99 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Luminous]

Not you. Morrigan. What I mean how someone acts and feels can be different.

 

She wanted you to say what love is important, she just don't know it.  What Morrigan want and what she need 2 different thinks.

 

Goddamn that sneaky-witch-thief.  

[Doominike]

That it's hidden doesn't really bother me, what I'm more interested in is if it's an actual like/dislike thing or that rivalry nonsense. Though considering they said party members can leave if you ****** them off too much, it might be safe to assume that companions who hate you actually hate you this time

[Shahadem]

When I talk to people in RL there isn't a meter or bar that pops up above their heads telling me how they feel about me. 

 

Did you forget to install the latest update again?

 

Also, not showing and not tracking a relationship stat are 2 different things. I have strong feeling that relationship is going to be tracked in the exact same way as it was in prior games, the only difference is you aren't going to get to see it change in DA:I, making it immeasurably worse.

 

In real life we use body language and pheromones to tell how someone feels about us, and if they don't like us we can try talking to them again to change their opinion. In a video game you have no body language and only one shot. Unless you save and reload. Without a meter you are going to need to reload from even further behind than you would with a meter. That or this will force you to use a guide to make sure that every conversation is perfect so you don't get screwed over.

[Ryzaki]

When I talk to people in RL there isn't a meter or bar that pops up above their heads telling me how they feel about me. I think it's a step in the right direction. Little changes in behavior and nuances during interactions is a better way to measure relationship progress IMO.

 

I'd probably agree with you when BW manages to get the nuances in body language and expression downpact along with variations of saying the same thing in different tones.

 

As it is.

 

I prefer the meter. Especially if dialogue is spread out between major quests and I don't realize I've been gathering disapproval til a good 4 hours later. Don't got not time for reloads.

 

You don't need a bar in real life because if someone dislikes you their body language and actions is your bar. (Assuming they're not faking).

[sandalisthemaker]

I just hope that I don't have to be friends with everyone to have interesting conversations and other content with them.  I'm hoping for rivalry type scenes and dialogue.

 

I get that in real life, people who don't like eachother tend not to hang out and talk, but still, this is the Inquisition. There is a world to save. Duty and such comes before differences in opinion.  I liked the system in DA2.

[Lee80]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees the problem with trying to figure out the non bared system.  It's crazy, cause in real life...everyone reacts differently based on how much they like you.  Some people are actually ruder to people they like cause that's just how they are...annoyingly enough.  So I'm not sure I can totally get behind the more realistic non-meter approach.  I shall try to keep an open mind though.  We'll find out next month I suppose.

[boissiere]

I would say friendship meters were not so bad, but without them, I hope that we still be able to have some approval system.

[Little Princess Peach]

There actually is a point based friendship like in DA:O, there was some gameplay that said "Varric approves 10+" or something like that, the numbers are hidden in the final version.

 

They're hiding it so your companions arn't reduced to statistics and numbers and 'gamey' as they describe. They want to make it more organic, just like when you talk to a person you read their expression. We'll see the "Varric approves" part, which is usually event on someone's face.

oh no not the two gamy thing again Bioware do you realize that your making an game and not an interactive movie?

[Little Princess Peach]

I just hope that I don't have to be friends with everyone to have interesting conversations and other content with them.  I'm hoping for rivalry type scenes and dialogue.

 

I get that in real life, people who don't like eachother tend not to hang out and talk, but still, this is the Inquisition. There is a world to save. Duty and such comes before differences in opinion.  I liked the system in DA2.

im planning to ****** everyone off so at the end of the game there will only be the Inquisitor fighting The elder one on her own lol

[SpiritMuse]

What I like about the rivalry system in DA2 is that I can play to character and antagonize and argue with my teammates without fear of missing out on their storylines or gimping my party because they left me. Unlike in DAO where it was a matter of eschewing all proper characterization of the main character and basically sucking up to my teammates and telling them exactly what they want to hear so they'll stay and get their combat bonuses. I wanted to argue with Morrigan about the virtues of selflessness, with Leliana about the Maker, but I never could because that would gimp their combat performance.

I'm afraid I'll be forced to turn back to that with this new/old system now. And on top of that, the nebulousness and uncertainty from not being able to track it at all would make it even more frustrating.

