131 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmmm. This could be cool.

Although... the events that cause further movement of relationships sounds suspiciously like the DA2 model, where we couldn't say anything to our companions until we had reached the next Act.

The DA:O conversations were just big getting to know you conversations that DA2 cut. All they need to do is add those back in. 

[Bekkael]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmmm. This could be cool.

Although... the events that cause further movement of relationships sounds suspiciously like the DA2 model, where we couldn't say anything to our companions until we had reached the next Act.

I really, really dislike that mechanic. It's too much like Mass Effect, doling out companion interaction in drips and drabs. I liked the camp conversation style of doing things in DAO much better.

[Tinu]

David Gaider wrote...

It is possible for a party member to end up hating the PC if approval gets low enough, yes, and it can come to a crisis point with that character-- at which point they may even leave for good. Or other things.

Oh I like the sound at that. Maybe we can lock them up in our prison (I assume the Inquisition will have one) or trade them (a demon's deal).

[Potato Cat]

So, if we cannot start romances at negative approval levels, does dropping into negative approval later on cause the romance to end?

[AppealToReason]

Cowboy Saunter wrote...

AppealToReason wrote...

Cowboy Saunter wrote...

AppealToReason wrote...

krul2k wrote...

Hopefully by the sounds of it our actions speak louder than any words, but obviously words have a lower impact

i know what i mean honest

Yes, something like this. Dumbed down.

*Kills small child eating a cookie*

Guy Francophone disapproves -15 "Dude wtf!"

Inquis "It was an accident" +1 approval

Basically you can't just say "woops sorry!" anymore to fix everything.

lol i agee and hope.but DUDE
http://bit.ly/1drNqml
i totally approve of you CAI

I really hope we can get the Megazord and its various modes as agents of the Inquisitor. Demon's ain't got **** on the Ultra Zord

so much win and awesomeness, no mere mage could hold themselfs together
Plus i mean the flute....
it would make all demons cower 

I thought it was a missed opportunity that when you woke up Corypheus he didn't say "AAAH AFTER TEN THOUSAND YEARS I'M FREE!!"

It would make my life so much if we came across a band of travelling do-gooders in Red, Yellow, Blue, Pink, Black and Green Armor fighting with swords, daggers, lance, bows and an axe.

[philippe willaume]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmmm. This could be cool.

Although... the events that cause further movement of relationships sounds suspiciously like the DA2 model, where we couldn't say anything to our companions until we had reached the next Act.

agreed, though I have a good vibe about how it will turn out.

[Potato Cat]

Bekkael wrote...
I really, really dislike that mechanic. It's too much like Mass Effect, doling out companion interaction in drips and drabs. I liked the camp conversation style of doing things in DAO much better.

Completely agree, though there does need to be these big event conversations, to spawn some later little conversations. 

Cassandra: "Hey Inquisitor, I'm Queen of Nevarra now"
Quizzy: "Oh, we need to talk about this!"
Cassandra: "Sure, but not right now, there's important BS going on right now."
Quizzy: "Okay, let's wait until we're back at our castle."

Better than having all the conversations balsted through in the first third of Origins.

[Daerog]

Are gifts still in game?

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 29 août 2013 - 12:04 .

[TsaiMeLemoni]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Are gifts still in game?

I hope not. Or least not implemented as in DA:O.

[Daerog]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Are gifts still in game?

I hope not. Or least not implemented as in DA:O.

Warden: "Look, I... I know you didn't like that I burned down that village so I could loot 5 sovereigns and an elfroot, but I'm going to make it up to you."
PartyMember: "How?"
Warden: "Here's a soggy cake and some tattered pants."
PartyMember: "Hey, awesome, you are a great warden!"
Warden: "Oh, and here's some cheap alcohol I got off a dead drunk."
PartyMember: "Sweet, now my base stat has improved thanks to your bribes! While my family was in that town, how about we be best friends?"

[RosaAquafire]

I am so devastated about the loss of rivalry relationships, particularly rivalry romance. This was the one thing that could potentially ruin DA:I for me and now it's here The best measurable change between DA:O and DA2, gone forever

Imma try and have faith but rivalry romances were the best thing in DA2 sob.

