1378 réponses à ce sujet

[Vortex13]

I would like to see what BioWare would take (if anything) from the Divison; sorry didn't want to make an entirely separate topic.

 

After playing the Alpha, I really hope that BioWare will look at the base gameplay for inspiration. The Division plays very much like a thrid person shooter, but you can swap out abilities on the fly and have completely different build with just a few presses of the button. Plus, exploration and side activities actually feels like it serves a purpose in that game; instead of pointless fetch quests.

[In Exile]

I don't see how FO and DA are that different in the romance dept except that DA give us romance scenes which puts them above FO IMO.

 

In both games the romances depend heavily on approval and disapproval which is acquired as you make choices in the world. DAI just gives you chunks of approval which speeds the romance up.  Considering how lackluster their world is, I actually don't mind that.  I'd rather speed through the main mission with a romance than drag myself thru that one note world grinding approval points.

 

The LI will also dump you in DAI if they don't like you.  Sera would dump you if you don't give in to her BS, and Dorian will not date you at all if you kill the guy to get his amulet back and there is no chance to get them back.  But I do like the way the FO 4 LIs will talk to you about how they're feeling and ask to just be friends for a while if things are going bad.  I just watched a breaking and making up video on Youtube.  The companions were very mature in how they handled the situation.  Whereas the moment you get low approval with a romance in DAI, the companion is done without a chance to win them back.  Not that they should automatically come back because you want them to, but when you think about it, the companions will dump you over stupid shyt that have nothing at all to do with the actual relationship.  Unless you punch romanced Dorian in the face.  But even then he was dumping you over something stupid anyway.

 

I don't see how "fundamental incompatibility with my religious belief" or "you acted in a way I find morally offensive" to be unreasonable dealbreakers. And did you just say Dorian dumping over outright abuse is stupid?

[Ahglock]

^^ while eagerly awaiting the division even with swap outs :2 abilities seems vastly limiting to me. It's seems less a RPG though so it's fitting. I'm worried about the game due to the publisher. I was eagerly waiting for watchdogs as well.

[Ahglock]

I don't see how "fundamental incompatibility with my religious belief" or "you acted in a way I find morally offensive" to be unreasonable dealbreakers. And did you just say Dorian dumping over outright abuse is stupid?

I consider this one of those areas you should get a mulligan or just quick save often. If you intentionally steal in front of them or shoot them hey I get that. But I have picked up items by accident or due to the crappy npc AI had them jump in front of an attack, so some kind of was that an accident conversation would be nice.

Damn hot post to quick on phone

In dragon age I don't do the romances do is hope there are also ways around screwed up behavior. I know I've hit the wrong conversation option more than once while coasting around the options with my mouse.

[Vortex13]

^^ while eagerly awaiting the division even with swap outs :2 abilities seems vastly limiting to me. It's seems less a RPG though so it's fitting. I'm worried about the game due to the publisher. I was eagerly waiting for watchdogs as well.

 

 

Two abilities are limiting on the surface, but each power has one of several "mods" that can be thrown on it that change up how it works; like switching a remote detonator to a proximity mine or flashbang, or making a pulse scan reveal loot crates, or lower enemy resistances, etc. Plus the fact that you can swap them out at any time really makes the gameplay fluid and allows players to quickly adapt to changing situations.

 

Though I agree that two powers would be a little on the light side when it comes to mass effect; still hot swapping powers and by extension combat roles on the fly was something that I think would be pretty cool if implemented well.

 

 

As far as Ubisoft goes, yeah I was kind of cautious about the whole thing as well, but unless they completely scrap everything from the alpha, the game is very well done and plays amazingly. The only grumblings I have heard about the  Division so far have been about a graphical downgrade, and while the alpha didn't look as shiny on my Xbox as the E3 presentation, it was still pretty good for what it offered; namely an open world exploration of a virus infected New York.

 

But then I don't really care about graphical fidelity that much; if the gameplay is solid I would gladly play as a pixilated square to having stunning 1080p and 60fps but no substance. Plus its that mentality of graphics>everything else that has lead to the lackluster titles lately (IMO). Killing split screen MP in Halo 5 all for the glorious 60fps was a cardinal sin, and I really don't like people or companies that lead with that mindset.

