54 réponses à ce sujet

[Alan Drifter13]

Sorry if this has already been addressed before, I searched for it but didn't find it.

 

I've just seen a video that suggests that the approval system of DA:I will be pretty much the same as DA:O, since companions that really dislike your choices might leave the party. This basically removes the "rivalry" bonus of DA2.

 

I don't understand this decision. The bad reviews of DA2 were mostly related to the constant recycling of scenarios, the small map and the enemies randomly appearing behind your party for no reason at all (which I agree were the game's main flaws). But I didn't read bad reviews focused on the different approval system, and I personally thought it was better.

 

The rivalry bonus allowed you to disagree with your companion's views without being "punished" by the game (no combat bonus lost, no side missions removed from your options). I always felt that the approval system of DA:O basically forced me to be nice to all my companions, especially if they were good in combat. For example, until I got Shale, I tried to get approval from Alistair, even though I basically hated the character, just because it was the only good tank I had. And what about the "rival-romance"? I thought it was a very unusual and interesting option.

 

Did other players hate the DA2 approval system with rivalry bonus and the rival-romance option? If so, why?

[aTigerslunch]

Didnt hate the DA2 approval system. I actually like this new one where responses will be more realistic to things in some ways. Like romances. Where it was said that after defeating a dragon each have their own say about it.

I think I will enjoy this new one more myself.

[Jurus]

The DA2 system wasn't perfect either. It was essentially the same as in DAO, you just got the chance to go both ways. It still forced you to be very consistent with your responses/actions, because if you scored both type of points (which was very easy to do) you could end up trapped in the middle and not get a high enough friend/rival score, to get the next special mission/dialogue from them.

 

And I think it's more realistic for a character to just leave when you basically don't agree about anything or you are a being a complete arsehole.

[Alan Drifter13]

if you scored both type of points (which was very easy to do) you could end up trapped in the middle and not get a high enough friend/rival score, to get the next special mission/dialogue from them.

 

Really? I thought this could only happen with Isabella (she leaves if you don't have a high friend or rival score by the end of act 2). I didn't know you could lose other companion missions.

[Jurus]

You don't lose them (mid game) but you can lose their companion quests and they can possibly turn on you in the end, depending on which side you chose.

 

The problem is that, especially in Act 3, their companion quests (including the "dialogue quests") need a very high friendly/rivalry score to appear. Around 90 percent filled I think. And unless you look up party approval online somewhere for each quest and choose accordingly whom to take, it is very easy to get, lets say, +10 friendship with Companion X now and +15 rivalry 5 minutes later. In Mass Effect for example, your paragon/renegade each had its own bar, so gaining one didn't affect the other, but friendship/rivarly in DA2 cancelled each other out. So if you supported the mages you got tons of rivarly points from Fenris, but if in your private conversations with him you didn't imply he had relations with his mother, you usually got friendship points. This could make reaching that final threshold for a quest easily unobtainable, therefore forcing you, just like DAO, to play some things and behave a certain way, even if you didn't want to. Unless of course you didn't want those quests/conversations in the first place.

[TinySquid]

Could someone explain how Inquisition's approval system is even going to work? I haven't seen much in the way of explaining it.

 

While I agree with the above criticisms of DA2's Friendship/Rivalry; I think we can all agree it was far better than Origins "be nice to everyone" and "Google gift locations." I seriously hope they haven't gone back to Origins. Hell, Mass Effect did it far better.  

[veeia]

In DA:I, will we be getting companion quests irregardless of their approval? Because that'd be preferable.

I never get Leliana's companion quest because I couldn't get her approval high enough.

Nope. Choice and Consequences implied you have to get approval high enough for them to "trust" you.

[Ryzaki]

Nope we're back to origins.

 

Sadly.

 

Oh well. Least it makes it easier for me to bench people all game instead of dragging them around for a few approval points here and there.

[EmperorKarino]

Sorry if this has already been addressed before, I searched for it but didn't find it.

 

I've just seen a video that suggests that the approval system of DA:I will be pretty much the same as DA:O, since companions that really dislike your choices might leave the party. This basically removes the "rivalry" bonus of DA2.

 

I don't understand this decision. The bad reviews of DA2 were mostly related to the constant recycling of scenarios, the small map and the enemies randomly appearing behind your party for no reason at all (which I agree were the game's main flaws). But I didn't read bad reviews focused on the different approval system, and I personally thought it was better.

