270 réponses à ce sujet

[Onyx Jaguar]

andyr1986 wrote...

I disagree, you should have that option in the main menu screen like you do in the first ME since you go around cities and in combat zones in the same uniform.

True. But its hardly 'nailed' to shepards head. Although they could go the same way as DA and have the head gear magically disappear which i find equally jaring.

Strange now that you mention it.  I guess both games have their faults in this regard.  I remember a conversation with Oghren that was extremely bugged with the whole helmet appears then disappears. 

[Abriael_CG]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

These same problems are in DA though (except perhaps the loyalty, which seemed to be bugged post released imo, and of course the customization) comparatively of those three I found less bugs in ME 2 than DA or ME

EDIT:  Again I need to use quote button more effeciently  

Also, ME2 is a much, much smaller and less complex game than DA:O, if you compare the level of complexity, you easily see how many corners Bioware cut with ME2.
Now, I'm not saying it's necessarily their fault, deadlines are a ****, but it's definitely not an example to follow for the future generations.

andyr1986 wrote...

True. But its hardly 'nailed' to
shepards head. Although they could go the same way as DA and have the
head gear magically disappear which i find equally jaring.

Yanno, people tend to take off their helmet when talking to other people. And when they drink of course...

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 11 février 2010 - 01:16 .

[corebit]

First of all, thank you David for your responses. It is always nice to see a developer interact so much with the community . Second Abrial_CG please keep it civil. You are being unnecesarily hostile.

David, I think the most important thing for a player is whether a feature makes the game immersive or not. Sure, lack of choices/freedom is not necessarily a bad thing, but does it make the players more or less attached to the character we are playing?

Morrigan is an example of a character with set model that is well done. Only she can wear her unique outfit, and it serves to add character. But during the course of the game, we can change her outfit according to our tastes. It is a much more personal experience when we are able to customize the look of our companions. It does not detract from the storytelling and it does not diminish Morrigan's character at all. I wish ME2 would have done the same thing.

In conclusion, companion set models by themselves are not necessarily a bad thing. But when used within a game where there is already little precious customization, it makes the game much more impersonal and less immersive.

[orpheus333]

Yanno, people tend to take off their helmet when talking to other people. And when they drink of course...

Instantaneous helmet removal would require magic are you saying all fighters are mages? Or maybe ferelden iron has special refractive properties?

[Maria Caliban]

Abriael_CG wrote...

You've come here telling basically how several aspects (customization first, then companion management as a whole and tactical party combat) of the Dragon Age  franchise should be dumbed down like they have been in ME2. You shouldn't be surpsided by the fact that people that happen to play (CRPGs, to which genre Dragon Age belongs, and ME2 doesn't belong) aren't pleased.

I've asked for one element to be changed. I've engaged in general discussion about companion management and tactical party combat. Those elements in Dragon Age are from wargames, they have nothing to do with RPGing. In RPGs, you play one character. If I'm sitting around playing DnD with my friends, I can't decide that the elven ranger Anne plays will go DW instead of archery. I don't get to decide what tactics she'll take in a fight.

While you might enjoy tactical party-based combat and fiddling with the stats of your companions, I don't see that as role-playing. Role-playing is about what the PC does, what choices they make, and how their actions impact the world.

Try going to the Modern Warfare forums telling that they should make it a racing game since Forza Motorsport 3 is so great. I'm sure they'll be delighted.

I've visited the Dragon Age forums for five years now, made a number of suggestions and voiced a number of opinions. I'll continue doing so as that's the point of forums. You're free to have your own opinions, but there's no need to pretend they're gospel.

[hexaligned]

I'm pretty much in agreement with the above poster, My major objection with the ME2 system is lack of things to play around with, I don't really care how it looks as long as I get to mess with game mechanics and personalize how effective chars are in different roles in combat.
Maybe it's being born with a penis that began my life long love affair with fiddling with things,

I don't even understand the argument that it makes chars more unique.  People in real life aren't 2 dimensional characatures.  They are the most fractured and dappled aspects of existance.  Why you would want them as unchanging shadow people I don't know.  Thats just lazy writing, and lazy game design.

Modifié par relhart, 11 février 2010 - 02:49 .

[eyesofastorm]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Go play ME2, which is basically a different genre (a third person shooter with a story), instead of coming here asking Bioware to turn Dragon Age in a dumbed down action game.