[Pen-N-Paper]

 

That reads to me as meaning the friendship mechanic will be a lot less detailed.  I really hope that the friendships haven't been watered down just to keep the game more action oriented.

This would be my reading as well, especially since the focus of every promotional video I have seen is on action. Connecting the dots. This game looks to be less and less role-playing the more I look at it. What happened to the big uproar from us folks Bioware was going to pay attention to? I thought this was supposed to be a role-playing game? Relationships (between characters and between characters' actions and the world) is the core of RPGs. I only see the reactions from violent interaction and classic fetch quest relationships "I lost my ring but, if you find it, I will love you long time"

Meh.

When I talk to people in RL there isn't a meter or bar that pops up above their heads telling me how they feel about me. 

Little changes in behavior and nuances during interactions is a better way to measure relationship progress IMO.

True observation. But that is all it is, without any substance for discussion about the game's RPG mechanic. In RL, as I experience it - YMMV, the NPCs around me are more demonstrative and communicative than in any video game. Apples and Oranges, friend.  

The second part is idealistic. If you play the game's 100+-hours straight through, maybe that might work as you concentrate attention to implicit change. We actively do this in real life, of course, using voice inflection, body language, directly confronting issues, asking the girl who is a friend of the girl you want to ask her friend if she loves you as much as you love her and would her friend pass along a note you wrote last night in iambic pentameter....

But, again, a video game is not real life. It exists in real life only within the mind of a handful of software puppeteers.

[-Stacey-07-]

I'm getting more and more curious about how good these facial animations are gonna be... especially the "reaction" wheel. I can't help but think that could be pretty fun to use!

[Pen-N-Paper]

There is a point about realism everyone is not mentioning. It happens at work, which is what the Inquisitor will be doing: working. It involves leadership and leading ad hoc teams. So there is that, if we're going to be realistic.

I assume we all have stories about working with people we would rather not have met. I assume we also have stories about people initiating a dialogue about their personal details to influence us in some way. I know I have.

Also you have to kiss a little derriere in the way that tush wants to be kissed, to move that derriere in the direction you, as leader, need it to go. In a role-playing game that might mean taking the side in an argument that seems really petty in game terms (because it is only a +2) but actually means something to the other person (because they are at +49 in the friend zone). In real life, you might have this other person initiate a heartfelt canvass of your support after which you would weigh the cost and benefit for your next leadership decision. That is real life.

Not sure this can be done without some simplified on screen game mechanic.

eh, it feels like a case of realism hurting gameplay. People like to try to make those decisions. On the other hand, this is the internet, eventually we can just look it up, but say I get 5 +5s approval and I get frustrated because no one liked me and I start worrying about bugs, or heavens even worse you having to max it out to retain loyalty like in DA2. There would be nothing to base these decisions on.

Has Bioware considered this in terms of the cost of man hours in PR on its forums and elsewhere as rumours about a broken game begin surfacing? How will this affect future sales?

It's a good strong point karushna5 is making. On the surface, it may sound like near unlimited replay value... but that's a dream the Internet will cure fast.

And I feel the realism should then apply to combat and health meters who also shouldn't have a bar telling me how close they are to me killing them, and the numbers in regard to damage.

 

This was a joke. And again this crying about locked content. We ask our choices to mater, but when our choices matter and we don't like it it's bad.

I think the complaint is that we folks would like to know our choices matter rather than just be told. Sure in the extreme cases you mention they're obvious. But as I wrote above, when you kiss tush make sure it is the way the tush wants it - not simply the way you want to give it. This means a visible mechanic is necessary to make decisions (that matter).

You will still get feedback as to whether or not they approve/disapprove of certain actions. So you can get an idea on how things are going with a particular character. I consider this a concession to make up for the fact that, as stated elsewhere, your interactions with companions are rigidly defined (you can't have more conversations than the game allows you to have), so a sort of "oh hey did that bother you?" type of conversation doesn't typically happen, for example.

This feedback is as necessary to role-playing as the flashy blooms and way-out audio-visual effects seem to be for the action. Without this feedback as highly visible to the player within the game as he or she plays, as highly regarded as all the combat considerations visible in the promotional videos, this game really cannot be a proper role-playing game, in my honest opinion.

