1166 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkKnightHolmes]

AresKeith wrote...

Dog should've been more of a summon/companion in DAO instead of filling an actual companion slot

Considering how useless Dog is in DA2, I'm glad he wasn't.

Modifié par DarkKnightHolmes, 30 août 2013 - 07:01 .

[Tinxa]

daveliam wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dog should've been more of a summon/companion in DAO instead of filling an actual companion slot

I liked that better too. 

1.)  I never took Dog because I'd rather take Alistair or Oghren to fill the melee role in my party
and
2.)  It gives you a "fifth" "companion", which is nice.

Sorry about the *sigh* I was mentally taking in a breath of air for a longer explanation and I just sort of typed it there 


I also prefer the DA2 summon. I never took dog along in DAO when I could have a talking companion instead. It was also nice having dog at your house and interacting with it there and having the little quest of him finding a burglar. I hope we at least get a dog for the stronghold in DAI.

[Iakus]

Tinxa wrote...

Let me try again:
I saw a couple of times that when someone expresses a concern about 9 being too many there comes a response of: "What's the problem, DAO had 9 (generously counting in shale and Loghain and whatnot)" and I was trying too say that Shale isn't even in the main game, Loghain is there only for the end ect. and that people are worried that 9 companions that are supposedly there for the full game will mean that all of them will get a bit watered down (like Mr Fixit ME2 example). That 9 equal but thin companions doesn't count the same as 7 wellrounded + 2 endgame, mute or whatever companions.

In my post, I did not include Loghain in my count.  I also specifically said "nine including Shale"  Shale was a DLC character, but was one that came free with every new copy of DAO, so I imagine a lot of people got it.  In fact, I believe Shale was originally meant to be in the full game, but was delayed due to problems in implementation.

As for Dog:  yes he has less content than the other companions, but is still a full companion, with equipment, gifts, dialogue (both with the Warden and banter with the other companions) and  a recruitment quest.  All he really lacks is a personal quest.  He even has unique reactions, such as when meeting Zathrien, visiting the Denerim market, and selecting him to duel Loghain at the Landsmeet.

The point being, Bioware has used nine companions several times in the past, in games regarded as some of the best they've ever made (even some of the best rpgs ever made).  So while concern about companions may be valid, I I don't think the sheer number of companions is cause for concern.  It's been done before, and done well.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...

In my post, I did not include Loghain in my count.  I also specifically said "nine including Shale"  Shale was a DLC character, but was one that came free with every new copy of DAO, so I imagine a lot of people got it.  In fact, I believe Shale was originally meant to be in the full game, but was delayed due to problems in implementation.

No. Shale was cut because of a number of reasons, and was given away as DLC for a number of reasons, including EA's project $10 and the delay that occured from the old release date. 

As for Dog:  yes he has less content than the other companions, but is still a full companion, with equipment, gifts, dialogue (both with the Warden and banter with the other companions) and  a recruitment quest.  All he really lacks is a personal quest.  He even has unique reactions, such as when meeting Zathrien, visiting the Denerim market, and selecting him to duel Loghain at the Landsmeet.

Pretending that Dog has the same content as Alistiar is riduculous. There's no VO cost, and there's no content on the Dog - Player interaction, which is the majority of NPC cost. And this doesn't factor in the cost of cinematics here, which are more involved than in DA:O. 

The point being, Bioware has used nine companions several times in the past, in games regarded as some of the best they've ever made (even some of the best rpgs ever made).  So while concern about companions may be valid, I I don't think the sheer number of companions is cause for concern.  It's been done before, and done well. 

Getting to the 9 companion figure is a stretch, and since KoTOR, we've seen the amount of content required per companion to be considered "good" increase a great deal. ME2, which was criticized as being shallow on the companion side, had more companion content than KoTOR. 

[DarkKnightHolmes]

In Exile wrote...
Getting to the 9 companion figure is a stretch, and since KoTOR, we've seen the amount of content required per companion to be considered "good" increase a great deal. ME2, which was criticized as being shallow on the companion side, had more companion content than KoTOR. 

ME2 had the same amount of content as ME1  so I don't see why anyone whines about that and not ME1 which only had 6 companions and only like 4 times to talk to them. In fact, Tali had even less than that.

