213 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

It was a more realistic interpretation of how people behave, and I liked that a LOT over the approval system in the end, which only rewarded friendships.You gained rewards for rivalries too, and actually helped in the role-playing to make the characters belivable. 

So yes, I liked it. 

Another thing to add, real quick.

Is Rivalry  truely negative? 

Rivalry isn't necessarily negative, but that means that there were no megaitive consequences in DA2 with regard to your companions.  It wasn't possible to offend your companions to ill effect.  All friendship/rivalry did was encourage players to game the system.

But the approval system, if you take out the gifts, works really well.  All it needed was some mechanism by which companions would leave upon reaching a certain level of disapproval.

See I think you describe approval over Friendship/Rivalry there. Even taking out the gifts it was all a scale of one to work on and forced you to be more blank as a character, gaming the system to get full approval.

And having no ill effects is honestly a good thing. Mechanical wise it allows the characters to stick around a bit longer, and story wise it allows them to be tested only at majer events. Look at act 3 for example where you are forced down certain paths based on choices and if you can't convince your companions to join you it is basically "offending" your companions that way based on beliefs.I also have to point out I quite like that fact that the negative consequences are tied to major events or personal issues, like say Fenris leaving to find his sister if you don't help him immediately.

Then again, this may be because I always found "alignment" systems to be contrived and artificical, but when you have complex characters who are more than just "i'm evil, i'm good" it allows for dynamism like this. Stuff like alignments were always bad for role-playing because it pigeon-holes people into behaving rigidly, instead of natrually. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 04 janvier 2013 - 05:11 .

[Zeta42]

The friendship/rivalry system isn't much different from the approval system. The only difference is a rather ugly meter. In my opinion, the best approval system was in Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of the Betrayer. It's the same as in DA:O, minus the gifts.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LinksOcarina wrote...

See I think you describe approval over Friendship/Rivalry there. Even taking out the gifts it was all a scale of one to work on and forced you to be more blank as a character, gaming the system to get full approval.

But you didn't need full approval.  Full approval didn't get you anything.

Whereas, being full friend or full rival in DA2 had big consequences (compared to not being full friend or full rival).  And I found that being consistently friendly or rivally with the companions in DA2 basically impossible without breaking character.

And having no ill effects is honestly a good thing. Mechanical wise it allows the characters to stick around a bit longer, and story wise it allows them to be tested only at majer events.

If all of those events are scripted, then having either system becomes pointless.

Then again, this may be because I always found "alignment" systems to be contrived and artificical, but when you have complex characters who are more than just "i'm evil, i'm good" it allows for dynamism like this. Stuff like alignments were always bad for role-playing because it pigeon-holes people into behaving rigidly, instead of natrually. 

That's a different issue.  People didn't have to choose an alignment and then treat it like a straightjacket - they could have instead designed a coherent personality and then tried to figure out in which alignment it fell.

[Cell1e]

- Songlian - wrote...

samgurl775 wrote...

I liked the approval system far more than the friendship/rivalry system.

Same here! 

Me too! Couldnt stand the rivalry thing and it really smacked of science fictiony type mass effecty kind of thingy.
But then I really thought the whole interface and feel of the game was more science fictiony and mass effecty than fantasy. The whole feel of DA changed drastically by the interface (and other) changes they made. I Prefered the more old fashioned and fantasy approach from DAO.

[BubbleDncr]

I liked friendship/rivalry more than approval, because it gave me two options at my relationships with my companions that were both equally rewarded. Which has, in fact, been my major reason to replay DA2: to see what everyone's friendship/rivalry paths are like.

In DA2, someone could love me or hate me, but still be in my party, have new conversations unlocked, and have a passive ability unlocked.

In DA:O, if they hated me, they may have left the party - if they stayed, I get no new conversations, miss out on sidequests, and no attribute bonuses to them. So you get to experience less of the game simply because you aren't pandering to your companions.

The only flaw, IMO, with the friendship/rivalry system was coloring friendship blue and rivalry red. So many people were terrified of getting rivalry points because to them, red = bad. I think it would have been better for them to color them yellow and purple or something.