[Dean_the_Young]

KotOR 2 had the same problem. Not really an issue for the romances, such as they were, but approval had serious gameplay consequences. Not sure about DAI, though my guess is that doing the companion quests will get you over unless your Inky is really opposed to that companion's agenda.

 

DAI had two good mitigating factors-

 

The companion approval quests, which gave great dividiends if you simply brought the companion along, and the fact that Big Decisions (and Judgements) garnered approval whether a companion was in the party or not. Vivienne would approve of exiling the Wardens even if she wasn't at Adamant, for example.

 

This was really helpful- while you would miss the minor dialogue approval/disapproval opportunities, you still were able to have considerable points to determine your relationship whether you partied with a companion often or not.
 

[ZombiePopper]

After dumping loads-o-time into FO4, a couple corrections/observations.

Sure,
You get power armor early but it doesn't really matter cause- fusion cores.

You can't romance dogs, robots, supermutants, etc just humans or human analogs (synths) or ghoul.

Some companions are very difficult to gain their affinity- looking at you Curie.
(Her approves/disapproves are so on/off and hard to find that it takes quite awhile.)
I really like this companion approval/disapproval system over DAI, for example. It just makes more sense. Having a companion approve/disapprove of something that's clear across the world (or another dimension) is silly.

One of my favs is Cait. I like piper and curie as well and of course dogmeat (probably because I own a German Shepard.) Danse, Preston, Nick, Hancock, Codsworth are okay. Strong is hilarious and I couldn't stand Deacon.
Oddly enough,
For whatever reason (not sure why), Codsworth absolutely hated me!

As far as factions,
For me,
Fallout is BoS and BoS is Fallout. So it's BoS for me.
But ironically the institute, BoS, Railroad all have the same mentality "black-and-white only! No gray!"
-Railroad would sacrifice innocent humans to free a synth. (While I respect their goals, I question their practices.)
-Institute are hitech futuristic slave owners that consider everything/everyone on the surface worthless except for experimental tests.
-BoS while the most capable of helping, suffer from a "kill first, question later" type of mentality.
(On the topic of Lyons, Outcasts, BoS. The BoS in FO4 VERY, VERY much feels like the Outcasts.
In fact,
Many of the BoS actually comment on Lyons' silly practices and departure from the "secure all tech" mentality.
Which, if you recall,
Was the EXACT issue that the Outcasts had with Lyons

-Minutemen mean well, but is a group of farmers with pitchforks and shovels. No resources, manpower, influence and suffer from a spotty past.

The story is interesting and has tough choices and twists, but the game suffers from those typical Bethesda glitches/bugs/crashes and paper-thin characters.
I played thru 3/4 of the game with no companion. EVERYTIME I equipped one they ran off (finally got that fixed).

FO4 def has that "last gen" feel and appearance. And doesn't seem to be a game that had much time invested but almost an ex-pack feel (perhaps the outdated engine?).

On a side-note,
I was cracking-up in dialogue when characters made wise-crack remarks about taking to long to choose a dialogue option.

Or when a character would talk to my protag and I ignored them and they'd remark "I'd appreciate an answer." Or "are you ignoring me?" Etc

The whole name thing is a parlor trick to me. I'm not as impressed. Only Codsworth uses your name, that's it.

The mats and building system is awkward at first but it works when you get used to it. (Once you figure out alum and adhesive is tough to get you learn to make it or order it and what junk you really want/need.)

Is it great? No.
But it's a decent and fun game.

Could Bioware learn anything from it?
Not really. Their products are really apples-oranges. But if they implemented some of the timed dialogue comments by NPC's and random comments into MEA, I'd be okay with that.

[AlanC9]

I really like this companion approval/disapproval system over DAI, for example. It just makes more sense. Having a companion approve/disapprove of something that's clear across the world (or another dimension) is silly.

Which choices are you thinking about? I can't think of too many instances where a companion who isn't in the party has approval shifts for something he wouldn't hear about later.