Modifié par DarkKnightHolmes, 30 août 2013 - 07:40 .

[Ianamus]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

In Exile wrote...
Getting to the 9 companion figure is a stretch, and since KoTOR, we've seen the amount of content required per companion to be considered "good" increase a great deal. ME2, which was criticized as being shallow on the companion side, had more companion content than KoTOR. 

ME2 had the same amount of content as ME1  so I don't see why anyone whines about that and not ME1 which only had 6 companions and only like 4 times to talk to them. In fact, Tali had even less than that.

Probably because Mass Effect 1 was more flawed overall. Mass Effect 2 was a much better recieved game, generally considered one of Biowares best recent releases. Slightly shallow companion interaction outside of romance and lack of inter-companion interaction were some of it's only major flaws, so it makes sense that it would be brought up more in relation to ME2 than ME1, which had much larger flaws. 

Modifié par EJ107, 30 août 2013 - 07:46 .

[daveliam]

In Exile wrote...

As for Dog:  yes he has less content than the other companions, but is still a full companion, with equipment, gifts, dialogue (both with the Warden and banter with the other companions) and  a recruitment quest.  All he really lacks is a personal quest.  He even has unique reactions, such as when meeting Zathrien, visiting the Denerim market, and selecting him to duel Loghain at the Landsmeet.

Pretending that Dog has the same content as Alistiar is riduculous. There's no VO cost, and there's no content on the Dog - Player interaction, which is the majority of NPC cost. And this doesn't factor in the cost of cinematics here, which are more involved than in DA:O. 

Am I missing something?  Where in there does the poster (or anyone) claim that Dog has the same content as Alistair?  In fact, s/he says the exact opposite in the quote your provided.  Everything s/he listed is 100% correct.

[Iakus]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

No. Shale was cut because of a number of reasons, and was given away as DLC for a number of reasons, including EA's project $10 and the delay that occured from the old release date. [/quote]

Doesn't change the fact that Shale was a fully intergrated character and free to anyone who bought a new copy, and intended to be in the game at the start..

[quote]As for Dog:  yes he has less content than the other companions, but is still a full companion, with equipment, gifts, dialogue (both with the Warden and banter with the other companions) and  a recruitment quest.  All he really lacks is a personal quest.  He even has unique reactions, such as when meeting Zathrien, visiting the Denerim market, and selecting him to duel Loghain at the Landsmeet. [/quote]

Pretending that Dog has the same content as Alistiar is riduculous. There's no VO cost, and there's no content on the Dog - Player interaction, which is the majority of NPC cost. And this doesn't factor in the cost of cinematics here, which are more involved than in DA:O. [/quote]

I bolded the line you may have missed.  No, I don't pretend they have the same content.  I ackknowledge that DOg has less content than the other companions.  I do say that Dog was still a full companion and had content that reflects that.  I don't know how much Dog cost for the game (I imagine there was an animal handler and a trained dog involved, as well as creating the dog animations) 

I also don't know what the cinematic costs will be involved in DAI.  But I imagine it's likely all the companions will be genreally humanoid.

[quote]

Getting to the 9 companion figure is a stretch, and since KoTOR, we've seen the amount of content required per companion to be considered "good" increase a great deal. ME2, which was criticized as being shallow on the companion side, had more companion content than KoTOR. 
[/quote]

ME2's problem was the companion interactions were limited entirely to conversatons with Shepard and their loyalty missions.  If you look at the Dragon AGe games, they spread it much more evenly.  I have my concerns about the game and the companions.  More than you might think.  But companion numbers are not one of them. 

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
Doesn't change the fact that Shale was a fully intergrated character and free to anyone who bought a new copy, and intended to be in the game at the start..

The character wasn't available when the game went gold. Shale was not a "base game" companion. It's a shell game to include her, and the same shell game you're playing with Dog. 

You're drawing a false equivalence between DA:O's 8 characters at announcement and DAI's 9 characters at announcement. 

I bolded the line you may have missed.  No, I don't pretend they have the same content.  I ackknowledge that DOg has less content than the other companions.  I do say that Dog was still a full companion and had content that reflects that.  I don't know how much Dog cost for the game (I imagine there was an animal handler and a trained dog involved, as well as creating the dog animations)  

I didn't miss it. I'm just calling out for the shell game that you're playing. If you want to say that you're excited about 8 fully realized companions and optimsitic that one will be mute with miminal cinematics, then sure, DAI is exactly the same as DAO if we count Shale. 