Can I see your Bioboard cred?  Cause I don't think you have the juice to be telling people where to go and what to do around these parts.  If you wish to present your views in a civil and respectful manner, I'm sure the community will welcome you with open arms no matter who and how many disagree with your viewpoints... whatever they may be.  But this GTFO stuff doesn't fly here... not unless the world turned topside down while I wasn't looking.

[Abriael_CG]

eyesofastorm wrote...

Can I see your Bioboard cred?  Cause I don't think you have the juice to be telling people where to go and what to do around these parts.  If you wish to present your views in a civil and respectful manner, I'm sure the community will welcome you with open arms no matter who and how many disagree with your viewpoints... whatever they may be.  But this GTFO stuff doesn't fly here... not unless the world turned topside down while I wasn't looking.

And can I see your cred perchance? Because you seem quite eager to play moderator here.

Personally I find going to a game's forum telling "this game should be like this other game" to be quite silly, expecially when that would require the game to basically change genre.

Visual customization, tactical party command, stat customization and other elements are what differentiates western RPGs from other genres. Bioware removed some of them from ME2 turning it in an action shooter with a story, and you see the effect in the ME2 board. Lots of people aren't happy.

Now we get people here advocating that DA should be dumbed down as well, turning it in just another depth-deprieved action game. Don't we have enough of those already? 
We waited several years for a by-the-book AAA CRPG. Fans of simpler action games get one every 2 months.
It's pretty sad that that for someone one AAA CRPG franchise (that embodies all the classic mechanics of the genre) in the whole gaming market seems to be too much.

relhart wrote...
I don't even understand the argument that it makes chars more unique.  People in real life aren't 2 dimensional
characatures.  They are the most fractured and dappled aspects of existance.  Why you would want them as unchanging shadow people I don't know.  Thats just lazy writing, and lazy game design.

This.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 11 février 2010 - 02:57 .

[David Gaider]

Let's keep it civil, folks. I think we can all state the sorts of things we'd prefer to see in our RPG's without resorting to snapping at each other or blowing what anyone says out of proportion. I do that myself sometimes, but that's probably because I -- like everyone here -- am very passionate about RPG's. So let's cool our jets a bit, shall we?

[hexaligned]

imported_beer wrote...

relhart wrote...


Maybe it's being born with a penis that began my life long love affair with fiddling with things,

That is the case?

I wonder what would explain MY life long affair with fiddling with things. I should borrow one to have a reason I can just whip out and show to people if I see fit.

People: I_B, why do you spend so much time rearranging inventory?
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: I_B, Why are you arranging and rearranging your party instead of attacking the frikkin' ogre already?
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: I_B: Why do you spend so much time on a leveling up screen? You don't even use that companion!
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: Why do you spend so much time flirting with that male NPC
I_B: [Hides it away] Dunno. He is cute. 

No offence meant, it was jsut a (lame) joke.

[eyesofastorm]

Abriael_CG wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...

Can I see your Bioboard cred?  Cause I don't think you have the juice to be telling people where to go and what to do around these parts.  If you wish to present your views in a civil and respectful manner, I'm sure the community will welcome you with open arms no matter who and how many disagree with your viewpoints... whatever they may be.  But this GTFO stuff doesn't fly here... not unless the world turned topside down while I wasn't looking.

And can I see your cred perchance? Because you seem quite eager to play moderator here.

Whether I have cred or not is irrelevant because you don't see me telling people that their opinions aren't valid.  Even if I had crazy-mad cred, it wouldn't be my place to do that nor tell people to go play some other game.  As to me being eager to play moderator... being a member of a decent community means being willing to self-moderate and keep the community clean. 

David Gaider wrote...

Let's keep it civil, folks. I think we can all state the sorts of things we'd prefer to see in our RPG's without resorting to snapping at each other or blowing what anyone says out of proportion. I do that myself sometimes, but that's probably because I -- like everyone here -- am very passionate about RPG's. So let's cool our jets a bit, shall we?

Hey DG, nice to see you back at it.  I can't barely stomach the main boards anymore.  I can't believe you're still in the pits.  Your dedication never ceases to amaze.  I've said my piece.  I'm done.

Modifié par eyesofastorm, 11 février 2010 - 03:04 .

[Abriael_CG]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I've asked for one element to be changed. I've engaged in general discussion about companion management and tactical party combat. Those elements in Dragon Age are from wargames, they have nothing to do with RPGing. In RPGs, you play one character. If I'm sitting around playing DnD with my friends, I can't decide that the elven ranger Anne plays will go DW instead of archery. I don't get to decide what tactics she'll take in a fight.

