90 réponses à ce sujet

[javeart]

What's the extent of this principle? Surely any decision with possible bad outcomes can penalize a PC for being role-played in a way that leads to one of the bad outcomes. (See, for instance, the terrible gyrations ME3's ending puts some players through as they desperately try to rationalize Destroy even though their PCs really want to Refuse.)

 

I'm ok with choices leading to bad outcomes, as long as every choice has its own bad outcome and there's no way out of it (like it is the case, in my opinion, with DA:O endings). This way everybody gets penalized, regardless of how you have roleplayed your character... What I don't like it's when there's way out to get everything right but only if you roleplay your character in a very specific way (like with ME 2 reputation system, that was what I actually had in mind). 

[Wulfram]

I had big problems with Fenris's Rivalry too.  It's not just the whole not liking slavers thing.  One time I effectively ended up having to kill him because I told Charade to go talk to Gamlen.  It definitely felt like I couldn't max out him either way with the sort of characters I like to play unless I metagamed heavily. The safest policy I found was just to mostly leave him at home except for his quests and thus rack up "hate slavers" friendship while avoiding "don't hate mages" rivalry.

 

Metagaming is always going to happen, but the big problem with Rivalry in DA2 is that the reasons why you might fail often don't feel like they make much sense, and the thought process necessary to succeed doesn't make sense - whereas metagaming Approval just means you spend your time watching what you say in order to ingratiate yourself, which is quite natural really.

[Ryzaki]

Eh I never had that issue cause I make sure to rival max him asap. Once it's maxed you don't have to worry about friendship gains anymore. (Basically save Charade for after you do his final QB conversation).

 

But if you're playing someone in the middle of the road it is a bit of a pain how you're expected to rival them on two instances (Like my friendship Anders. My Hawke didn't like Justice but the game assumed I was all okay with it. Which...was no).

 

I'm not saying it doesn't have flaws. Cause it does. But the game really isn't forcing you to metagame to keep anyone unless you want them to turn against templars/mages. And as I said above for Fenris to me it makes sense. He's not enough of a friend with you to go along with it cause whatever and he doesn't respect you enough (nor does he feel the need to get over his hatred of mages) to along with it at sub 80 rivalry.

[Wulfram]

I'm not saying it doesn't have flaws. Cause it does. But the game really isn't forcing you to metagame to keep anyone unless you want them to turn against templars/mages. And as I said above for Fenris to me it makes sense. He's not enough of a friend with you to go along with it cause whatever and he doesn't respect you enough (nor does he feel the need to get over his hatred of mages) to along with it at sub 80 rivalry.

 

But the mechanics don't have any apparent connection to the degree of respect he might have.  Why should he respect Hawke less for disapproving of blood magic, giving an elf a job, hating slavers and encouraging his niece to reconcile with his Uncle?

 

I don't think the concept was bad, but it basically ran into the fact that the system really needed an approval system - and when the writers instead effectively chose to give out friendship as approval, the system pretty much broke down for Rivalry.

[Ryzaki]

Now that's fair enough. It is pretty silly that it becomes a balancing act.

 

XD point. It should've been two separate bars and whichever was higher won out. I don't know why they used it as a sliding scale cause that did turn it pretty awkward.

 

Edit:

 

That said he respects Hawke on either side of the scale. Rivalry is just agree to disagree and friendship is we agree. The middle is I guess neutral. As for why he'd respect you less it's the scale being arbitrary.

 

And you guys encouraged me to replay. Going to rival Fenris with nice guy Hawke yet again. Actually screw nice guy Hawke snarky Hawke. Least he'll crack a smile once in a while.

[somewherenoplace]

It definitely should've been two different scales.

 

Agree and Disagree

 

Respect and Disrespect

 

These would obviously be connected at times as some characters will both disagree and feel disrespect from certain actions and how you carry yourself; Just who you are (Mage, Shem, some other thing, might even affect respect at the start). The option to do something they may disagree with but due it with honor or because you truly believe that it is the right way to do things. This would all obviously get modified by the companion's personality and their views on respect and disrespect would differ. 

