|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-s-rggURqU I'm morbidly curious as to how romance as a Qunari will play out. I hope it involves nuzzling.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
Alister is silly and dumb because the Grey Wardens do take criminals, murderers, blood mages, anything at all into their ranks, but it sort of makes sense when you think about how Loghain's crimes include getting all the Grey Wardens wiped out, so he almost certainly hates him more than anyone else. Alister would make more sense if you had more time to see the other Gray Wardens besides Duncan - put another Origin sized act between the Origins and Ostagar where you are in a Gray Warden camp and can see some of these characters. There's a big disconnect between the Gray Warden and Alister in that the Gray Warden literally never met the other hundred Gray Wardens whose deaths Loghain caused. Alister didn't just lose Duncan, he lost droves of his brothers in arms, people he called friends and family. You lose Duncan who everyone can agree is awesome, but there's still tons of other gray wardens who were killed who you never met.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
Yeah, I think if the camp you go to for the ritual in Ostagar was the Gray Warden camp so you could get to know them would have been a better option at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
I think Loghain and Alistair were both making logical decisions from their points of view. It's what makes that dilemma good. Alistair and Loghain really shouldn't exist on the same team. Similarly, in DA2, they should have limited when certain combinations of characters were available. It makes sense from a storytelling point of view and would shake up the combat. (They sort of did this with Isabela limitations in Act 2.)kingcom posted:Also Pick give us a DA2 story about something you enjoyed that a bunch a people thought was terrible so we don't slip back to ME chat. I love the romance options and I love that they're all terrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
TheWorldIsSquare posted:I didn't hate him as much as some people do, but he was too Whedon-eque for my liking, and his ragequit when Loghain joins is sort of ridiculous. I can get being against the idea of letting the guy who killed all your friends join your party, but he treats the Grey Wardens as some sort of club. "Well it has traditions and meanies shouldn't join!", even if you explain to him that it's basically a different brand of death sentence. He could have at least kept off leaving until after the fight is over, but nope, he just abandons the world-threatening conflict because he really doesn't like Loghain. That's really just bad writing on Bioware's part for the sake of game balance, since if you get one as a party member you can't have the other. Which doesn't make it good, but I think it's less of a knock against the character himself than against the compromise Bioware made in the story for the game. quote:I think Loghain and Alistair were both making logical decisions from their points of view. It's what makes that dilemma good. Alistair and Loghain really shouldn't exist on the same team. Similarly, in DA2, they should have limited when certain combinations of characters were available. It makes sense from a storytelling point of view and would shake up the combat. I agree with this in principle, but in practice Loghain and especially Alistair's actual acting out of their motivations there was poorly written. Alistair's writer(s) took what was sympathetic motivation for a stupid decision and made him sound like a crybaby instead of a young man under great emotional distress making a poor value judgement. As for limiting party member combinations for story, again, that's a compromise made for gameplay. They give you one party member of each broad fantasy RPG character class archetype so the game is basically playable and your party can always function no matter how you spec your PC. If they limit that, they either need multiples of each archetype - and then you have too many characters to properly deal with in one story, or they have to just make the player deal with the fact that certain specs for their characters are suboptimal given party member choices, which will lead to metagaming and disincentivize role playing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Well, DA2 was pretty good about always having a neutral option for every major decision for every class. Even Merrill is about the most neutral you could make a mage in the final conflict.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Pick posted:I think Loghain and Alistair were both making logical decisions from their points of view. It's what makes that dilemma good. Alistair and Loghain really shouldn't exist on the same team. Similarly, in DA2, they should have limited when certain combinations of characters were available. It makes sense from a storytelling point of view and would shake up the combat. (They sort of did this with Isabela limitations in Act 2.) God Isabella in Act 2 was the stupidest thing. I can't get over the idea that after telling her directly to her face your going to give her the book and help her pay off that debt, she still just runs off with it for absolutely no reason. Then comes back later anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
kingcom posted:God Isabella in Act 2 was the stupidest thing. I can't get over the idea that after telling her directly to her face your going to give her the book and help her pay off that debt, she still just runs off with it for absolutely no reason. Then comes back later anyway. She doesn't always. And it makes sense because she's a shyster; why should she trust you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
