132 réponses à ce sujet

[fchopin]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

and yet Anders hates Templars and hates anyone who is going against Mage freedom, Fenris hates mages, Isabella is only out for herself unless you befriend her (or make her your rivial, I agree that was a mistake) Aveline is pretty much your second mother, and even and wen you rival her, you get a very different reaction from her later, its honestly pretty good. And shows her character even more. Merill... honestly, an idiot, a pretty damn big idiot....  Varic, the observer, and fellow troublemaker. Seb... honestly he is the confused one, he knews what he belives in but just doesn't know what  to do or who he should be. Bethany/Carver, siblings, Beth, willing to let the world go by her and more than happy to do it quitely. Carver, the struggle to get out from behind Hawkes Shadow.

Feel like im missing someone but gon't know who.

The romance of the LI in some cases ends up reviealing more about who they are really vs who they would be for a friend. So it hasn't really taken anything "away" from the story at all, and nether does it seem to matter that they are gay or straight. Cause from what I understand the world seems to be a ton more tolorent of homosexuality than our real world.

So in a world where homosexuality is not looked down on (i think execpt in royality expected to have heirs) would a person act any differently if they where gay or straight?

Yes Anders hates Templers and still comes with us if we go after mages even if we kill them and same with Fenris.
 
I want companions to have their own personality and never to come with us unless they agree with us and also have set sexualities and not changeable depending on the PC gender.
That is how life is and we all have to deal with this in real life, i don’t want to play in an imaginary world where i can have and do anything i want but in a world that i can achieve what i want provided i follow the correct road.
 
For example one of my favourite scenes in ME3 is with Steve as i play a male Shepard and i become friends with Steve and help him out. That is one of my favourite scenes in ME3 and i love it.

[Wulfram]

I don't think there's any occasions in DA2 or DA:O where it's problematic to reconcile the various possibilities. As far as I'm concerned they're the same in all playthroughs and that works fine.

(Except I guess that Dog is a different Dog if you're a Cousland, but that's probably overthinking things)

In ME1, you had squadmates opinions switching around so that you always got one person advocating each side - and I really disliked that.

[Xilizhra]

I want companions to have their own personality and never to come with us unless they agree with us and also have set sexualities and not changeable depending on the PC gender.

So have them all set as being bisexual; problem solved.

[Ziggeh]

fchopin wrote...
Because the companions have no set personality and sexuality and that means they do not believe in anything so we cannot interact with them. How can i argue with a companion when he agrees with everything i say or if he does not agree still does what i tell him? I want real companions to stand up for themselves and if they do not agree with me to just go.And it should be the same with their sexuality; i don’t want slaves but people to interact with socially and sexually.

That'd they do things that conflict with their apparent beliefs is a whole other topic, as for the rest, I do find that interesting: 

The result of conflicting (or potentially conflicting) information for you, adopting mindset (1), is the assumption that neither is true, effectively leaving them without that aspect of their personality. 

Modifié par Ziggeh, 04 juillet 2013 - 12:55 .

[Ziggeh]

Wulfram wrote...

I don't think there's any occasions in DA2 or DA:O where it's problematic to reconcile the various possibilities. As far as I'm concerned they're the same in all playthroughs and that works fine.

(Except I guess that Dog is a different Dog if you're a Cousland, but that's probably overthinking things)

In ME1, you had squadmates opinions switching around so that you always got one person advocating each side - and I really disliked that.

Where Duncan chose to be at the start of Origins is the only one I can't think of a solid rationale for.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 04 juillet 2013 - 12:58 .

[Nightdragon8]

fchopin wrote...

Nightdragon8 wrote...

and yet Anders hates Templars and hates anyone who is going against Mage freedom, Fenris hates mages, Isabella is only out for herself unless you befriend her (or make her your rivial, I agree that was a mistake) Aveline is pretty much your second mother, and even and wen you rival her, you get a very different reaction from her later, its honestly pretty good. And shows her character even more. Merill... honestly, an idiot, a pretty damn big idiot....  Varic, the observer, and fellow troublemaker. Seb... honestly he is the confused one, he knews what he belives in but just doesn't know what  to do or who he should be. Bethany/Carver, siblings, Beth, willing to let the world go by her and more than happy to do it quitely. Carver, the struggle to get out from behind Hawkes Shadow.