[cactusberry]

I don't love it nor hate it.

[demont0]

It's a good system, with DA2's bar being the better of the two games, since it allows for your character to have defined opinions, without having characters leaving you or with no bonuses to stats.

I think two bars for each companion could be good for the system, basically the bar from DA2, which reflects the clashing/acceptance of opinions you have with your companions (friendship/rivalry), this is the standard meter that changes depending on conversations and general actions during the game. And a more definite bar (trust/distrust perhaps?), similar to the one from DA:O, where a big reduction could result in companions leaving or being less trusthworthy, and this changes mainly from big events. An example would be desecrating Andraste's ashes, that would drastically lower Leliana's 'trust' meter, which then could lead to her attacking you if it fell too far.

Modifié par demont0, 04 janvier 2013 - 07:18 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Why should approval or disapproval (or friendship or rivalry) give stat bonuses at all? How does that make sense?

[daft inquisitor]

demont0 wrote...

It's a good system, with DA2's bar being the better of the two games, since it allows for your character to have defined opinions, without having characters leaving you or with no bonuses to stats.

I think two bars for each companion could be good for the system, basically the bar from DA2, which reflects the clashing/acceptance of opinions you have with your companions (friendship/rivalry), this is the standard meter that changes depending on conversations and general actions during the game. And a more definite bar (trust/distrust perhaps?), similar to the one from DA:O, where a big reduction could result in companions leaving or being less trusthworthy, and this changes mainly from big events. An example would be desecrating Andraste's ashes, that would drastically lower Leliana's 'trust' meter, which then could lead to her attacking you if it fell too far.

May I introduce you to the Triangle Relationship system in my sig? 

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Why should approval or disapproval (or friendship or rivalry) give stat bonuses at all? How does that make sense?

It's called "Gameplay/Story Segregation". Some things don't have to make sense in-story to give a boost to game mechanics, and I'm okay with that.

If you really must have a reason, consider it a "morale bonus". And a pseudo-magical one at that. (Andraste did it. )

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 04 janvier 2013 - 07:32 .

[Face of Evil]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Why should approval or disapproval (or friendship or rivalry) give stat bonuses at all? How does that make sense?

They basically represents boosts of morale. Anders fights just that much harder for you as a friend, and so his attacks do more damage. As a thousand animé series have shown us, loyalty, love and the power of friendship are terrific motivators.

"Listen, Anders! Don't believe in yourself! Believe in me! Believe in the Hawke that believes in you!"

(Conversely, Rivaled allies are motivated by pure spite.)

Modifié par Face of Evil, 04 janvier 2013 - 07:43 .

[bleetman]

Cell1e wrote...

Me too! Couldnt stand the rivalry thing and it really smacked of science fictiony type mass effecty kind of thingy.

Despite Mass Effect having nothing remotely similar?

Ok.

[Herr Uhl]

Face of Evil wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Why should approval or disapproval (or friendship or rivalry) give stat bonuses at all? How does that make sense?

They basically represents boosts of morale. Anders fights just that much harder for you as a friend, and so his attacks do more damage. As a thousand animé series have shown us, loyalty, love and the power of friendship are terrific motivators.

"Listen, Anders! Don't believe in yourself! Believe in me! Believe in the Hawke that believes in you!"

(Conversely, Rivaled allies are motivated by pure spite.)

I think for rivals the official explanation was that they wanted to show you up.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But you didn't need full approval.  Full approval didn't get you anything.

Beyond more interactions (e.g. romances) high (but not full) approval had unique consequences (like Zevran not leaving or not dueling Sten).

Whereas, being full friend or full rival in DA2 had big consequences (compared to not being full friend or full rival).  And I found that being consistently friendly or rivally with the companions in DA2 basically impossible without breaking character.

I found being friendly with all companions quite easy in-character. It just depends on the character. But then I find that to be the case in every game. A social PC has a very easy time of it, because part of being social is knowing how to appear to every character that you interact with - which side of yourself to illustrate.