 

The rivalry bonus allowed you to disagree with your companion's views without being "punished" by the game (no combat bonus lost, no side missions removed from your options). I always felt that the approval system of DA:O basically forced me to be nice to all my companions, especially if they were good in combat. For example, until I got Shale, I tried to get approval from Alistair, even though I basically hated the character, just because it was the only good tank I had. And what about the "rival-romance"? I thought it was a very unusual and interesting option.

 

Did other players hate the DA2 approval system with rivalry bonus and the rival-romance option? If so, why?

 

i liked the friendship rivalry system in dragonage 2, it didn't punish you for doing things your party members did not like. now we have to make sure the party likes what we do for fear they will leave the inquisition. i get why they went back to the old system, so that are choices have more of an impact, but all it will do is just divide players between doing what you need to keep party members from leaving and people who don't care about the party members and will just make the chocies they want. i sorta had to manage that in dragonage 2 anyways cause i wanted full friendship with all my partymembers, but now i have to be extra careful cause there is no way to measure friendship and disapproval (from what i heard, i could be wrong).

[Hiemoth]

Yep, we are pretty much back to Origins, although this time gift spamming won't apparently be possible. At least not the same extent as in DAO.

 

I am also really sad to lose that, because the rivalry system gave me such great amount of joy in DA2 by being able to disagree with the companions while not actually lose content because of it. In this we seem to go back to being forced to agree with them about everything important in order to get their personal content and thus always feels like a punishment to the player for me.

[veeia]

I'm not sure its fair to compare to Origins. The companions are clearly more reactive this time. A huge problem Origins had was that you couldn't get much approval/disapproval outside of bringing people with you..so you ended up gift spamming to get anything from people who weren't in your party. Looks like here, you'll be able to get more out of characters you don't bring with you.

I did like rivalry in theory, but i do agree...that system did force you to wrap your reactions to the companions by metagaming often because it punished neutrality. Id rather be "punished" for making someone mad for consistent actions that rewarded for being inconsistent or metagaming.

Ymmv, but I don't care if I'll be able to make everyone my 100% BFF in every game, but I do want to be able to feel like every companion has an opinion on my actions and personality, otherwise you end up with a bunch of people who just sit around, blandly having no opinion.

[veeia]

http://www.makinggam...mbers,6845.html

Further information about the system. I can't quote because I'm on mobile, but it's pretty meaty in terms of revealing how approval will work.

[Ryzaki]

http://www.makinggam...mbers,6845.html

Further information about the system. I can't quote because I'm on mobile, but it's pretty meaty in terms of revealing how approval will work.

 

So looks like we still get the plot reactive conversations regardless of approval and 2 extra conversations with disapproval where's approval gets an extra 1 and romance gets an extra 2.

 

I'd preferred a better rivalry but yeah this is better than DAO.

[Gothfather]

Sorry if this has already been addressed before, I searched for it but didn't find it.

 

I've just seen a video that suggests that the approval system of DA:I will be pretty much the same as DA:O, since companions that really dislike your choices might leave the party. This basically removes the "rivalry" bonus of DA2.

 

I don't understand this decision. The bad reviews of DA2 were mostly related to the constant recycling of scenarios, the small map and the enemies randomly appearing behind your party for no reason at all (which I agree were the game's main flaws). But I didn't read bad reviews focused on the different approval system, and I personally thought it was better.

 

The rivalry bonus allowed you to disagree with your companion's views without being "punished" by the game (no combat bonus lost, no side missions removed from your options). I always felt that the approval system of DA:O basically forced me to be nice to all my companions, especially if they were good in combat. For example, until I got Shale, I tried to get approval from Alistair, even though I basically hated the character, just because it was the only good tank I had. And what about the "rival-romance"? I thought it was a very unusual and interesting option.

 

Did other players hate the DA2 approval system with rivalry bonus and the rival-romance option? If so, why?

 

Da2 had to change the affection mechanic because it had to explain why people stayed with you, specifically your companions who were vital to the plot. The whole system was designed so that a "The circle is just, the templars are coddling mages" players had Anders as part of their group still even after Years of friction between these two mutually exclusive believe systems. If Anders was the only one who never left because of poor relationships then it would look stupid.

 

DA:I does not appear to be a story that spans years and years like DA2, so Companions saying "your mage loving ways are NOT what i signed on for," makes sense or "You are a tyrant the way you treat mages! I am out of here."