Feel like im missing someone but gon't know who.

The romance of the LI in some cases ends up reviealing more about who they are really vs who they would be for a friend. So it hasn't really taken anything "away" from the story at all, and nether does it seem to matter that they are gay or straight. Cause from what I understand the world seems to be a ton more tolorent of homosexuality than our real world.

So in a world where homosexuality is not looked down on (i think execpt in royality expected to have heirs) would a person act any differently if they where gay or straight?

Yes Anders hates Templers and still comes with us if we go after mages even if we kill them and same with Fenris.
 
I want companions to have their own personality and never to come with us unless they agree with us and also have set sexualities and not changeable depending on the PC gender.
That is how life is and we all have to deal with this in real life, i don’t want to play in an imaginary world where i can have and do anything i want but in a world that i can achieve what i want provided i follow the correct road.
 
For example one of my favourite scenes in ME3 is with Steve as i play a male Shepard and i become friends with Steve and help him out. That is one of my favourite scenes in ME3 and i love it.

You mean like DA:O where Lillieana would turn agianst the PC if he tainted the ashes, and Shale would turn against you if you go agsinst that Goalm guy. And Alister leaves if you let Logain join the GW. You mean those kinds of events? Even tho, there is a blight on and what not.



Eh... the rivialery path for Isabella never really made much sense to me, the Merill thing honestly... working with a Demon, to fix an artifact that killed 1 member (and potentially) causing another to be tanited with Darkspawn blood. Doesn't sound smart to me. It screams "I'm an idiot" Also the fact that she doesn't heed the advice of a elder also screams "fool" to me. Yes yes I know, retrieve old elven magic. But in the end never got it working and still was being tricked by the demon. "I can tell you if you free me" = "I'm not going to tell you and eat your soul" 

[Ieldra]

@fchopin:
So you would never approve of the PC influencing their companions as you did with Leliana and Alistair? I found that pretty cool. I love hardened Leliana, and it wasn't as if this came out of nothing. With regard to the players, yes, it can be seen as catering to a specific player base, but guess what: all characters are made to cater to specific player bases. Read David Gaider's article on how stories in games are made, he says it explicitly. Making content variable between playthroughs allows for more freedom - and ultimately more player enjoyment, and we wouldn't play games if didn't enjoy them. As long as it's done well it enhances the experience and adds replayability.

What I grant you is that something like Anders coming with you if you side with the templars in DA2 (does he really?) should not happen because it goes against a core character trait established again and again throughout the game. But that's not the level of divergence I'm talking about.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 04 juillet 2013 - 01:19 .

[Ziggeh]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@fchopin:
So you would never approve of the PC influencing their companions as you did with Leliana and Alistair? 

That's a different case. If you had no influence as the PC, it may as well be entirely linear. The issue here is influence beyond the PC - if they became hardened at random or due to arbitrary "game" choices, like class or race.

[fchopin]

Xilizhra wrote...

I want companions to have their own personality and never to come with us unless they agree with us and also have set sexualities and not changeable depending on the PC gender.

So have them all set as being bisexual; problem solved.

It is not possible to have all bisexual as it would depend on their personality and beliefs.
For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married.
And there could be hundreds of reasons why not everyone can be bi in the game.

Modifié par fchopin, 04 juillet 2013 - 01:17 .

[ComfortablyNumb]

fchopin wrote...

Because the companions have no set personality and sexuality and that means they do not believe in anything so we cannot interact with them. How can i argue with a companion when he agrees with everything i say or if he does not agree still does what i tell him?
 
I want real companions to stand up for themselves and if they do not agree with me to just go.And it should be the same with their sexuality; i don’t want slaves but people to interact with socially and sexually.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, so forgive me if not. But are you expecting companions to always act the same, regardless of their relationship with PC and how PC and story is played? 