And for comic effect, from a game purporting to become realistic in representation of relationships, what is this walk for the female characters all about? http://forum.bioware...age/?p=17462304

[Who Knows]

The DA2 system was far from perfect. Friendship paths assume that Hawke agrees with the companion on subjects where Hawke may actually disagree on. While rivalry assumes that Hawke disagrees with the companion on subjects where Hawke may actually agree.

Certain quests are locked off if you don't have enough 50% or 100% friendship or rivalry. There are equivalent quests for less than 50% friendship and less than 50% rivalry.

While this allows for less locking off than Dragon Age Origins, it still suffers from about the same problem. You could bring a companion every where, do all of their (available) quests, but if you happen to end with less than 50% friendship or rivalry, then entire conversations are blocked. In some cases, this can mean that they outright leave or turn on you at the end of the game, even if you have helped them as much as you can otherwise.

[Lee80]

The DA2 system was far from perfect. Friendship paths assume that Hawke agrees with the companion on subjects where Hawke may actually disagree on. While rivalry assumes that Hawke disagrees with the companion on subjects where Hawke may actually agree.

Certain quests are locked off if you don't have enough 50% or 100% friendship or rivalry. There are equivalent quests for less than 50% friendship and less than 50% rivalry.

While this allows for less locking off than Dragon Age Origins, it still suffers from about the same problem. You could bring a companion every where, do all of their (available) quests, but if you happen to end with less than 50% friendship or rivalry, then entire conversations are blocked. In some cases, this can mean that they outright leave or turn on you at the end of the game, even if you have helped them as much as you can otherwise.

If you know where to look there is tons of information on how the points system works and what the outcome of every interaction is.  You can actually max out most of the friendships in act one if you really power game it.  though that would be kind of boring to some people, but yeah...if you don't get at least 50 friendship points (or rival) you probably are not trying to gain them or refuse to adjust your party to the situation. 

 

For example if you are trying to friendship max both Carver and Anders, you can't take them in the same party a lot of the time because they both like different things (Anders is pro-mage, Carver pro templar).  It is only really complicated if you don't understand how it works.  (or you refuse to use the wiki when all else fails).  I adore the DA2 friendship/ rivalry system.

 

 

Also worth noting: never try to friendship max Carver, unless you are willing to use the Wiki for every quest, cause he's extremely hard to max-also there's no real benefit to it, since he really doesn't gain anything from max  friendship and he isn't around much anyway....but still point stands he has a different agenda then Anders. lol!

[Who Knows]

If you know where to look there is tons of information on how the points system works and what the outcome of every interaction is.  You can actually max out most of the friendships in act one if you really power game it.  though that would be kind of boring to some people, but yeah...if you don't get at least 50 friendship points (or rival) you probably are not trying to gain them or refuse to adjust your party to the situation. 

 

For example if you are trying to friendship max both Carver and Anders, you can't take them in the same party a lot of the time because they both like different things (Anders is pro-mage, Carver pro templar).  It is only really complicated if you don't understand how it works.  (or you refuse to use the wiki when all else fails).  I adore the DA2 friendship/ rivalry system. 

I don't think you should need to metagame that much. When the game first comes out, a lot of information is also not going to be available.

I don't think it's too complicated, I think it's too simplistic, actually. And also does not accommodate some Hawkes who are not completely one way or another on some issues that the companions care about. It's better than DA:O, but still not good enough, imo.

[Lee80]

I don't think you should need to metagame that much. When the game first comes out, a lot of information is also not going to be available.

I don't think it's too complicated, I think it's too simplistic, actually. And also does not accommodate some Hawkes who are not completely one way or another on some issues that the companions care about. It's better than DA:O, but still not good enough, imo.

I don't think it's really a bad thing that companions react according to their own moral and personal beliefs to your actions and words.  I am confused as to what it is you would like the system to be like? 

[Eveangaline]

I accept I probably won't be able to get anyone to be my best friend in my first runthrough. I'll probably accidentally bring the worst people along for quests and get everyone stuck at neutral.

[Who Knows]

I don't think it's really a bad thing that companions react according to their own moral and personal beliefs to your actions and words.

No, that part is fine.