EDIT: I know I'm the sort of person that the BSN hates but is there any chance on us getting some clarification on how this system will affect romance? Does the capacity for a rivalry romance with tension and yelling and slap slap kiss still exist? Is low approval like rivalry? Can we keep a character hanging at low approval to get a rivalry relationship if we prefer it that way? Or is low approval just 'neutrel?'

Would love some clarifcation on this, not specifics, just what we're looking at.

Modifié par RosaAquafire, 29 août 2013 - 12:54 .

[Aaleel]

So does this mean we may get some more moments like when Sten challenged your command in DA:O if your approval was too low?

[Allan Schumacher]

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmmm. This could be cool.

Although... the events that cause further movement of relationships sounds suspiciously like the DA2 model, where we couldn't say anything to our companions until we had reached the next Act.

The DA:O conversations were just big getting to know you conversations that DA2 cut. All they need to do is add those back in. 

DAO had conversations that were gated based upon what things you had accomplished so far in the game, as well.

[Icinix]

I like the sound of it. I did think the Rivalry / Friendship system was very good though.

Also like the return of characters possibly leaving or...other...as the case may be.

[In Exile]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
DAO had conversations that were gated based upon what things you had accomplished so far in the game, as well.

That's true, and I wasn't very precise in my post. But my recollection was that the majority of the "talk anywhere, at the start of the game" conversations were either background on the characters or background on the game's lore. For example, Alistair has a huge conversation tree on the GWs. 

[TheBlackAdder13]

It is possible for a party member to end up hating the PC if approval gets low enough, yes, and it can come to a crisis point with that character-- at which point they may even leave for good. Or other things.

Oh me likey. Me likey a lot. You know, it'd be a great way to induce fan tears if a party member you ****** off enough ends up assassinating your LI. *hint hint*

[PantheraOnca]

RosaAquafire wrote...

I am so devastated about the loss of rivalry relationships, particularly rivalry romance. This was the one thing that could potentially ruin DA:I for me and now it's here The best measurable change between DA:O and DA2, gone forever

Imma try and have faith but rivalry romances were the best thing in DA2 sob.

EDIT: I know I'm the sort of person that the BSN hates but is there any chance on us getting some clarification on how this system will affect romance? Does the capacity for a rivalry romance with tension and yelling and slap slap kiss still exist? Is low approval like rivalry? Can we keep a character hanging at low approval to get a rivalry relationship if we prefer it that way? Or is low approval just 'neutrel?'

Would love some clarifcation on this, not specifics, just what we're looking at.

I think if you start a romance and maintain a low approval, or start a romance and continually lose approval it may have a similar effect as a rivalry romance. Potentially anyway. Possibly also there are triggers that change the tone of the relationship without costing approval?

[kinderschlager]

David Gaider wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Is it possible to have a romance with low approval?

To a point. You cannot begin a romance at negative approval, however.

Is it saying that approval is basically about whether the character approves or disapproves of the PC's actions, rather than whether or not they like you?  Which would make it rather more like Friendship/Rivalry than the DA2 system?

It's based on their approval of your actions. Ultimately it's closer to DAO's approval system than DA2's, but without DAO's system of low approval locking out interactions with your party members. The majority of interactions (the ones that aren't directly approval-related) are gated by events in the game, not your approval level. The type of interaction you have in those instances varies by their approval.

Is it possible for the character to end up just plain disliking/hating the PC, or is it always going to be the "disagree, but good friends" thing mentioned?

It is possible for a party member to end up hating the PC if approval gets low enough, yes, and it can come to a crisis point with that character-- at which point they may even leave for good. Or other things.

please let that mean i can kill the pentaghast woman once i manage to ****** her off enough (i'm pro-mage fanatic, i don't like the chantry. ask liliana, stitching that head of hers back on must have been a pain)

[kinderschlager]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmmm. This could be cool.

Although... the events that cause further movement of relationships sounds suspiciously like the DA2 model, where we couldn't say anything to our companions until we had reached the next Act.

