking I thought the problems of the F/R system were less egregious than DA:O's reputation problems.

"Here, have some presents!" XD

Sabariel wrote...

"I dislike you and everything you stand for! You also gave Fenris back to Danarius!! ...I like/respect you anyway! Let's have sex!"

Oh does someone actually comment on this if you do it? I'll never do it, even with a reload, I can't bear to see the look on his face.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 04 janvier 2013 - 10:30 .

[Dutchess]

I much prefer the Friendship/Rivalry system as well, because it offers something on the disagreeing side besides outright hating and stomping off (which would have been the case in DAO). It does need to be improved, though, because rivalry now constituted of "hate" points and disagreement-on-actions points. I believe that rivalry was supposed to represent just the disagreement part, but in DA2 playing an aggressive Hawke pretty much assured you of a rivalry relationship with every companion. Because respect is the crucial part in rivalry, this gets lost in the Hawke-is-being-a-douche scenario. Since most of DA2's companions were more or less supposed to be your friends, it becomes less believable they would stick around with you while you're always being mean to them.

Then there are the decisions that go beyond mere disagreement. If you take Orana in as a slave, you just get rivalry points from Fenris. Rivalry indicates respect, but I don't see how Fenris could ever have any respect for someone who condones slavery and even has his own slave. Besides, how could Fenris still trust Hawke to help him against Danarius, if Hawke has already shown to have no problems with slavery? That makes no sense, and situations like this hurt the rivarly system and make it less believable.

[Dutchess]

nightscrawl wrote...

Sabariel wrote...

"I dislike you and everything you stand for! You also gave Fenris back to Danarius!! ...I like/respect you anyway! Let's have sex!"

Oh does someone actually comment on this if you do it? I'll never do it, even with a reload, I can't bear to see the look on his face.

No, nobody ever says a single word about it after Fenris is gone. 

[snackrat]

I would like an inverted triangle. Bottom point = no respect, top left = friendship/respect, top right = rivalry = respect.
You'd start somewhere near the middle of the triangle. Get them to the bottom point, they have their 'crisis' and leave/attack/etc. Get them to the top, you get your Beliefs dialogue, then it varies depending on where you are left-to-right.

Something like ME3's 'reputation' could also work, but it would have a benefit if it could be reversed (you could 'lose' respect). As a whole they'd be friends for rivals based on compartive percentages. Yeah, the resulting dialogue would probably be binary like ME3 was, but with friendship/rivalry you have to go all the way in either direction or it is like you just met.

[thats1evildude]

renjility wrote...

No, nobody ever says a single word about it after Fenris is gone.

They complain a lot about it in the moment, but once it's done, no one brings it up again.

Though executing Alistair or other party members in DAO never gets brought up either.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 04 janvier 2013 - 10:40 .

[Wulfram]

The Friendship/Rivalry system had some fairly big problems.  Really, I think the writers found themselves often reaching for Approval/Disapproval, and using Friend/Rival in that way led to confusing and nonsensical results.

But having two different ways of having basically positive relationship was good.  Having the ability to disagree with companions and still have a positive relationship was good.

If they don't manage to keep those aspects when going back to A/D, I think that'll represent a major step back

AshenSugar wrote...

Sounds to me that you're treating the Friendship/Rivalry thing as a system that needs to be 'gamed' in order for you to 'win', carefully working out the required sequence of events the min/max the system in order to get the highest bonus score.

Doing this severely limits yourself as you'll be constantly choosing options that provide the best possible 'score', rather than ones that are natural to your character. Far better (in my opinion) to just go with the flow. If they disapprove of your actions, so be it - You're character is being true to their beliefs regardless.

Problem is, if I just "go with the flow" then I'm going to end up having to kill Fenris because he liked me giving an elf a job and encouraging my cousin to reunite with her father.

[nightscrawl]

thats1evildude wrote...

renjility wrote...

No, nobody ever says a single word about it after Fenris is gone.

They complain a lot about it in the moment, but once it's done, no one brings it up again.

Though executing Alistair or other party members in DAO never gets brought up either.

That's quite a bummer, for both of those =/.

Wulfram wrote...

Problem is, if I just "go with the flow" then I'm going to end up having to kill Fenris because he liked me giving an elf a job and encouraging my cousin to reunite with her father.

I didn't think he gave rival points if you picked the "I'll pay her" option, because you respond in a defensive tone with "I gave her a job, Fenris." He sheepishly replies, "Oh, then... that's good." That scene always annoys me. It's like he doesn't know me after four freaking years, which is another flaw with the 'reputation' systems in both games. I would like them to be more alive, if that is possible.

[Noviere]

I preferred friendship/rivalry over approval. It made the characters seem more like people, because they were reacting to how my actions gelled with their beliefs. The approval system in DAO had me acting in ways I didn't want to in order to placate companions who I brought with me.

Oh, and then throwing presents at the ones who didn't like me, until I was their best friend.