 

I don't think it's really a bad thing that companions react according to their own moral and personal beliefs to your actions and words.  I am confused as to what it is you would like the system to be like? 

Okay, to put it simply: My main issue with DA2 is that you are locked off from certain conversations if your total combination of friendship (represented as positive) and rivalry (represented as negative) points is greater than -50 but less than 50. Even if you have taken them everywhere and helped them in every way - like helping Fenris fend off the slavers and defeat Danarius. This has the consequence of certain companions leaving the party or turning on you.

 

Notice that in Mass Effect, besides romance, you get about the same amount of conversations with a companion no matter how much or how little you agree with them. That combined with more reactivity to your choices is roughly what my ideal is.

[Lee80]

No, that part is fine.

 

Okay, to put it simply: My main issue with DA2 is that you are locked off from certain conversations if your total combination of friendship (represented as positive) and rivalry (represented as negative) points is greater than -50 but less than 50. Even if you have taken them everywhere and helped them in every way - like helping Fenris fend off the slavers and defeat Danarius. This has the consequence of certain companions leaving the party or turning on you.

 

Notice that in Mass Effect, besides romance, you get about the same amount of conversations with a companion no matter how much or how little you agree with them. That combined with more reactivity to your choices is roughly what my ideal is.

ah okay.  so you want to have the simplistic system of Mass Effect.  I can understand that.  I have a feeling you may be in luck, cause it seems like the friendship points may not matter much in Inquisition, but who knows...

[Ceoldoren]

That it's hidden doesn't really bother me, what I'm more interested in is if it's an actual like/dislike thing or that rivalry nonsense. Though considering they said party members can leave if you ****** them off too much, it might be safe to assume that companions who hate you actually hate you this time

I think a good reason why the rivalry system won't, and shouldn't, return, is that DA2 was on a much smaller scale storywise, You could do some pretty messed up things, but you could never be completely evil. I imagine we'll be given the option to make some pretty brutal choice since we're back on the 'save the world no matter what' narrative. Meaning our companions aren't going to like it too much if we get civilians killed by the dozens (well, most of them won't.  )

[Doominike]

Well giving Fenris back to Denarius, forcing him into slavery again, with a master who may rape him more or less regularly, and letting Meredith kill Bethany are pretty evil things. But overall ya, you could be more outright evil as the Warden.

 

But that's not my main issue with the DA2 system. The big problem is that if I diagree with, oppose and insult someone for years they should stop following me. Also being forced to "recruit" them and being stuck with them all game long. Why can't I leave Aveline to die with her templar husband ? Or if not that, when we get to Kirkwall, Leandra just invites her and we can't say anything, why can't I say "No she's not, now shoo"

[Ceoldoren]

Well giving Fenris back to Denarius, forcing him into slavery again, with a master who may rape him more or less regularly, and letting Meredith kill Bethany are pretty evil things. But overall ya, you could be more outright evil as the Warden.

 

But that's not my main issue with the DA2 system. The big problem is that if I diagree with, oppose and insult someone for years they should stop following me. Also being forced to "recruit" them and being stuck with them all game long. Why can't I leave Aveline to die with her templar husband ? Or if not that, when we get to Kirkwall, Leandra just invites her and we can't say anything, why can't I say "No she's not, now shoo"

Well, you can't make all your companions completely unrelated to the plot, that would make them much less interesting to me.

 

But yes, you make a good point, people I'm a complete bastard to should not just let it go. They should get pissed off and leave. Glad they brought that back.

[Doominike]

I liked being able to tell companions to leave in DAO, directly being able to get rid of people I absolutely don't want. It's not like you can complain about being alone when you personally asked everyone to go away 

[Ceoldoren]

I liked being able to tell companions to leave in DAO, directly being able to get rid of people I absolutely don't want. It's not like you can complain about being alone when you personally asked everyone to go away 

I don't having issue with sending away companions who aren't important to the narrative. But I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice a plot related character just so I can have the option to make him leave.

 

But characters like Sten, or Zevran ? Yeah they have nothing to do with the plot, we should be able to tell them to go away.

 

Luckily we've already been told we can get rid of the majority of our companions whenever we want. I think maybe Solas and Cass are the only companions we have to keep. Since they seem to be related to the plot, especially Solas.