[LinksOcarina]

Which choices are you thinking about? I can't think of too many instances where a companion who isn't in the party has approval shifts for something he wouldn't hear about later.

 

A lot of the big ticket items did that, sitting in judgement did it, a few of the field quests like destroying red lyrium and such did so as well; if Varric is in the party he greatly approves, if he's not there its a slight improvement for example.

 

So it did happen.

[Dean_the_Young]

A lot of the big ticket items did that, sitting in judgement did it, a few of the field quests like destroying red lyrium and such did so as well; if Varric is in the party he greatly approves, if he's not there its a slight improvement for example.

 

So it did happen.

 

But that goes back to the 'things they'd hear about anyways.'

 

Especially since Red Lyrium destruction is Varrc's approval-garnering quest. I mean, sure, it's something that benefits everyone and you don't need to do solely because of him, just like you don't have to like Cassandra to agree that bad apostates are bad, or Vivienne that recovering Circle literature from bandits is good, but it's more or less the same sort of 'personal favor' quest that they'd hear about. Since it's kinda important to them.

[AlanC9]

Are those lyrium deposits even interactable without having the quest from Varric? I know that at least some of the companion mission targets don't spawn in until you get the quest.

And sitting in judgement is a public act; everyone's going to know about it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Are those lyrium deposits even interactable without having the quest from Varric? I know that at least some of the companion mission targets don't spawn in until you get the quest.

 

I want to say no, but considering you can get the quest from Varric almost at the start I can't say for sure.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Are those lyrium deposits even interactable without having the quest from Varric? I know that at least some of the companion mission targets don't spawn in until you get the quest.

And sitting in judgement is a public act; everyone's going to know about it.

 

They aren't. In my current game I forgot to grab the quest from Varric and the deposit was sitting there, taunting me.

 

And really, FO4's approval system is considered by some better than DA:I? Cait and Piper wanting you in their pants because you're a good lockpicker or tortured Dogmeat in front of them is better than (say) Solas hearing about your monumental decision at Adamant and agreeing/disagreeing with you? 

[Lebanese Dude]

They aren't. In my current game I forgot to grab the quest from Varric and the deposit was sitting there, taunting me.

 

And really, FO4's approval system is considered by some better than DA:I? Cait and Piper wanting you in their pants because you're a good lockpicker or tortured Dogmeat in front of them is better than (say) Solas hearing about your monumental decision at Adamant and agreeing/disagreeing with you? 

 

I enjoyed FO4 but the relationship element was minor at best.

[Hazegurl]

I don't see how "fundamental incompatibility with my religious belief" or "you acted in a way I find morally offensive" to be unreasonable dealbreakers. And did you just say Dorian dumping over outright abuse is stupid?

Sera dumps you because she's a moron who can't handle different opinions.  That's realistic, she's a douchebag after all.  

 

And no I did not say that Dorian dumping you over abuse is stupid.  I said he's dumping you over something stupid UNLESS you punch him in the face.

[Master Warder Z_]

-BoS while the most capable of helping, suffer from a "kill first, question later" type of mentality.
(On the topic of Lyons, Outcasts, BoS. The BoS in FO4 VERY, VERY much feels like the Outcasts.

 

Actually Lyons was a pansy who fell from standard BOS practice, back west the Outcasts would be considered normal members of the BOS. It's their job to secure and guard tech that may be dangerous if it fell into any hands outside of the Brotherhood. You never play Fallout or Fallout 2? The chapter in New Vegas are actually BOS too. Its a very pragmatic, dogmatic and insular order.

[Dean_the_Young]

They aren't. In my current game I forgot to grab the quest from Varric and the deposit was sitting there, taunting me.

 

And really, FO4's approval system is considered by some better than DA:I? Cait and Piper wanting you in their pants because you're a good lockpicker or tortured Dogmeat in front of them is better than (say) Solas hearing about your monumental decision at Adamant and agreeing/disagreeing with you? 

 

Who's making that argument again? Specific people, please.

