38 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonPogo]

So the one thing I always felt DA2 did great was the relationships between the companions.  It felt like even when Hawke was not around they would all still hang out together and go on their own adventures minus the presence of Hawke.  But in DAI just like DAO it felt like the only thing bringing this group of people together was the main character.  If the Inquisitor was not their none of your companions would spend any time together.  I mean their is the Dorian Iron Bull romance but that is the only one I can think of and it is very easy to miss altogether. 

 

So yeah I miss that feeling that when Hawke was busy Varric and Isabella were out corrupting Merrill, Fenris, Anders and Sebastian are all off bickering at each other while Avaline is running around trying to keep them all out of trouble.

 

In DAI I feel that when my Inquisitor was busy all my companions were off by themselves only interacting in passing since they lived in the same castle... 

[DarkKnightHolmes]

Cullen with Dorian. Leliana with Josie. Varric with Cassandra, loads of times. Solas, Vivienne and Cass talking about Cole. Dorian jumping in when Cassandra is talking about her favorite book. Cassandra with Cullen lyrium problem. Cole with Varric and Solas. Iron Bull's romance scene where Cassa and the advisors see his dick. Varrics conversation where he invites almost all the companions except Solas and Vivienne to a wicked grace match.

 

I'm sure there are more but DAI has plenty of interactions. It's just that there so spread about in the 90 hr game that there easy to forget.

[devSin]

Actually, this was a big problem with DA2. You would always see people hanging out together and having a good time (or arguing, or curing venereal disease), and then you would show up just as the party was ending to have some boring conversation. Hawke was the perpetual third-wheel in every relationship there.

Inquisition is an improvement in this regard, though I think there is still room to do more in establishing NPC relationships.

Also, there are messengers that are supposed to bounce around the advisors that bring up a lot of stuff suggesting that the companions are all doing their own thing, but their spawns are very finicky.

[Marshal Moriarty]

The issue is execution. You list all these examples, yet it still never feels like they are a team or a gang. Along with that terribly contrived and awkward wicked grace scene, this game does not sell the connections between the characters. Its not that such content isn;t in DA:I at all, but it simply isn't done well. Like your own character's interactions with the companions, it feels abstracted and mechanical. It doesn't feel like there is any actual connections there.

 

In DA2, it was genuinely fascinating to hear the kinds of things the companions talked about amongst themselves, because they would discuss their futures (Sebastian and Fenris for example), Bethany comments that Anders reminds her of her father with the strength of his conviction and compassion for mages, Merril expresses envy at Anders having such clear purpose and drive that he really believes in, when she has only doubts and solitude etc etc. In Inquisition, I never felt the banter was letting me get under the skin of the characters in that same way. It seemed predominantly jokey, and very rarely would I see a new or interesting side to a character. It was just the individual characters 'doing their routines' at each other.

 

A case in point. After a certain character has his big 'everything you thought you knew was wrong' scene and you've gone through all kinds of sequences to bring him back into the fold, it never really feels like anything has remotely changed. All the other characters are like 'Oh right... well, whatever' assuming they even mention it at all. And it doesn't affect the sequences like the  Wicked Grace scene etc. Its basically like nothing has changed, regardless of some characters claim to think about it. And the same with my character. Because despite it obviously being set up as this huge reveal, the character is fairly dull IMO, and this feels like more of a gmmick than anything, the rquivalent of long running characters in TV shows suddenly turning out to be contract assassins or serial murderers etc. I didn't feel like my relationship or standing with the guy had really changed at all, despite the fact that on paper, you'd think it would be a huge deal. But it never felt that way, because I felt about him the way I felt about most of the cast. To invoke the trope, I just don't care about these people.

 

So it was just as poor with my character's interactions with the companions as it was their interactions with each other. When characters like Dorian, Cassandra, Varric etc express great admiration and friendship, I think 'Wait... when did that happen? We've barely spoken haven't we?' The instant rapport with characters like Barris and Morrigan (to stretch this to the NPCs), is just a particularly stark example, The game for all its length, never made me feel like my characters had spent real time together and had grown to know each other as I do in DA:O and DA2. Even at the end of the game, I still felt like I'd barely spent any time with the characters, and that if they all went their seperate ways, none of them would give the others a second thought.