The DA:O conversations were just big getting to know you conversations that DA2 cut. All they need to do is add those back in. 

DAO had conversations that were gated based upon what things you had accomplished so far in the game, as well.

not to such an extent as what happened in DA2 is what he meant i think

[Firky]

Approval is always a weird system.

Like, even since Baldur's Gate 2, with alignment and reputation leading to stuff like characters killing each other.

I think I find it weird because the opposite of love isn't hate. (So far as I conceptualise it.) It's nothing. So, I picture the companions loving and hating you, while still being your companions and eventually sliding down the scale to meh, and then leaving. (But that's not the way it usually plays out, obviously.)

Of course they could leave after a terrible argument, but I don't see that as changing your love/hate status. At least not immediately.

The Sten example in Origins, where he attacks you, is another odd example. But, I'd prefer it be less explicit, like this example, than really clear - like with an approval bar.

[AlexanderCousland]

IM WATCHING HOW COMPANION INTERACTION VERY CLOSELY.

It's definitely going to be interesting to so where they go with this, especially because THE WRITER'S seem to be infatuated with the idea of making companion's "Independent and Strong" almost to a fault. I hope they dont forget the Player is most important. Further exacerbating my concern Is the fact that I dont agree with the Writer's on social issue's, which makes me think Im going have to worry about all my male companions being easy going softie's (Alistair, Ander's,Varric) and my female companions too arrogant to tolerate (Morrigan,Leliana,Wynne,Aveline,).

[David Gaider]

In Exile wrote...
That's true, and I wasn't very precise in my post. But my recollection was that the majority of the "talk anywhere, at the start of the game" conversations were either background on the characters or background on the game's lore. For example, Alistair has a huge conversation tree on the GWs.

No, the main difference between DAO and DA2 conversations with the party members was the lack of random questions-- being able to to ask the character questions about their past or about the lore. The full conversations-- as in the ones that actually progressed their plots or relationships, were gated (mostly by approval level). DA2 had more content on the plot side, as in the one plot per act (as opposed to DAO, which simply had one short plot per party member), though I think the perception of many people is that those plots were simply quests and not really "part" of the character's interactions.

We sort of hit a middle ground in DAI. There are the random questions you can ask the party member, similar to DAO, and we're down to one plot again (which is part of their development arc). They have the full conversations which are primarily gated by event, as mentioned (though these depend on the player seeking them out, usually-- no more missions demanding you seek the party member out). You still cannot talk to them anywhere in the world (there's not even the option to click on them outside of "safe" areas), but there are certain conversations that can initiate elsewhere, depending on whether they're present.

[GreyLycanTrope]

David Gaider wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...
Aw, I'll miss the rivalry relationships.

Rivalry not being a bad thing but just a different type of relationship was something that, I think, wasn't easily communicated-- particularly to those having played DAO. So we were faced with either trying to do a better job of explaining it (like with some kind of tutorial) or going back to "friendship good, rivalry bad" ...which, I think, is a bit more intuitive anyhow. So long as rivalry doesn't mean the player is locked out of any interesting content with the follower (and thus chances to regain friendship), I think it still works.

Fair enough I'm just worried about party members leaving if I disagreed with them too often, one of the reasons Morrigan stayed at the camp more often than the rest on a few playthroughs, somehow I always thought it was a bit of a disservice to constantly stick the same party members on campfire duty. But if the new system allows for disagreements with major actions contributing more to the departure I think I'm good.

Will there be different ability bonuses attached to the approval ranking for both the positive and negative relationships like in DA2 or just the positive approval like in DA:O?

[Maria Caliban]

Anders was an easy-going softie?

If Leliana and Aveline were arrogant in your view, I suspect Cassandra and Vivianne will qualify as well.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 29 août 2013 - 02:59 .

[CronoDragoon]

David Gaider wrote...
So long as rivalry doesn't mean the player is locked out of any interesting content with the follower (and thus chances to regain friendship), I think it still works.

This is how I feel. Not having to meta-worry about missing content because of how my character acts/reacts will lead to a better, more "true" experience, I think. Although obviously if I get someone's rating low enough that they attack me....well...that's just how it goes.