Pick posted:She doesn't always. And it makes sense because she's a shyster; why should she trust you? Other than me siding with my team members over everyone else at every opportunity? Other than previously having poo poo talked the Aristok about his stupid religion? I even got that blue bar up to full, the most important part. I feel going out of my way to help the companions at virtually every opportunity to the point where, right before we are going to bust down the warehouse to get the book you get the chance to tell her your giving her the book. She still decides 'welp, thats not trustworthy, I'll just take it and run mid-fight' I'm not talking about what can and can't happen, I'm talking about my sequence of events in my game. The scenario played out where she ran off, I went 'well thats dumb, time to go kill the Arishok I guess' and went off and did it. Isabella runs in at the last moment to hand the book off. Then I still fight and kill the Arishok anyway. Drama..?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
IIRC on my first playthrough I let Alistair decapitate Loghain in personal combat. It was tremendously satisfying. E: Of course that path somewhat limits your options later on 
HenessyHero fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
kingcom posted:I even got that blue bar up to full, the most important part. This, and that mentality that's encouraged by it, is why we don't need approval bars or karma meters or whatever. Not that I thought Isabella was particularly well done, don't get me wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
I always end up doing the knock up Morrigan route because the manner in which the Grey Wardens destroy the archdemon completely horrifies me (your soul and that of the archdemon collide and loving annihilate each other.) In a setting where there's souls and afterlives and such, that is kind of unnerving.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
kingcom posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:This, and that mentality that's encouraged by it, is why we don't need approval bars or karma meters or whatever.  Seriously, I referred to it as the blue bar.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
I vehemently like the companion-specific friend/rivalry option (though I'd have renamed it "Facilitator" and "Challenger" or something.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
TheWorldIsSquare posted:I didn't hate him as much as some people do, but he was too Whedon-eque for my liking, and his ragequit when Loghain joins is sort of ridiculous. I can get being against the idea of letting the guy who killed all your friends join your party, but he treats the Grey Wardens as some sort of club. "Well it has traditions and meanies shouldn't join!", even if you explain to him that it's basically a different brand of death sentence. He could have at least kept off leaving until after the fight is over, but nope, he just abandons the world-threatening conflict because he really doesn't like Loghain. Alistar was okay, but for me he just got grating with multiple replays. I did think they handled it pretty shoddy in his getting whiny over Loghain joining when you'd think he'd been around enough Grey Wardens long enough to know it's all about whatever it takes to end the Blight instead of picking and choosing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
I liked it a lot better than the insert presents to get side quests and power ups for your party system they used in DA:O. It wasn't perfect, and there were obvious limits to the choices, but that pretty much describes every relationship system in RPGs. I hope they expand on it/retool it for DA:I instead of just backtracking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
Alistair is just too overbearingly Whedon-esque in dialogue and even character design (coincidentally being the last male heir of Ferelden, come on) for me to deal with even through my first playthrough. I thought Dragon Age II hit the perfect amount of companion meter-shifting through in game dialogue and roughly 2 gifts per character every act to help guide your relationship towards your ideal state when you inadvertently offend someone or simply have their progress decay from constantly disagreeing with your plot actions. steakmancer fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
I went out of my way to betray Isabella and give the Arishok the drat book and then Varric goes on to claim that Isabella escaped his ship and took the book with her anyway, which was just one final tinkle in my eye because by that point I was utterly convinced the only good ending the game could possibly have would involve a Qunari purge of Kirkwall.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
kingcom posted:
Right, sorry, I didn't catch the sarcasm. The point still stands even if it doesn't apply to you though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
Pick posted:I vehemently like the companion-specific friend/rivalry option (though I'd have renamed it "Facilitator" and "Challenger" or something.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
Pick posted:I vehemently like the companion-specific friend/rivalry option (though I'd have renamed it "Facilitator" and "Challenger" or something.) How many blue points do i need to start selling them crack?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:35