 

This would create four quadrants of personality towards the player which would affect how they react to story moments and dialogue.

 

The problem with this system is most likely a ballooning dialogue budget but it would've made sense in DA2 which is definitely more of a band of people adventuring and living rather than a military situation.

 

Since Inquisition seems to place you once again at such a high place of power, I'd be fine with just a loyalty bar since that respect is basically implied since they've agreed to follow you as leader of the inquisition.

 

If Bioware goes for a Firefly esque small ship of outlaws or something for ME4 I hope a dual axis system of approval would be implemented

[CybAnt1]

There's lots of proposed two-axis systems. 

 

I really like the concept, and yes I wish they'd do it. 

 

But, Lord Gaider said that isn't what they're doing for DA:I. It will be some kind of one axis system, it won't be two end/dual scale (friendship-rivalry). Everything else as to implementation ... well, we don't know. 

[ImperatorMortis]

I'm glad there won't be a rivalry system anymore. It was kind of silly. 

 

When I heard the concept before Dragon Age 2 was released the idea seemed really cool, but man was it awful in practice. 

[somewherenoplace]

I never really found it awful because I have a hard time role playing straight up evil/heartless characters. I can play prejudiced, strong willed, opinionated characters, etc... but never jerks. Therefore rivalry always ended up feeling like I had their respect, but not their agreement. That respect, and continued friendship made rivalry more of a misnomer for me than a bad concept. I imagine if my companions followed me as a rival after I was straight up malicious towards them than there would be a lot more ludonarrative dissonance. 

[Dabrikishaw]

I gamed approval in Dragon Age: Origins and Awakening.

 

I gamed friendship/rivalry in Dragon Age ][.

 

I will game whatever system shows up in this game no problem.

[Mockingword]

Yes.

 

If you recruit people, they are your friends.

[Ryzaki]

Okay replaying DA2 and rivaling Fenris and lmao Fenris can give some huge rivalry boosts in convos if you mix the move on choices with jerk ones. I got a +20 rivalry in his first conversation (post recruitment) with a mixture of telling him Hawke chose to survive and move on, why bother going after Danarius if he left him be and telling him to stop whining XD You get +15 if you just pick the former two (I mixed it with some flirts and snarky choices). heh he was already at 50 rivalry when I started the convo (mostly siding against the templars and trying to talk to slavers as I said). Only quest i have left is the turn in for Sheparding wolves for act 1. (Though picking the you could make a home here hits you with +5 Friendship, Picking the I'm sorry seems neutral). So he's at 65 Rivalry and I haven't even finished act 1 yet. +15 Rivalry gift from act 2 (or I could just do Feynriel's's quest first thing in act 2 like I usually do and that's around 20 rivalry) and that'll get him either maxed or close enough to it...

 

And yep. Just did Fenris first convo in act 2, got +5 approval so I was at 70, ran to lowtown to pick up the book gave it to him hit 85 approval, triggered a bitter pill quest tried to talk the slaver down (though it really wasn't necessary at this point) got +5 so I was at 90, got +5 after the conversation with Hadriana and was at 95 then got my final +5 during the scene where he apologizes. I did romance him though so that probably made the gains faster...but even with that I didn't even get the rivalry boost from the romance scene cause he already had hit maxed by then...

[CybAnt1]

I gamed approval in Dragon Age: Origins and Awakening.

 

I gamed friendship/rivalry in Dragon Age ][.

 

I will game whatever system shows up in this game no problem.

 

Of course, there's three easy ways to do it.

 

1) The Prima guides pretty much spell out exactly what impact all decisions/dialogue have on the game on companions. Just read, metagame, and choose what they say is the best option. (All that information will also eventually be in online game guides at various sites, too, although the Prima guide has the built-in advantage of having this info at launch. Because if they didn't, no one would buy it.) 