 

Alternatively, if we step back from fixating on the exploits, then the principle of the approval system that people like might be that people think it's a good thing that companions can approve of how a PC acts as much as what they say. Perhaps there is something about Cait and Piper's characters that lead them to approve of picking locks- perhaps Cait is a survivor who approves of breaking and looting, perhaps Piper is some kind of investigative journalist who might approve of sneaking around into places that otherwise might be off limits, finding secrets and otherwise doing good stuff. Maybe this approval is an imperfect but relevant aspect of their characters, distinguishing them from the likes of, say, Strong, who has a different set of beliefs and actions he approves and disapproves of.

 

Or may you are being as fair and balanced as Fox News, and these people think torturing Dogmeat is the epitome of an ideal approval system.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sera dumps you because she's a moron who can't handle different opinions. 

 

Different opinions in general, or one opinion in particular?

 

 

 

And no I did not say that Dorian dumping you over abuse is stupid.  I said he's dumping you over something stupid UNLESS you punch him in the face.

 

 

This would be an example of a distinction without a difference.

[In Exile]

Sera dumps you because she's a moron who can't handle different opinions.  That's realistic, she's a douchebag after all.  

 

And no I did not say that Dorian dumping you over abuse is stupid.  I said he's dumping you over something stupid UNLESS you punch him in the face.

 

It's more than just an opinion. This isn't about whether or not cookies taste good. It's fundamental to her belief. Regardless of whether you think that's stupid, it's as legitimate as any reason for dumping someone. She's also a bit douchy, but dumping someone for having fundamentally different religious beliefs isn't dumb. That relationship is DOA at that point. Like dumping someone over politics. Again, totally justified and, IMO, the right call. 

 

As for Dorian, dumping someone over doing something morally repugnant is totally justified. If I was dating someone, and they got in a bar fight. my dumping them would be perfectly justified. The Inquisitor out and out gleefully murdering someone is not fine. It's a problem in the gameworld in the sense that we as RPG PCs engage in murder on a scale absolutely incomprehensible to IRL humans, but there's no way to play that one straight. DA2 tries to lampshade it, but it's just stupid to even acknowledge it because the verisimilitude of the setting collapses when you do. 

[ZombiePopper]

They aren't. In my current game I forgot to grab the quest from Varric and the deposit was sitting there, taunting me.

And really, FO4's approval system is considered by some better than DA:I? Cait and Piper wanting you in their pants because you're a good lockpicker or tortured Dogmeat in front of them is better than (say) Solas hearing about your monumental decision at Adamant and agreeing/disagreeing with you?

No,
I'm saying that
For me when a companion only approves of something you do in front of them, I like better than them approving of something 100's of miles away or in another dimension. (Sure you can head cannon that they "heard" about it later if you wish.)

but I agree the whole "I likes you cause yous lock picky" is silly at best. But having each companion liking something different is nice.
But be realistic,
I think at some point in all of our lives,
We've been superficial and liked silly little things.

Actually Lyons was a pansy who fell from standard BOS practice, back west the Outcasts would be considered normal members of the BOS. It's their job to secure and guard tech that may be dangerous if it fell into any hands outside of the Brotherhood. You never play Fallout or Fallout 2? The chapter in New Vegas are actually BOS too. Its a very pragmatic, dogmatic and insular order.

True,
But I simply meant that the outcasts and BoS in FO4 share the same opinion of Lyons.
But I don't recall the outcasts being accepted and welcomed by other BoS members. If memory serves (it's been a while since I played FO 3 or NV and even longer for 1 and 2.) they were considered "traitors" (?)
But I'd agree Lyons' chapter seemed to deviate from the "normal" BoS. So I see where you're saying that the FO4 BoS and outcasts are actually BoS members.

[Master Warder Z_]

True,
But I simply meant that the outcasts and BoS in FO4 share the same opinion of Lyons.
But I don't recall the outcasts being accepted and welcomed by other BoS members. If memory serves (it's been a while since I played FO 3 or NV and even longer for 1 and 2.) they were considered "traitors" (?)
But I'd agree Lyons' chapter seemed to deviate from the "normal" BoS. So I see where you're saying that the FO4 BoS and outcasts are actually BoS members.