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:It's terrible specifically because it treats "neutral" as "I have no opinion on this person whatsoever". If I'm nice to slaves and mages, Fenris should be mixed on me, not acting like we'd never interacted. That, and having a bar leads to a situation where characters will be swayed by the PC just because you filled one of the bars even though it doesn't make sense for their actual characters. The game would be better off if it just organically let characters react to player choices based on the previous characterization than how many points on a bar you've gotten in previous conversations. I'll be honest, my favorite armor set in DA2 was by far the Champion's set, and especially the mage one looked really cool to me. I hope they have that style of armor available in the new game, where it looks like a cross between robes and plate armor. I also liked that they made magic look like it required physical skill, like it was almost a martial art, rather than the characters just standing there plinking away with a stick and doing nothing. Really, overall the combat in DA2 was much more visually appealing, and I liked how they laid out the skill trees. They just need to make the underlying system more intuitive and allow more diversity in what we can spec for over the course of the game and leveling up and it would be pretty good. I also hope they have a realistic level cap and a good method of scaling enemies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:It's terrible specifically because it treats "neutral" as "I have no opinion on this person whatsoever". If I'm nice to slaves and mages, Fenris should be mixed on me, not acting like we'd never interacted. They never act like you've never interacted. Your banter always suggests you do whether you carry them around or not. Anyway, they act like you could mean anything, not that you're a stranger, which is a valid interpretation of a fickle Hawke. An example is the gifts. If you rarely interact with the character, they'll think you could mean it well or badly depending on how you present it. If you have you F/R points cancel out the character will also have to rely on how you're approaching the matter at that time. That's broadly realistic. I'd prefer a Friendship bar AND a Rivalry bar, but you're vastly increasing the amount of content that would need to be created and the complexity of the game. To unfair extents, I feel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:18
|
|
The friendship/rivalry system is still miles better than DA:O's appeasement simulator.The Crotch posted:It's terrible specifically because it treats "neutral" as "I have no opinion on this person whatsoever". If I'm nice to slaves and mages, Fenris should be mixed on me, not acting like we'd never interacted. Fenris doesn't act like you've never interacted though, your conversations still progress as does his character arc, albeit in a different tone. If you're floundering around neutrality the only thing you're really missing is a rival/friend character bonus and you also may not be able to persuade him to do something he's ardently opposed to, if it comes up.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
^^ And depending on what stupid glitch decides to poo poo on your save, you might not be able to even if you've filled out one bar or the other  Lightning Knight posted:That, and having a bar leads to a situation where characters will be swayed by the PC just because you filled one of the bars even though it doesn't make sense for their actual characters. The game would be better off if it just organically let characters react to player choices based on the previous characterization than how many points on a bar you've gotten in previous conversations. I'm a little confused to what you mean here. Do you mean the previous characterization of the party members? Because in that case it creates a really strict path where characters always react the same to certain choices regardless of what relationship you have with them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Pick posted:They never act like you've never interacted. Your banter always suggests you do whether you carry them around or not. Anyway, they act like you could mean anything, not that you're a stranger, which is a valid interpretation of a fickle Hawke. HenessyHero posted:If you're floundering around neutrality the only thing you're really missing is a rival/friend character bonus and you also may not be able to persuade him to do something he's ardently opposed to, if it comes up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:38
|
|
|
I don't like narrative mechanics which actively encourage you to take the same answer for every question. Don't give bonuses for going purely one way. Otherwise you get the ME3 issue of blindly pushing paragon to get your talking stat up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:40
|
|
|
Not to go down that dark hole again, but ME3 mostly dropped that poo poo. That was really more ME2's own, terrible thing. Anyway, the friendship/rivalry thing is undoubtedly better than "give people dog treats to make them like you". It is still bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Alright, let me rephrase: dragging him around in your party, picking up a bunch of +rivalry and +friendship such that the bar stays in the middle, subsequent conversations with him will be the same as what you'd get if you hadn't had him around with you that whole time. This is Dumb and Bad. Interactions combining to completely negate each-other so that they don't matter is Dumb and Bad. You might as well as for the game to sync with your brain and suck your dick. You're asking for nine characters to have not five potential statuses (Full friend, friend, neutral, rival, full rival) but fifteen. Full rival, full friend Full rival, friend Full rival, neutrally friend Full rival, not friend Full rival, enemy Rival, full friend Rival, friend Rival, neutrally friend Rival, not friend Rival, enemy Neutrally rival, full friend Neutrally rival, friend Neutrally rival, neutrally friend Neutrally rival, not friend Neutrally rival, enemy That's writing 135 character paths (81 if we simplify each bar to 3 statuses, but of course that's sacrificing realism the current model has), with voice acting and corresponding animation for each. You are asking for something totally unrealistic, especially when there was only rarely a conflict with the five-status system. Pick fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:45
|
|
The Crotch posted:... or they leave your party because you were insufficiently one-note around them. To my knowledge Fenris leaves on his own if you don't deal with the slavers that are actively hunting him down in act 2 or if you're unable to convince him in act 3 to side with the mages during that finale, something that he would ferociously oppose.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