ME2's problem was the companion interactions were limited entirely to conversatons with Shepard and their loyalty missions.  If you look at the Dragon AGe games, they spread it much more evenly.  I have my concerns about the game and the companions.  More than you might think.  But companion numbers are not one of them. 

ME2s problem was that a significant amount of companion content was romance-locked, and that each character had a limited number of shallow interactions with Shepard. But if you happen to think that the actual interactions between each character and Shepard were satisfying in ME2, then I can't fault you for thinking that DAI will deliver. 

[In Exile]

daveliam wrote...
Am I missing something?  Where in there does the poster (or anyone) claim that Dog has the same content as Alistair?  In fact, s/he says the exact opposite in the quote your provided.  Everything s/he listed is 100% correct.

You're missing the shell game. Saying that there's less content, except that Dog is really a companion, is trying to say that Dog counts just as much as Alistiar as a companion despite having 0 dialogue, no cinematics, etc. 

When some of us are concerned that 9 companions means that one of them will be dilluted, or that they all will be diluted, saying that other games had 9 if we include a mute character with no companion quest is not a real response to our concern. It's, in fact, the concern. 

[Andraste_Reborn]

For all we know, one of the nine DAI companions will be a dog. Or a non-verbal golem. Or a Silent Sister who doesn't bring their translator along when she joins up. (Actually, that would be amazing.) Or one of them will turn up late in the day like Loghain does in DAO. There's no reason to assume at this point that the companions will have less individual content than the ones in DAO and DA2.

(Although just as content distribution shifted somewhat between those two games, I imagine it'll shift again. Apparently we're back to just one companion quest each, for instance, instead of one per act.)

[Iakus]

In Exile wrote...

iakus wrote...
Doesn't change the fact that Shale was a fully intergrated character and free to anyone who bought a new copy, and intended to be in the game at the start..

The character wasn't available when the game went gold. Shale was not a "base game" companion. It's a shell game to include her, and the same shell game you're playing with Dog. 

You're drawing a false equivalence between DA:O's 8 characters at announcement and DAI's 9 characters at announcement. 

I bolded the line you may have missed.  No, I don't pretend they have the same content.  I ackknowledge that DOg has less content than the other companions.  I do say that Dog was still a full companion and had content that reflects that.  I don't know how much Dog cost for the game (I imagine there was an animal handler and a trained dog involved, as well as creating the dog animations)  

I didn't miss it. I'm just calling out for the shell game that you're playing. If you want to say that you're excited about 8 fully realized companions and optimsitic that one will be mute with miminal cinematics, then sure, DAI is exactly the same as DAO if we count Shale. 

ME2's problem was the companion interactions were limited entirely to conversatons with Shepard and their loyalty missions.  If you look at the Dragon AGe games, they spread it much more evenly.  I have my concerns about the game and the companions.  More than you might think.  But companion numbers are not one of them. 

ME2s problem was that a significant amount of companion content was romance-locked, and that each character had a limited number of shallow interactions with Shepard. But if you happen to think that the actual interactions between each character and Shepard were satisfying in ME2, then I can't fault you for thinking that DAI will deliver. 

Look I'm trying to have a nice debate here, but if you're going to accuse me of dishonesty then we might as well cut it off here and now.  I have no patience for that kind of thing.

[daveliam]

Andrastee wrote...

 Or a Silent Sister who doesn't bring their translator along when she joins up. (Actually, that would be amazing.)

THIS!  I would love to have a Silent Sister join up.  The only out of game content that I read was The Calling and thought Utha was a really interesting character.  I was initially thrilled to see her involved in DA: A, but was a bit overwhelmed by her development throughout.  If I hadn't read the book, I wouldn't even had known she was a Silent Sister because I don't think it was mentioned.

I'm not sure if it's because having a mute character, by nature, limits the ways that you can explore their story or if it just didn't suit them to have her play a larger role since she was pretty ancillary.  However, I think it would be cool to have a Silent Sister around that you have to learn about in ways outside of the typical backstory monologue that usually happens.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
Look I'm trying to have a nice debate here, but if you're going to accuse me of dishonesty then we might as well cut it off here and now.  I have no patience for that kind of thing. 