That's because in most pen and paper RPGs, since everyone wants to have fun and you're playing with real people, no one is given the role of an actual leader.

In CRPGs play the role of the leader of a party. People do what you tell them to do, because they recognize you as such. They wear the equipment that you tell them to wear (they're going to battle, not to a party, fashion sense is less important in battle than in normal situations), they follow you around, and in battle they do pretty much what you tell them to do, unless you decide to let them do whatever they want, and in that case they have an AI that lets them do just that.
Playing the role of a leader is in no way conflicting with the basics of role playing game. The fact that you're normally not given a leading role in a pen and paper RPGs has no bearing to that. You're simply playing a different role.

While you might enjoy tactical party-based combat and fiddling with the stats of your companions, I don't see that as role-playing. Role-playing is about what the PC does, what choices they make, and how their actions impact the world

The fact that you don't see it as roleplaying doesn't change the fact that such elements have been widely accepted for years as important elements in the crpg genre.

CRPG != Pen and Paper RPGs.
It's two different forms of entertainment, with different rules and different gameplay mechanics.

eyesofastorm wrote...
Whether I have cred or not is irrelevant because you don't see me telling people that their opinions
aren't valid.  Even if I had crazy-mad cred, it wouldn't be my place to do that nor tell people to go play some other game.  As to me being eager to play moderator... being a member of a decent community means being willing to self-moderate and keep the community clean. 

But you look like you feel entitled to tell people how to behave. Which is basically exactly the same behavioir.
Self-moderating means moderating oneself, not being moderators of others. There are appointed moderators with a tag to "keep the community clean". Moderator wannabes normally end up just being argumentative and
damaging.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 11 février 2010 - 03:14 .

[flem1]

Abriael_CG wrote...

flem1 wrote...
Pfft.  You mean having my skinny elf-girl rogue be able to switch plate armors at will with Oghren is "realistic"!?

Metal isn't exactly the least reworkable element in the world. A plate armor can be rearranged and modified by a good armorsmith to fit a different person and size. Recycling armor was very widespread in the middle ages.

In the middle of a battlefield?  LOL.

The point is, no armor should be wearable by anone but the owner until it's taken to a smith or leatherworker back at camp or a city -- at which point turning it to the character's custom looks is more sensible than the alternative.

[Abriael_CG]

flem1 wrote...
The point is, no armor should be wearable by anone but the owner until it's taken to a smith or leatherworker back at camp or a city -- at which point turning it to the character's custom looks is more sensible than the alternative.

Not really. The small concession to gameplay of skipping the "bring to the smith" phase (that would just be unnecessarily cumbersome and would cause quite nasty inventory management problems), doesn't make changing gear less realistic than people going around with the same set of clothing costantly glued to their skin for months.

It's utterly laughable how the character in your avatar ends up flashing her ample blue cleavage at the aliens she faces no matter what environmental or battle situation she's in.
It's not good character design, nor it makes the character more "unique". It's stereotyping the character, which is the exact opposite of good character design.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 11 février 2010 - 03:20 .

[flem1]

Abriael_CG wrote...

flem1 wrote...
The point is, no armor should be wearable by anone but the owner until it's taken to a smith or leatherworker back at camp or a city -- at which point turning it to the character's custom looks is more sensible than the alternative.

Not really. The small concession to gameplay of skipping the "bring to the smith" phase (that would just be unnecessarily cumbersome and would cause quite nasty inventory management problems), doesn't make changing gear less realistic than people going around with the same set of clothing costantly glued to their skin for months.

Oh NOW you're thinking about streamlined gameplay?

In any case, you haven't done a great job reading the thread.  I never argued for one permanent outfit (though if you watched a bunch of soldiers in the field, this wouldn't surprise you), but having custom styled versions of the various armor types for each companion.  So every leather Leliana wore would have her personal decor scheme, etc...

Bio does story games, and continuity of appearance is a classic feature of stories.

[flem1]

Abriael_CG wrote...

It's not good character design, nor it makes the character more "unique". It's stereotyping the character, which is the exact opposite of good character design.

Let me guess.  You were going through Star Wars complaining that Obi-Wan never put on any armor.

[Onyx Jaguar]

imported_beer wrote...

relhart wrote...


Maybe it's being born with a penis that began my life long love affair with fiddling with things,

That is the case?

I wonder what would explain MY life long affair with fiddling with things. I should borrow one to have a reason I can just whip out and show to people if I see fit.