 

And I was in a romance with Josephine, but it never really felt like it. Not to mention that her love for you seems to come out of nowhere, and then shuts back off every moment you aren't actively speaking about it. I don't need a lover's attention 24/7, but this was crazy. It literally felt like she was still just my secretary and seneschal, with no familiarity beyond what we always had. It really underscored for me the mechanical nature of the interactions and the lack of charisma between any of the characters. There's a lot of talk, but it never feels like anything is actually being said. Never feels like people are actually interacting and communicating. Just a lot of 'Insert 5 dollars to hear a fact about Tevinter' etc.

[Heathen Oxman]

I blame it on the fact that, as Hawke, it was just you and a small group of your friends/family hanging out in Kirkwall.

 

As The Inquisitor, you're the head of a large organization and a quasi-religious figure.  As such, DAI is bound to feel more impersonal.

[Bob Walker]

I blame it on the fact that, as Hawke, it was just you and a small group of your friends/family hanging out in Kirkwall.

 

As The Inquisitor, you're the head of a large organization and a quasi-religious figure.  As such, DAI is bound to feel more impersonal.

 

Agreed. And both ways are enjoyable, IMO.

[FieryDove]

I blame it on the fact that, as Hawke, it was just you and a small group of your friends/family hanging out in Kirkwall.

 

As The Inquisitor, you're the head of a large organization and a quasi-religious figure.  As such, DAI is bound to feel more impersonal.

 

I agree with this but I think time was also a factor. Hawke had what 7 years with most everyone? Varric was his bud. Even with the WG scene my quizzy never felt close to Varric. A shame that since I really adore his snark. How long does the events of DAI take? 6 months? A year maybe? Not enough time for more than what we see I guess.

[Dieb]

While I don't fully agree with the general premise -examples like Sera & Blackwall, Josephine & Blackwall, Dorian & Iron Bull, Cole & well... everyone) I would like to use this chance to add:

 

WHY did theythrow the Friendship/Rivalry-system overboard?!

 

It was the single best thing that happened in the "companion relationship" sector of camp BioWare, and thankfully to what's probably another symptom of BioWare's creatively odd approach to interpret & adress criticism (Looking at you, "Mako handling is annoying and gimpy? Alright, no exploration and a weird minigame it is!") we're now back to DAO's terrible suckup system.

 

At least they didn't bring the gifts back.

[Gileadan]

What was so great about rivalry? It just gave you another extreme to aim for, and one that made less sense than approval. You could suck up or be a jerk now, and being a jerk somehow made them just as likely to remain with your party as friendship (the new approval) did. All it did was removing the negative consequences for being a jerk and replacing it with a positive one.

It almost forced you to either kiss their rears or being consistently mean so you'd max out one of the two, because in between was wishy-washy-land, which gave you a disadvantage.

[SomberXIII]

I never play rivaly paths. I even made friend with Anders and Carver even though I didn't like them.

[BountyhunterGER]

At least they didn't bring the gifts back.

I am currently playing DA:O again and all I have to do is carrying some cakes with me.

"Oh Morrigan, you disagree with my actions? Eat this 50 cakes!" -> companion approval 100.

 

Ridiculous..

[Dieb]

What was so great about rivalry? It just gave you another extreme to aim for, and one that made less sense than approval. You could suck up or be a jerk now, and being a jerk somehow made them just as likely to remain with your party as friendship (the new approval) did. All it did was removing the negative consequences for being a jerk and replacing it with a positive one.

It almost forced you to either kiss their rears or being consistently mean so you'd max out one of the two, because in between was wishy-washy-land, which gave you a disadvantage.

 

Party members will not leave you with full rivalry, they will leave you if your accumulated relationship points (regardless of direction) are low - as in not caring about them. Being rivals with someone, you care about them, yet not in the way they'd want you to. Being "Rivals" with someone is different than being their enemy. The word was chosen carefully here. You basically get to choose whether they agree and admire or disagree yet respect you.

 

In DAO and DAI, yeah it's absolutely a binary choice. There is no distinction between disapproval and negativity. Regardless I have no idea why Oghren still followed me around.