Wouldn't it be a little like expecting people IRL to react to others always in the same way (because IRL we are supposed to have set personalities, as well)? Which, obviously, is never the case. 

When you don't agree with someone, it doesn't mean you will never interact with this person again. 

Even with sexuality, some people get attracted to opposite sex (I'm assuming that's your main problem?) only when they meet "the right person". And even if it's only as some sort of experiment, they can still get involved.

People are flexible and they change and adapt, depending on situation.
And as Nightdragon8 pointed out, DA companions do stay the same at their core. They do stand up for themselves (were you never yelled at by Anders or Fenris?). They will leave you (in DA:O and Isabela in DA2). 

I think we have to allow some matters to be simplified in games, and I do not agree, that is as bad as you present it.

Modifié par mrufka_z, 04 juillet 2013 - 01:21 .

[Ziggeh]

fchopin wrote...

It is not possible to have all bisexual as it would depend on their personality and beliefs.
For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married.
And there could be hundreds of reasons why not everyone can be bi in the game.

So avoid writing those beliefs into the characters, problem solved.

[ComfortablyNumb]

fchopin wrote...

For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married.
And there could be hundreds of reasons why not everyone can be bi in the game.

We have Sebastian... Optional, true, but fits your description perfectly.

[Zazzerka]

Ziggeh wrote...

So avoid writing those beliefs into the characters, problem solved.

Oh good, I look forward to meeting the cast full of excruciatingly neutral characters.

It'd be enough to make me appreciate Fenris.

[fchopin]

Ziggeh wrote...

fchopin wrote...

It is not possible to have all bisexual as it would depend on their personality and beliefs.
For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married.
And there could be hundreds of reasons why not everyone can be bi in the game.

So avoid writing those beliefs into the characters, problem solved.

Then we would be restricting ourselves on what kind of companions we can have and i don’t want to have the same companions with same personalities in each game but different companions with different ideas.

[Nightdragon8]

Ziggeh wrote...

fchopin wrote...

It is not possible to have all bisexual as it would depend on their personality and beliefs.
For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married.
And there could be hundreds of reasons why not everyone can be bi in the game.

So avoid writing those beliefs into the characters, problem solved.

.... you know.... i may be wrong but, sounds more and more.... like trolling now......

It IS possible to have all bi characters I mean think about it, thats exactly what is in DA2 now isn't it?

Also agian you are wrong about beliefs, while yes having them do acts that would go against there characters should result in them leaving I agree with. should have been in the game, it was good for DA:O don't see why it shouldn't have applied to DA2 (where in fact it should have applied more)

Sorry I just don't see how "For example if there is companion with a belief that all people should
be virgins for both male and female and only heterosexual couples can
mate after marriage then there would be no sex unless PC gets married." So if a companion thinks that only virgins can marry, and the world says its ok. where is the problem here? Oh right its the companion that has the problem so if the PC thinks, "screw that" and goes ahead anyway

So I should not do anything and thus obey the companion 100%? or are you talking about something that going on between the companion and the PC? There has already been of at least 2 companions that either wont have sex until marrige (Vette from SWTOR sith warroir) and Seb from DA2 for a sexless marrige.

Also, it then should be blocked for the PC if the PC had a sexual relatinoship with someone else. Which would be done if that kind of compaion where to show up. That's just common sense, so unless you are going to accuse the writers of potentially making that therotical plothole in the story in relationship (which I haven't seen them remotely do) you don't need to worry about it.

Aveilen gets married (unless you sabatoge the relationship) and she has "relations" with her husband. Wither or not the PC has a relationship or not.

[fchopin]

mrufka_z wrote...

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, so forgive me if not. But are you expecting companions to always act the same, regardless of their relationship with PC and how PC and story is played? 

No, basically what i am asking for is that companions should react to what the PC is doing and if they do not agree with us to talk to us on the problem depending on their beliefs.

[Nightdragon8]

fchopin wrote...

mrufka_z wrote...