 

Eh, I don't know truthfully, that would be up to the Western Elders wouldn't it? They'd probably see Lyons in the wrong for causing a civil war though truthfully and from deviating from his mission. But no according to Lyons they were traitors who broke away after Lyons changed their mission scope from acquiring useful technology to protecting the inhabitants of the wasteland. But from my perspective? Their goals would be acceptable cause to break away from the chapter, I think so anyway.

 

I hope that the next FO takes place back west, crud, send us to Arizona or back to Cali, I want a familiar environment, going up north always sucks.

[ZombiePopper]

Eh, I don't know truthfully, that would be up to the Western Elders wouldn't it? They'd probably see Lyons in the wrong for causing a civil war though truthfully and from deviating from his mission. But no according to Lyons they were traitors who broke away after Lyons changed their mission scope from acquiring useful technology to protecting the inhabitants of the wasteland. But from my perspective? Their goals would be acceptable cause to break away from the chapter, I think so anyway.

I hope that the next FO takes place back west, crud, send us to Arizona or back to Cali, I want a familiar environment, going up north always sucks.

Heck I'd like the next FO in the Midwest call it the "Western Wasteland". And the Enclave is in control.

[Hazegurl]

Different opinions in general, or one opinion in particular?

 

 

 

This would be an example of a distinction without a difference.

The Mythal thing was probably Sera's last straw, the first straw was the IQ being Dalish.  I don't know much about Sera's romance but it seems the only one who gets dumped is the Elf IQ.

 

How so? Disagreeing with someone isn't the same as punching them in the face.

 

It's more than just an opinion. This isn't about whether or not cookies taste good. It's fundamental to her belief. Regardless of whether you think that's stupid, it's as legitimate as any reason for dumping someone. She's also a bit douchy, but dumping someone for having fundamentally different religious beliefs isn't dumb. That relationship is DOA at that point. Like dumping someone over politics. Again, totally justified and, IMO, the right call. 

 

I already know your opinion about Sera from the other thread.  You think compromise is a wishy washy behavior to have and that it somehow means you've given in to the other person. Naturally you think Sera's actions are just.  I think she's a moron but getting dump by her is probably the best gift she could give the IQ though. Who wants to be stuck with that? 

 

As for Dorian, dumping someone over doing something morally repugnant is totally justified.

 

 

The issue is not Dorian dumping you over the temple thing. It's him adding the Templars on top of it to give it some weight and it makes his reasons seemed as though it was pulled out of his rear end considering the fact that he still dates you after the fact. Which is why I stated good reasons for him to dump you.   ie Killing Ponchain and punching him in the face during the argument. Both of those are far more solid reasons to get dumped than over choices he would have otherwise overlooked if he liked you well enough.  Considering the fact that you can side with Mages to get his approval up, keep Alexius alive then go on an Elf killing spree at the Temple with no issues from him says that the action isn't that morally repugnant to him.  But that's more of a flaw with the system than the character.  I'll even be fair and say the same of Sera. The Dalish female should have been locked out of the Sera romance. 

 

Anyway, my point is that the disapproval dialogue in DAI makes most of the companions look like they got some sort of disorder as it's usually not even relevant to their problem with you. Side with the Templars and the Cole claims he doesn't like you cause you're not helping people, during your very first convo with him in Haven and Solas pretty much acts like you're a racist when you get no such dialogue options.  Side with the Temps and Dorian claims you thrash around like a caged bear or something when you first get to Skyhold.  Cass thinks you straddle the world for saving mages. 

 

I really would like to see this power mad, world straddling, racist, caged bear IQ who doesn't help anyone everyone keeps taking about in their disapproval dialogue.  He sounds more interesting than what I actually got. lol!!