 

Personally I loved it because you got to disagree with characters like Merrill (whom chosing full rivalry upgrade as a character infinitely) and Anders, yet they would still have a relationship with you, romatically or not.

[Gileadan]

Party members will not leave you with full rivalry, they will leave you if your accumulated relationship points (regardless of direction) are low - as in not caring about them. Being rivals with someone, you care about them, yet not in the way they'd want you to. Being "Rivals" with someone is different than being their enemy. The word was chosen carefully here. You basically get to choose whether they agree and admire or disagree yet respect you.

 

In DAO and DAI, yeah it's absolutely a binary choice. There is no distinction between disapproval and negativity. Regardless I have no idea why Oghren still followed me around.

 

Personally I loved it because you got to disagree with characters like Merrill (whom chosing full rivalry upgrade as a character infinitely) and Anders, yet they would still have a relationship with you, romatically or not.

Yeah, but don't friendship and rivalry cancel each other out because it's a single meter and not one for each? For example, if you were pro mage freedom and anti slavery, you'd probably stay somewhere in the middle with Fenris because he hated mages and slavers alike, giving you rivalry for your attitude towards mages and friendship for your dislike of slavery. But that does not mean you didn't care about him or what he liked, you just were neither completely for his views nor against them, denying you both maxed friendship or rivalry.

 

I'm also not sure whether rivalry means that I care about the rival person. Rivalry, as I understand the word, is a form of competition and opposition. Once the reason for said competition disappears (was there ever one for any character in DA2?), I may or may not care about my former rival any longer. Because that would depend on whether I also grew to respect and like him in the meanwhile. 

 

I for one like the possibility of party members leaving if they think that my protagonist is a jerk. I do however disagree with how the game determines that level of sympathy or lack thereof - a person you have been friends with for a while shouldn't like you less because you made a bad joke. Or even disagree on politics. I'd be very friendless if it worked like that in real life. 

 

Anyway, I realize this is very much a YMMV matter and mine is just another opinion. Thank you for your perspective. I totally get the advantage of not having to worry about sucking up anymore - as I said, I disagree with how the game determines the approval levels.

[Medhia_Nox]

DA:2 where a group of sycophants waited on my every word to shape their personalities with "Friendship" or "Rivalry" 

 

or

 

DA:I where they have their own agendas and lives. 

 

I'll take DA:I every time. 

[jedidotflow]

I am currently playing DA:O again and all I have to do is carrying some cakes with me.

"Oh Morrigan, you disagree with my actions? Eat this 50 cakes!" -> companion approval 100.

 

Ridiculous..

 

Nothing ridiculous about that. It's cake! 

[Dieb]

Anyway, I realize this is very much a YMMV matter and mine is just another opinion. Thank you for your perspective. I totally get the advantage of not having to worry about sucking up anymore - as I said, I disagree with how the game determines the approval levels.

 

It's definitely not even close to perfect.

 

I was annoyed by the example you stated as well - it's where it simply doesn't work (Agree + Disagreeing = Apathy). It was a little too mathematical at this point.

 

For future games, I simply wished -luckily smarter people than myself have to figure out the hows- for a system that gave me a clearer distinction between emotional involvement and personal convictions. But I think the problem here is, that due to keeping stuff tense and meaningful, most conversations with companions boil down to chit chat that peaks in a question revolving around their character traits & personality.

 

On the other hand, I will say that DA:I did well by making companion quest results mean a lot. My rogueish, unspiritual Inquisitor kept disagreeing with Cassandra and making fun of her stoicism at any given opportunity -to the point where I felt I almost exclusively got disapproval points from her-, yet helping her out when in need made that all secondary... *clears throat* and then some.

[BountyhunterGER]

Nothing ridiculous about that. It's cake! 

Well, I am suprised that my companions are still alive and don't look like this:

after eating tons of cakes. - It's not a healthy life to travel with my warden.

[Lebanese Dude]

What was so great about rivalry? It just gave you another extreme to aim for, and one that made less sense than approval. You could suck up or be a jerk now, and being a jerk somehow made them just as likely to remain with your party as friendship (the new approval) did. All it did was removing the negative consequences for being a jerk and replacing it with a positive one.