"I know you hate my guts, Loghain... But look what I got you! A MAP!!! See? We really can have a grudging respect for each other."

Modifié par Noviere, 04 janvier 2013 - 11:50 .

[Wulfram]

nightscrawl wrote...

I didn't think he gave rival points if you picked the "I'll pay her" option, because you respond in a defensive tone with "I gave her a job, Fenris." He sheepishly replies, "Oh, then... that's good."

You're right, he gives Friend points.  Since I naturally end up on the Rival side, that's the problem.

(Though the easiest way I find to avoid killing him is to just leave him at home all the time except for his own quests and avoid the subject of mages, since I tend to pick up a bunch of Friend points on his quests, and while I won't max out his bar on that side ever, you don't need to max out the bar as a Friend, only as a Rival)

[_- Songlian -]

To all the people who asked why can't I just go with the flow and not mind the approval machinations, I think nightscrawl replied to that issue much better than I could ever have. So I'll just quote it here again:

nightscrawl wrote...

It's not arbitrary, neither in the case of DAO or DA2. Both of those systems had certain checkpoints that were required for events in the relationships to proceed. With DA2, some players have done exactly what you stated and gone with what their character would want. In some cases that can leave followers yo-yoing the entire time. In addition, the DA2 system had the additional factor of changing your interaction with a given companion based on friendship or rivalry. This also determines which followers side with you at the end, with the potential to have your numbers significantly reduced.

As for the general direction in which the thread is going... yep, it seems I'm in minority. Some of you make some very interesting points about the current F/R system and I'm glad you posted.  

Modifié par - Songlian -, 04 janvier 2013 - 01:22 .

[daft inquisitor]

Karsciyin wrote...

I would like an inverted triangle. Bottom point = no respect, top left = friendship/respect, top right = rivalry = respect.
You'd start somewhere near the middle of the triangle. Get them to the bottom point, they have their 'crisis' and leave/attack/etc. Get them to the top, you get your Beliefs dialogue, then it varies depending on where you are left-to-right.

Something like ME3's 'reputation' could also work, but it would have a benefit if it could be reversed (you could 'lose' respect). As a whole they'd be friends for rivals based on compartive percentages. Yeah, the resulting dialogue would probably be binary like ME3 was, but with friendship/rivalry you have to go all the way in either direction or it is like you just met.

I really like the triangle idea. I could see it really working.

But, for the sake of simplicity, colors would have to be rearranged. Blue for Friendship, Purple for Rivalry, Red for Loss Of Respect.

Getting to the "top" of the triangle (the flat-edge on the Friend/Rivalry side) would mean your companions trust you implicitly, and won't abandon you no matter if you're friendly or a rival to them. That way, it also stops that stupid crap from DA2 at the end. "Fenris, I know you liked me a lot, but we weren't quite the best of pals, so that's the only reason you're abandoning me when I choose the mages over the templars? Seriously??"

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 04 janvier 2013 - 01:16 .

[Sidney]

Neither like it nor the straight friendship track of DAO because the game creates incentives to max out one way or the other to get some form of bonuses. Relationships aren't little mini-games.

[InfinitePaths]

The best solution to your problem is having a
Friendship
Neutral(some better name ofc)
Rivaly
By this I mean that you still get extra dialouge if you get +10 friendship +10 rivaly +15 friendship + 10 rivaly.This way the game will see that you use your companion often and if your companion is somewhere in the middle of the bar,he will get extra neutral dialouge and priviliges becouse you use him often,not the same as if you don't use the companion at all.I think of doing this in a way if you use the companion often but he always stays in the middle of the bar.Something like ME3 did with Paragon Renegade,they gave us reputation points so you could stay 50% Renagade 50% Paragon and still get extra dialouge,it could be called interection points or opinion points or something like that,the point is that they still give you extra dialouge and content if you stay in the middle side of the bar.

A perfect solution IMO.

[daft inquisitor]

That doesn't fix the issue with party members leaving for hating your guts, though... and yes, I do consider that a serious issue.

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 04 janvier 2013 - 01:43 .

[Althix]

how this is issue?

[InfinitePaths]

They actually don't do that in DA2.

[Althix]

Anders for some time

if you allow him to kill a girl and after that suggest him to go and... please him self he wll leave. Perhaps you can do that even with out killing a girl

Modifié par secretsandlies, 04 janvier 2013 - 01:54 .

[Gileadan]

Rivalry just seemed disapproval with a different color to me, and bizarrely rewarded you for it in the end instead of making the party member in question pack up and leave instead. There's no reason that someone should respect you for constantly disagreeing with them unless you had some other common ground to serve as the basis of a relationship. Without that common ground, people are really just opponents and there's no reason for them to keep each other's company (unless ****ing at each other is all they got in their lives).

All things considered, friendship/rivalry looks like a metagaming switch to me that lets you choose your favorite flavor of drama for the companion in question.

Ironically, rivalry would have made more sense in Origins, where the party members actually had a common cause: "stop the blight", for various reasons of their own.