 

I'm sorry but player choice is all about the concequences. Players SHOULD have concequences to their actions both good and bad otherwise choices are meaningless.

[Fast Jimmy]

Awwwww.... ::disappointed thbbbbblt sound::

Read Veeia's more recent post - the companions will still have quests and dialogue as you progress through the game, it will just be colored and affected by their approval.

Better than DA:O's "everyone must love me" and DA2's "I must either worship the ground you walk on or treat you like the worst piece of crap on the planet to get you to like me." Significantly better.

[mopotter]

I disliked the rivalry option in DA2  immensely.   I also disliked the idea in DAO that you could gift your way to approval.  I used them, mostly because giving one of them something my dog dug up, like a bone or a found cake or a ball of yarn made me laugh.  My dog loved me didn't need to give him the gifts. 

[Isaidlunch]

I enjoyed having different "flavored" relationships with companions, but none of them really required the Friendship/Rivalry meter to function:

 

Aveline: Pretty much the same as DAO disapproval path anyway.

Varric: Same as above.

Fenris: Also the same.

Isabela: Could easily be based on player's choices e.g. refusing to give her friend the poison and killing Castillon.

Merrill: Revolved around the Arulin'holm choice.

Sebastian: Revolved around the Chantry brother vs prince choice.

Anders: A little trickier. Could be based on dialogue options in his conversations, though disapproving of him joining with Justice and disapproving of mage freedom shouldn't have been bundled together anyway.

 

I think going back to approval/disapproval is for the best. More straightforward, as it should be, and doesn't reward you for spitting in their face and on everything they believe in. It would be great if relationships changed based on certain choices in a way that's similar to DA2 but based on the choices themselves rather than the meter.

[Grieving Natashina]

Linking this for the curious that want a quick TL;DR about the affection system.

 

 

Haven't seen this here yet. David Gaider answered a couple of companion questions (gifts, companions leaving) on his tumblr.

 

Spoiler

I loved the article on party members! Very interesting and it gave me a much better understanding on the writing process and how I'll proceed in DA:I. Two questions I had: Will the gift system be a factor as it was in the previous games and to what extent? I plan to pick my words carefully with my party, but a well timed present does go a long way. Also, will there be any one, single choice that can make a party member leave the Inquisition regardless of how high their friendship is with me?

 

1) Gifts are present in DAI, but only for those characters who are romanceable. It’s part of their romance arc, and more story-related rather than “give them X gift to increase approval”. There is a way to (more or less) grind approval for a party member, but it’s different for each character as to what that involves (but does not involve gifts). You’ll see.

 

2) Hmmm…I had to think about this one, as all the characters work a little differently. I would say, on the whole, that no—there is never one single choice that will make them up and leave you regardless of their approval. I wish I was at work, so I could turn to the other writers and go, “Is that right? Did I qualify that statement enough?” I’m not, however, so it’ll have to do.

 

[veeia]

I'm so curious about the "different ways to get approval"

 

Do you think some could be tied to collecting? Like we saw Solas talking about (pointing out one) elven artifacts once, maybe if you collect those, you get approval? 

 

That's not so much "gifts" as it is aiding them with a resource + part of gameplay? Idk. 

[Grieving Natashina]

Well, I know a couple of little things.  First, I know if you don't help the villagers and/or don't get to the third option to save the keep and the town, Varric will have some disapproval.   If you choose to help the townsfolk over the keep, you'll gain affection.  I'm not sure about the third option, but it will be possible to save both within a time limit.

 

The next one is a minor spoiler, so I have it in tags just in case.

 

Spoiler

If you tell Cass not to call you the Herald of Andraste (which I plan on doing on my dwarf,) you'll have some disapproval from her.

[veeia]

Yes, but he seemed to imply there was a way to farm approval...like a simple, predictable thing you could do to get it up, if you were willing to go through some grinding. I hope the story decisions you make (even for minor quests) aren't like that, but I suppose its possible. Also hard to read into a tumblr post he's being deliberately vague in. XD 

[Grieving Natashina]

Yes, but he seemed to imply there was a way to farm approval...like a simple, predictable thing you could do to get it up, if you were willing to go through some grinding. I hope the story decisions you make (even for minor quests) aren't like that, but I suppose its possible. Also hard to read into a tumblr post he's being deliberately vague in. XD 

Sounds like DG.