People: I_B, why do you spend so much time rearranging inventory?
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: I_B, Why are you arranging and rearranging your party instead of attacking the frikkin' ogre already?
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: I_B: Why do you spend so much time on a leveling up screen? You don't even use that companion!
I_B: [Whips it out] THIS is the reason.

People: Why do you spend so much time flirting with that male NPC
I_B: [Hides it away] Dunno. He is cute. 

Fantastic!

[Hugmejohnny]

Gonna have to go with ME2 on this one. Yeah it kinda sucks you can't toss 'um in armor, but some of the characters benefit from their clothing personality wise. Thane's clothes are just strait up bad **** and their just his style. I dunno, kinda like Boba Fett, the look is part of the character.



And in all other aspects I think it's beyond opinion that the models are better. More detailed, better animated, and just more life like.

[grregg]

Abriael_CG wrote...

(...)

Personally I find going to a game's forum telling "this game should be like this other game" to be quite silly, expecially when that would require the game to basically change genre.

Visual customization, tactical party command, stat customization and other elements are what differentiates western RPGs from other genres. Bioware removed some of them from ME2 turning it in an action shooter with a story, and you see the effect in the ME2 board. Lots of people aren't happy.

Now we get people here advocating that DA should be dumbed down as well, turning it in just another depth-deprieved action game. Don't we have enough of those already? 
We waited several years for a by-the-book AAA CRPG. Fans of simpler action games get one every 2 months.
It's pretty sad that that for someone one AAA CRPG franchise (that embodies all the classic mechanics of the genre) in the whole gaming market seems to be too much.

(...)

I don't think people (and that seems to include BioWare) are as concerned as you are with genre "purity". Somehow I don't see BioWare pulling out some kind of RPG Bible and going "we have to implement all these features or people on our forum will not consider our game to be an RPG!"

And I, for one, would agree with them. I very much applaud BioWare tinkering with genre's formula. Sure, sometimes they might add something that I don't like, or drop some feature that I am attached to, but that's the price of innovation. I already played Baldur's Gate (insert your own favorite hardcore, by-the-book RPG game here). If I want to play it again, it's sitting right there on my shelf. I'd rather that BioWare did something new.

[Abriael_CG]

flem1 wrote...
Oh NOW you're thinking about streamlined gameplay?

There's a very big difference between making small concessions to gameplay and dumbing down whole mechanics.

In any case, you haven't done a great job reading the thread.  I never argued for one permanent outfit (though if you watched a bunch of soldiers in the field, this wouldn't surprise you)

There's quite some difference between soldiers and adventurers. 

but having custom styled versions of the various armor types for each companion.  So every leather Leliana wore would have her personal decor scheme, etc...

That'd be all good and fine, provided that outfits are different from each other, and not all leather armor that go on Leliana look exactly the same. But that's very, very different than the ME2 model advocated by the OP, and it's extremely resource-consuming, because every available armor model needs to be designed separately for each character.
I wouldn't for sure be opposed to that, provided that the developer is willing to spend that many resources on itemization. The problem is that I doubt they ever will. It's much easier to give a couple "personal" outfits like Morrigan's to each character and then allow him/her to wear generic equipment as well, giving the player a choice.

Bio does story games, and continuity of appearance is a classic feature of stories.

Like in the Baldur's Gate series? In the Neverwinter Night series? Basically all modern CRPGs with great stories had ample visual customization for all characters involved.

Hugmejohnny wrote...
And in
all other aspects I think it's beyond opinion that the models are
better. More detailed, better animated, and just more life like.

So much that their eyes look in different directions. ME2's human models are some of the worst i've seen in a few years, expecially in their expressiveness. Maybe that's why they need clothes to be characterized.

You simply don't get expressions like the one below in ME2, with many layers of complexity and that perfectly show conflicting feelings:


And yes, she's in plate. And looks great in it. So much for "unique" clothing.

Characters in ME have 2 expressions.

Jack: Normal - Angry
Miranda: Normal - I want to give you a ******
Jacob: Normal - Angry
Male Shepard: Normal - Angry - Creepy leecher (progress! He has 3!)
Samara: Normal - Pensive (with and without light-emitting eyes)
Tali: biiiiiip....

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 11 février 2010 - 03:44 .

[David Gaider]

Abriael_CG wrote...
You simply don't get expressions like the one below in ME2, with many layers of complexity and that perfectly show conflifting feelings

Quite a feat, apparently, since we borrowed their system for our facial expressions.