[Lebanese Dude]

 

 

The issue is not Dorian dumping you over the temple thing. It's him adding the Templars on top of it to give it some weight and it makes his reasons seemed as though it was pulled out of his rear end considering the fact that he still dates you after the fact. Which is why I stated good reasons for him to dump you.   ie Killing Ponchain and punching him in the face during the argument. Both of those are far more solid reasons to get dumped than over choices he would have otherwise overlooked if he liked you well enough.  Considering the fact that you can side with Mages to get his approval up, keep Alexius alive then go on an Elf killing spree at the Temple with no issues from him says that the action isn't that morally repugnant to him.  But that's more of a flaw with the system than the character.  I'll even be fair and say the same of Sera. The Dalish female should have been locked out of the Sera romance. 

 

Anyway, my point is that the disapproval dialogue in DAI makes most of the companions look like they got some sort of disorder as it's usually not even relevant to their problem with you. Side with the Templars and the Cole claims he doesn't like you cause you're not helping people, during your very first convo with him in Haven and Solas pretty much acts like you're a racist when you get no such dialogue options.  Side with the Temps and Dorian claims you thrash around like a caged bear or something when you first get to Skyhold.  Cass thinks you straddle the world for saving mages. 

 

I really would like to see this power mad, world straddling, racist, caged bear IQ who doesn't help anyone everyone keeps taking about in their disapproval dialogue.  He sounds more interesting than what I actually got. lol!!

 

The companions have personalities of their own. That they remain with the Inquisitor is more of a gameplay compromise than a realistic one. They're not just random recruits you pick up for them to be disposable. I don't think it would be logical for them to leave unless absolutely provoked either. They're saving themselves by saving the world. 

 

In any case, you're fully capable of ignoring the whims of your companions. That they continue to romance you despite you picking despicable choices (to them) is both a gameplay mechanic as well as a reasonable choice of their own. I don't think any of the choices have such enormous untenable consequences on any of the relationships.

 

You actually have the option of making companions take double the negative disapproval hits if you desire. That makes it monumentally more difficult to maintain a relationship with someone that has ideals that run counter to yours. Is that not what you are asking for?

 

No really. I put that option on and lost like two companions after the first major decision. It was hilarious.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Who's making that argument again? Specific people, please.

 

Alternatively, if we step back from fixating on the exploits, then the principle of the approval system that people like might be that people think it's a good thing that companions can approve of how a PC acts as much as what they say. Perhaps there is something about Cait and Piper's characters that lead them to approve of picking locks- perhaps Cait is a survivor who approves of breaking and looting, perhaps Piper is some kind of investigative journalist who might approve of sneaking around into places that otherwise might be off limits, finding secrets and otherwise doing good stuff. Maybe this approval is an imperfect but relevant aspect of their characters, distinguishing them from the likes of, say, Strong, who has a different set of beliefs and actions he approves and disapproves of.

 

Or may you are being as fair and balanced as Fox News, and these people think torturing Dogmeat is the epitome of an ideal approval system.

 

ZombiePopper said that (at least I thought) but clarified their position. 

 

Yet Piper dislikes it when you commit an illegal act. As someone who is an investigative journalist in a city where the mayor wants nothing more than shut her paper down, that seems a bit silly to me. 

 

That companions approve of player actions is fine. Dragon Age does that too, when you find Vivienne's books or Blackwall's Warden relics. The difference is, those are things they asked you to do. Finding these items is important for them, so it stands to reason that they would like the player more because of it. I'm even down for Strong liking you more and more as you kill things with him in tow, since as a Super Mutant he enjoys little else.

 

But I find it really silly that Cait starts talking about all the good I did for her when I haven't even spoken to her since leaving the Combat Zone with her in tow. Piper speaks of me helping people and how she likes that in my character, but I barely did that at all and simply picked locks in her presence until her approval hit the desired spot. I don't think that is an exploit, it's how the system is designed to work and happens naturally as the game flows unless you intentionally refuse to pick locks so as not to gain approval.

 

Dragon Age had something similar with gifts in Origins, and the devs rightfully decided this system had to go and toned it down. I think companions liking the player for mundane actions is not good both story and gameplay wise, unless that action is explicitely important for them. ''I like picking locks and you pick locks'' isn't really a great reason to have the approval bar soar if you ask me.