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, so forgive me if not. But are you expecting companions to always act the same, regardless of their relationship with PC and how PC and story is played? 

No, basically what i am asking for is that companions should react to what the PC is doing and if they do not agree with us to talk to us on the problem depending on their beliefs.

so basicly you want more dialoge and less "hand waving" in the game....

[ComfortablyNumb]

fchopin wrote...

mrufka_z wrote...

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, so forgive me if not. But are you expecting companions to always act the same, regardless of their relationship with PC and how PC and story is played? 

No, basically what i am asking for is that companions should react to what the PC is doing and if they do not agree with us to talk to us on the problem depending on their beliefs.

Which they do - Alistair, Leliana, Wynne, Sten, Anders, Fenris... 

They will all confront PC, if s/he does something that goes against their beliefs. Some will even fight you for that!

Modifié par mrufka_z, 04 juillet 2013 - 01:51 .

[fchopin]

I am always for more dialogue.

[Ieldra]

fchopin wrote...

mrufka_z wrote...
I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, so forgive me if not. But are you expecting companions to always act the same, regardless of their relationship with PC and how PC and story is played? 

No, basically what i am asking for is that companions should react to what the PC is doing and if they do not agree with us to talk to us on the problem depending on their beliefs.

That is not incompatible with expressing different traits in different playthroughs. Also, there's a core of a character that should, of course, not be changed, but I think the optional "hardening" of characters in DAO was a very good idea. I dislike the idea that the PC shapes the companions all that much and would prefer it just happened based on decisions unrelated to the PC's interaction with the companion - as in "companion witnesses you do X - becomes more inclined to change towards Y", but that would have the effect that plot and companion development might be linked in a way players don't like. I'm not sure that's better. 

[Ziggeh]

fchopin wrote...
Then we would be restricting ourselves on what kind of companions we can have and i don’t want to have the same companions with same personalities in each game but different companions with different ideas.

Zazzerka wrote...
Oh good, I look forward to meeting the cast full of excruciatingly neutral characters.
It'd be enough to make me appreciate Fenris.

Right, because if you can't have Tuna/Mayo there are no other options for your sandwich. You'll just have to have bread.

There are more personality traits that we can possibly list and restricting any given sample is not objectively flawed and absolutely does not render the characters composed of those remaining as neutral or identical. 

[fchopin]

Ziggeh wrote...

Right, because if you can't have Tuna/Mayo there are no other options for your sandwich. You'll just have to have bread.

There are more personality traits that we can possibly list and restricting any given sample is not objectively flawed and absolutely does not render the characters composed of those remaining as neutral or identical. 

I know that they can create many companions with different personalities and still make them bi but you have to agree that it does restrict many personalities that would not be possible is that correct?

[Zazzerka]

Ziggeh wrote...

Right, because if you can't have Tuna/Mayo there are no other options for your sandwich. You'll just have to have bread.

Since you love metaphors, the other options are mayo and ham, mayo and chicken, and mayo and beef.

Mayo would get boring after a while.

[Ziggeh]

fchopin wrote...
I know that they can create many companions with different personalities and still make them bi but you have to agree that it does restrict many personalities that would not be possible is that correct?

Only in that there are a vast number and that that "many", despite any numerical quality is still a relatively inconsequential number.

Zazzerka wrote...
Since you love metaphors, the other options are mayo and ham, mayo and chicken, and mayo and beef.
Mayo would get boring after a while.

So what you're saying is that all bisexuals are roughly the same, give or take some meat? Do you need me to point out the flaw in that?

[fchopin]

Ziggeh wrote...

fchopin wrote...
I know that they can create many companions with different personalities and still make them bi but you have to agree that it does restrict many personalities that would not be possible is that correct?

Only in that there are a vast number and that that "many", despite any numerical quality is still a relatively inconsequential number.

Don’t you also agree that if these companions are used like DA2 and change depending on gender they would be very superficial and probably not used in future games as different people would have different experiences with them and would be almost impossible to see them again unless it is some kind of small cameo role?