Then don't do it. 

[In Exile]

Andrastee wrote...

For all we know, one of the nine DAI companions will be a dog. Or a non-verbal golem. Or a Silent Sister who doesn't bring their translator along when she joins up. (Actually, that would be amazing.) Or one of them will turn up late in the day like Loghain does in DAO. There's no reason to assume at this point that the companions will have less individual content than the ones in DAO and DA2.

Maybe they will be. And that's a reasonable conversation we could have. I would rather have 8 companions than a non-verbal golem or an animal. But to have that conversation, we should at least acknowledge how content was spread over the last few games.

[Ianamus]

I don't understand the logic that having more companions immediately means they will receive less development and individual content. Dragon Age Inquisition is having a lot more development time than the previous game, presumably accompanied by larger budget. It seems to have more content in general from what we've seen so far.

There's nothing to say we won't be given more companions while still giving them just as, if not more individual content than the companions in Dragon Age 2 and Origins.

Modifié par EJ107, 30 août 2013 - 09:03 .

[In Exile]

EJ107 wrote...

I don't understand the logic that having more companions immediately means they will receive less development and individual content. Dragon Age Inquisition is having a lot more development time than the previous game, presumably accompanied by larger budget. It seems to have more content in general from what we've seen so far.  

Creating a new engine from scratch seems costly. Bioware might shower this game with more content, but why would that new content go to companions instead of the quasi open-world exploration they are aiming for. 

There's nothing to say we won't be given more companions while still giving them just as, if not more individual content than the companions in Dragon Age 2 and Origins.

They very well could be true. And I respect that argument, but that's not the argument being made. 

[draken-heart]

I hope one of them is a female Alistair (not the royal child part, the deflect serious conversation with humor part).

[In Exile]

draken-heart wrote...

I hope one of them is a female Alistair (not the royal child part, the deflect serious conversation with humor part).

I believe Cassandra is the royal child part. 

[draken-heart]

In Exile wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

I hope one of them is a female Alistair (not the royal child part, the deflect serious conversation with humor part).

I believe Cassandra is the royal child part. 

Which is why I want a chick who has the uses humor to avoid serious talk part.

[In Exile]

draken-heart wrote...

Which is why I want a chick who has the uses humor to avoid serious talk part.

Didn't Isabella count?

[Cantina]

I just hope there not as bad as DA2..


Isabella- A walking disease factory. Slept with anything that breathed.

Fenris- Annoying whiner who looked like a Final Fantasy character.

Merill- Dumb, ignorant and a blood mage.

Sebastian- I wanted so badly to find a roll of duct tape inside a chest to put over his mouth.

Anders- Love ya sweety but the constant oppression this and that was over done. We know mages are oppressed, it sucks, but lets focus on the task at hand.

Bethany- Boring.

Carver- I have a brother who is pissed off all the time, don't need a second dose in my game.

Varric- OK, your cool, cannot complain about you.

Aveline- Too high and mighty, also needy. Plus that "fruit roll up" wrapped around her head annoyed me and sometimes made me hungry.

Talis- Just no and yuck! Please go away and die by a fly landing on you some where else.

Modifié par Cantina, 30 août 2013 - 10:10 .

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

AresKeith wrote...

Dog should've been more of a summon/companion in DAO instead of filling an actual companion slot

This mod is pretty much vital in my DA:O playthroughs. It gets Dog, keeps him as a full companion, but puts him into a summonable slot a la the Ranger specialization. You can still switch to control him, set his tactics, level him up, etc. but he doesn't take up a party slot anymore.

IMO, that's what they should do in DA:I if they have a mabari.

[Iakus]

In Exile wrote...

Then don't do it. 

Cute.

In Exile wrote...

Maybe they will be. And that's a reasonable conversation we could have. I would rather have 8 companions than a non-verbal golem or an animal. But to have that conversation, we should at least acknowledge how content was spread over the last few games.

I've got this really insane idea:

Why don't we wait until all nine companions are revealed and we see some examples of their interaction before we bemoan how shallow and/or boring they will be.