 

(2nd way is not available to those not on PC)

 

2) you can use the "cheat"/"customization" console to set their approval (DAO) or friendship or rivalry (DA2) to whatever score you want. Set it to 100. Done. (Of course, you can't freeze it there, so you might want to set it to something right before crisis points, which are also spelled out in the guides, see above.) 

 

3) Some people say the gifts let you game it, too, but of course, they're an intrinsic, intended mechanic. Of course, without the guide, you have no idea where to find those gifts. You do have to find them first, and give them, and at least in DA2, they gated their locatability based on what Act you were in. 

 

And, BTW, people can avail themselves of this, or just let things happen without resorting to customization/metagaming. IMHO, can't really do much better than that, AFA the perennial "play the game the way you want to". 

[Dabrikishaw]

Okay replaying DA2 and rivaling Fenris and lmao Fenris can give some huge rivalry boosts in convos if you mix the move on choices with jerk ones. I got a +20 rivalry in his first conversation (post recruitment) with a mixture of telling him Hawke chose to survive and move on, why bother going after Danarius if he left him be and telling him to stop whining XD You get +15 if you just pick the former two (I mixed it with some flirts and snarky choices). heh he was already at 50 rivalry when I started the convo (mostly siding against the templars and trying to talk to slavers as I said). Only quest i have left is the turn in for Sheparding wolves for act 1. (Though picking the you could make a home here hits you with +5 Friendship, Picking the I'm sorry seems neutral). So he's at 65 Rivalry and I haven't even finished act 1 yet. +15 Rivalry gift from act 2 (or I could just do Feynriel's's quest first thing in act 2 like I usually do and that's around 20 rivalry) and that'll get him either maxed or close enough to it...

 

And yep. Just did Fenris first convo in act 2, got +5 approval so I was at 70, ran to lowtown to pick up the book gave it to him hit 85 approval, triggered a bitter pill quest tried to talk the slaver down (though it really wasn't necessary at this point) got +5 so I was at 90, got +5 after the conversation with Hadriana and was at 95 then got my final +5 during the scene where he apologizes. I did romance him though so that probably made the gains faster...but even with that I didn't even get the rivalry boost from the romance scene cause he already had hit maxed by then...

Even easier if you're a mage during "Bait and Switch". Just pick the "Power" dialogue option for an easy 25 rivalry. Not restricted to being a mage, you can get another 30 rivalry in "A Bitter Pill" by forcing an encounter with Tevinter Mages in Hightown and picking the aggressive option. 

[Chewin]

There's lots of proposed two-axis systems. 

 

I really like the concept, and yes I wish they'd do it. 

 

But, Lord Gaider said that isn't what they're doing for DA:I. It will be some kind of one axis system, it won't be two end/dual scale (friendship-rivalry). Everything else as to implementation ... well, we don't know. 

 

Agreed, would have been a real joy had it been implemented. Though if I recall correctly, Gaider stated that a two-axis system would be too intricate to develop and not something they would be focusing on to such an extent.

[TreeHuggerHannah]

When I heard the concept before Dragon Age 2 was released the idea seemed really cool, but man was it awful in practice. 

 

I have to agree with this. I love the idea of friendship/rivalry, because agreeing to disagree on certain subjects but still respecting each other is realistic, as is being able to work cooperatively with someone you have significant differences with because the stakes are important.

 

I think it failed in the implementation, though, unfortunately. The system simply lumped together everything from "I think you made the wrong call back there but I'll accept your decision" to outright verbal abuse, or from making a choice that didn't directly affect them anyway to violation of their deepest principles, and that lumping together could lead to some very weird outcomes - things that shouldn't even be in the same ballpark of importance were usually just reduced to higher or lower numbers, which ended up not feeling realistic at all to me.

 

DA2 was a good try at doing something different, and I can see why the devs thought it sounded like a good system when the idea was floated, but in practice it just seemed even more artificial and scripted.