It almost forced you to either kiss their rears or being consistently mean so you'd max out one of the two, because in between was wishy-washy-land, which gave you a disadvantage.

 

I think you're being a little too general in your description of rivalry.

 

In my opinion, the states of "friendship" and "rivalry" actually implied a positive or negative outlook to their agendas/lifestyles respectively, as opposed to an indication of whether you were their friend or not.

It's important to note that being a jerk to someone in-game does not always imply being mean. You can call Isabela out on her nonchalance in a serious way using diplomatic or direct dialogue options, but that doesn't mean you were doing it to ****** her off. You're actually concerned for her well-being.

 

Merrill is the best example to use here.

 

You gain rivalry points by being against her goal of restoring the mirror, whether you're friendly, cynical, or aggressive about it. In one scenario, being nice about it nets you the biggest gain, a whopping 25 points, when you tell her that you're looking out for her best interests.

 

Your entire friendship rating ( - 15 points ) is converted to rivalry should you deny her the tool. This implies that the more she trusts you, the more she feels betrayed by your act. 

 

They have their agendas. That friendship/rivalry bar is simply a representation of how aligned you are with their interests as opposed to how friendly you are with them.

 

Now you can ask why they would stick around with Hawke when they're against their agendas. The game goes through great lengths to make the reasons obvious.

 

Of course this is contingent on you always being around to help them should they ask you to, irrespective of their agendas. Should you not complete their arcs, they will inevitably turn on you (except for Varric) based on your decisions at certain critical points in the game.

 

Anders: Needs the protection of Hawke, Aveline, and Varric. Hawke appeals to Anders' human side and keeps his desires in check. The human side of Anders understands this.

 

Isabela: Needs your help in finding the artifact. She grows to respect and admire Hawke's selfless nature. which ultimately makes her return to you during her crisis point because she felt guilty and wanted to do the right thing.

 

Merrill: Needs the protection of Hawke and Varric. Hawke continues to be on Merrill's side throughout her fumbling and she eventually understands that she needs to let go of her past.

 

Sebastian: Hawke is one of Sebastian's allies in Kirkwall. Hawke convinces Sebastian that he should become king.

 

Aveline: Life debt by saving her ass in Lothering. She's been through you through thick and thin and she considers you family. She only disowns you should you not complete her arc and not get her married to Donnic. That's some serious sabotaging. 

 

Fenris: Respects you regardless of your stance on magic. He owes you a debt of gratitude for risking your neck to keep him safe when you didn't have to. He has bigger fish to fry, so as long as you're helping him keep Danarius at bay, he'll stay by your side since he doesn't want to leave Kirkwall just yet.

 

That you gain bonuses by being against their agendas is also explained in the passive descriptions. Most of the rivalry bonuses are defensive in nature while the friendship ones are symbiotic/offensive. This makes sense. They have to more on guard when they have to be more independent and can't rely on Hawke's support should you be their rival etc..

 

So ultimately you being a complete and utter jerk to them by not even helping them at all makes this entire discussion moot since they end up just leaving you. Rivalry/Friendship has no bearing here.

[Aquarius121]

Just chiming in to say I adored the Friendship/Rivalry aspect. It allows for so many opportunities to role-play. I couldn't help myself from doing multiple play throughs to experience the different scenes and dialogue. That and I kind of have a guilty pleasure for screwed up relationships in games/television...the Isabela/Hawke rival-romance was pretty fun in that regard

 

So yeah, I agree with the OP. I felt like the interactions between the PC and companions in DAII were much more meaningful and varied. There were a lot of possible routes you could take with each of them, and you could feel the change in dynamics.

 

DAI didn't have the cinematics to pull off that vibe of closeness, nor did it give the Inquisitor enough chances to form a personality. Companions would say they were attached to you, or respected you, or disagreed with you...but the Inquisitor seemed so bland I was surprised they had an opinion on him/her at all xD (obviously "actions speak louder than words" explains their feelings, but still)

 

Don't get me wrong, I've grown to love most of the companions in DAI, and there are good spots where the emotions don't feel as fake. Unfortunately I still am sometimes left with a hollow feeling at the end. Not the kind where you can't believe it's really over and you realize how much you care about everyone...but the kind where you're wondering why you *aren't* feeling that way :/

[jds1bio]

DA2's companions and companion quests were the most role-playable, shapeable parts of DA2 - from the player's standpoint, anyway.  The way you just "ran into" these characters upon meeting them for the first time was also very organic from a storytelling point.