That's a different issue.  People didn't have to choose an alignment and then treat it like a straightjacket - they could have instead designed a coherent personality and then tried to figure out in which alignment it fell.

The game doesn't let you do that. Take KoTOR: I do no that have a choice in a middle road between chaotic evil and lawful good in many quests (rarely I will have the option to just accept payment, but that also forces your hand).

Modifié par In Exile, 04 janvier 2013 - 07:46 .

[In Exile]

Gileadan wrote...

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).

You can disagree with people without being a jerk. You can be quite nice to Merril beyond her mirror thing, and you can have a lot of fun with Isabella while disagreeing with parts of her worldview. Where it gets nonsensical is Anders, because the game often conflates pro-mage and pro-Vengeage, so then you get into issues.

[daft inquisitor]

Face of Evil wrote...

"Listen, Anders! Don't believe in yourself! Believe in me! Believe in the Hawke that believes in you!"

Freakin' Gurren Lagann...

[Thor Rand Al]

I DO

[Swagger7]

I prefer the approval bar from Origins. Companions should leave if you ****** them off. It just makes sense.

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

Wulfram wrote...

Rpgfantasyplayer wrote...

I like the friendship/rivalry system better than the approval system in the respect that only the NPC's that I had in my group at the time were affected in my choices. In the approval system, even if I didn't have them in my party and they were at camp and I did something they didn't agree with I would get approval taken away. I knew they wouldn't agree with me so that is why I didn't take them in the first place. As long as it doesn't affect those that I don't have in my party at the time, I don't care the which system comes back.

Pretty sure the approval system only affected people in party in Origins.  Though there were a few occasions when particularly related characters might confront the PC in the camp after the event.

Personally, I wish party members were effected even if they weren't in the party, at least for non-minor choices.  They'll hear about it from the other companions, and I don't think Anders will be OK with you going around killing mages just because he wasn't in the party at the time.

Maybe it was just in Awakenings, but I did not have Valenna in my party and I chose to do something she didn't like and I got disapproval for it.

[Mr_Steph]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I would rather they improve the friendship/rivalry system than go back to/improve the old approval/disapproval system.

So much this.

[dreman9999]

Swagger7 wrote...

I prefer the approval bar from Origins. Companions should leave if you ****** them off. It just makes sense.

No it doesn't.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

It's called "Gameplay/Story Segregation". Some things don't have to make sense in-story to give a boost to game mechanics, and I'm okay with that.

I know what it's called.  Gameplay/story segregation is never acceptable.  It can't be - the gameplay is an element of the story; segregating them makes no sense.

[Zubie]

I preferred the approval system. Why should you get bonuses for pissing off your companions? Many people say rivalry isn't "bad" yet gaining rivalry points sometimes required you to do some pretty nasty things. Why would someone follow you after you just made a mockery of everything they believe in?

If anything the friendship/rivalry system would have made more sense in Origins where your companions might have stuck with you despite hating your guts in order to stop the Blight.

[Fredward]

OH! OH! OH! Me! Me! I did!

Waaaay more than the approval/disapproval thing.

[dreman9999]

LinksOcarina wrote...

A lot of people think complicated systems make it more complex.

That is not the case all the time.

F/r is not complex, it's just more varied.

[dreman9999]

easygame88 wrote...

I preferred the approval system. Why should you get bonuses for pissing off your companions? Many people say rivalry isn't "bad" yet gaining rivalry points sometimes required you to do some pretty nasty things. Why would someone follow you after you just made a mockery of everything they believe in?

If anything the friendship/rivalry system would have made more sense in Origins where your companions might have stuck with you despite hating your guts in order to stop the Blight.

Do you even know whyyouget the Friend ship rivalry points for?
You get Marril's Friendship for allowing her to do demonology. You get Fenris's friendship for blindly hating mages.
Add, you need to take the time to understand that people who don't like one another do work together. You never had to work with a boss you hated, or deal with a teacher you did not like?
Hate does not equal not being able to work with some one.