 

But a few of DAI's companion setups - "go here and meet so-and-so" I think are part of the price you pay when your character is "The One".  There is a forced distance between people based on circumstances, and you are always responsible for the main sky-is-falling issue.

 

Early on in the game it seems that without you and the mark, the Inquisition doesn't have a chance of fulfilling its mandate.  And since so many people in DAI's world are already pissed off, if not stark raving mad (apostate mages and templars flipping out and fighting each other), alienating people who can help deal with the threat doesn't seem all that viable a tactic.  Either does being "good" or being "evil" as a gameplay strategy, since the world seems to be screwed either way if it gets overrun with demons from the Fade. 

 

DA:I just seems to be a different game - one where exerting power over others takes a back seat to building up power to go up against the end-of-the-world threat.  For those that tend to like playing power fantasies, this may be seen as a negative.

[Sah291]

DAI didn't have the cinematics to pull off that vibe of closeness, nor did it give the Inquisitor enough chances to form a personality. Companions would say they were attached to you, or respected you, or disagreed with you...but the Inquisitor seemed so bland I was surprised they had an opinion on him/her at all xD (obviously "actions speak louder than words" explains their feelings, but still)

This. I think DAI actually has more nuanced characters, and some of the best written. What it has less of are cinematics. Part of it is just the difference in story/setting. The "chosen one" type characters are always going to be at arms length and slightly set apart from their followers/companions. No way around that. Still, in DA2, companions had fewer things to say...but dialogues felt intimate because of the camera closeups. It gave the illusion they were closer and more involved in everything happening around you.

I also really liked the friendship/rivalry dynamic. Though it probably makes less sense in DAI, given everyone has already agreed to join up with the Inquisition and it isn't just about you, but about the organization. It doesn't make much sense to have characters with radically different goals/agendas, when they have already agreed to help you, despite any differences they may have had going in.

[Aren]

IN DAII you have 3 acts and 7 years to develop your friendship towards the companions, at the end of the game they were a "family" for my Marian Hawke and not just "companions".

Each of them with their craziness,their ideas were great (Yes,even Anders and Sebastian).

I like to think that while my Marian Hawke is in her estate  at night,she think of what her "family is doing" Fenris into the abandoned house drinking to forget the pain,Anders thinking about the good times with my HoF and Ser Pounce-a-lot Sebastian with Elthina,Aveline with Donnic,Merrill and her  Eluvian, Varric and Isabela doing something into the Tavern.....This is to say that Kirkwall was a living and hot city to me,more interesting than the  over the top of a mountain, the cold   fortress of Skyhold.

[BubbleDncr]

My understanding is that a lot of this is in the game, it's just not implemented in a way that lets players notice it. 

 

On my first playthrough, banter hardly ever triggered. I think from start to end, I maybe had 10 banters during the entire game. I've heard a lot more in subsequent playthroughs, but their method of having banter trigger in this game is definitely broken. They need to find a better way. 

 

They also apparently had messengers going around to all the companions/advisers at skyhold, that had everyone sending messages to each other - but I had gone through 2 full playthroughs without realizing this before finding a video of all that dialog on the internet. 

 

So, I feel like DA:I DID have a lot of that character development, it was just implemented in ways that resulted in a lot of players never seeing it. IMO it's one of the most tragic flaws of DA:I, and I hope in their future games they either find a way to make those systems more reliable, or just put it all into player controlled dialog so we can make sure we hear everything. 

[Handsome Jack]

>DA2

 

The only DA game to do relationships well was Origins. Sorry kid.

[Lebanese Dude]

>DA2

 

The only DA game to do relationships well was Origins. Sorry kid.

 

Because someone telling you that they love you after killing their mother then giving them a few rocks as a present is a good system.