HenessyHero posted:To my knowledge Fenris leaves on his own if you don't deal with the slavers that are actively hunting him down in act 2 or if you're unable to convince him in act 3 to side with the mages during that finale, something that he would ferociously oppose. Correct, Fenris will leave (after recruited) if: 1. You refuse to help Fenris with the slavers in Act 2 2. You dick around and don't deal with the slavers within a certain timeframe, even if you agreed to help in Act 2 3. You side with the mages and he's not locked as 100% friend/rival (I think you can kill him even if he's romanced if he's not maxed) 3a. I hear you still need to do "Questioning Beliefs" if he's 100%, but I always finish that so I can't speak from experience 4. You let Danarius take him 5. You tell him to go at one of a few opportunities, if I recall right--at least one obvious one Bastard really wants to jet. It's the reason Aveline is almost a lock-in for sticking with Hawke in the final battle; you practically have to be trying to drastically lose her approval and not his. Pick fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
HenessyHero posted:To my knowledge Fenris leaves on his own if you don't deal with the slavers that are actively hunting him down in act 2 or if you're unable to convince him in act 3 to side with the mages during that finale, something that he would ferociously oppose. Pick posted:You might as well as for the game to sync with your brain and suck your dick. You're asking for nine characters to have not five potential statuses (Full friend, friend, neutral, rival, full rival) but nine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:58
|
|
|
Well then what's your solution? You said you wanted it to be based on "pre-existing characterization"--how do you determine this without meters for character qualities? Without meters, the number of iterations is going to increase, not decrease. Assigning it a numerical designation to different kinds of behaviors is used as a simplification to avoid the problem of having to write a path for every potential combination of player-character behavior.
Pick fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 07:03
|
|
|
If we're going to be posting our own made-up systems, I would generally keep the current system. However, if you're at neutrality by the end of a character arc, in that you've done everything available for that character, I do think you should have a meaningful conversation and hit a solidified 'neutral' status. You've known the character a long time by this point, the character knows exactly what your PC is about and where the two of them stand. In that conversation you can decide if you're going to carry on as friends, rivals or maintain a professional distance. What options are available will partly depend on if you're leaning towards either rival or friend and also on the character in question*. You get a unique bonus from that character that's different from the friend or rival bonus and you move on. I think this is workable since generally NPCs are already given 3 conversational tones, friend, rival and mixed. In effect you're just choosing which tone to use now. It also rewards players for totally completing a character arc as opposed to just ignoring it. This conversation also gives a rare chance for the PC to explain their motivations, by letting the player set a context for their past interactions with the NPC to establish a current connection. This doesn't comparatively renege the bonuses of full friend or rival either. If you get along with an NPC particularly well, you're on a fast track to their character bonus and tone shift as opposed to waiting for the full arc, possibly most of the game, to obtain this content. *By that I mean if one character is designed to be an incredible sourpuss, it should be impossible to choose to carry on as friends if you're coming at it from a neutral situation, and so you're only able to choose 'professional distance' or 'rivals' even if they're leaning towards friendship. If one character is generally gregarious, you can opt to carry on as friends even though you may be leaning towards rivals, though still neutral. Some people just want to be friends with everyone after all. The Crotch posted:I was referring to notFenris in that particular case - or more specifically, Isabella. I used Fenris as an example earlier only because he's a character it's fairly common for people to be neutral with. Fortunately, while it is annoying in Isabella's case, that's not really a recurring issue with DA2's companions in that they'll just leave if haven't been metagaming their bars. Most other party members don't just up and leave if you're stuck in neutral. I would consider it to be part of Isabella's characterization as a bit of a flake, but perhaps its overall execution was a touch lacking. HenessyHero fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Oct 11, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 07:22
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Not to go down that dark hole again, but ME3 mostly dropped that poo poo. That was really more ME2's own, terrible thing. They can use those dog treats to make my dog like them. What better gift is there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:It's not a matter of fear. This is a very simple binary decision. You need a default, you have two primary options and a couple permutations of one. Warden Alive is the one with the most permutations, and thus the most complications. Warden Dead is easier as a default and a perfectly valid choice, rather than a fail state. What exactly is the motivation to pick Warden Alive as their default? My motivation is that there are specific quests in the game that are only available if you import certain types of saves. So, sure, let's make a "default" where a couple of quests per act are not available because gently caress those people who don't have a save ready (in DA2 it was like that). Anyway, i am glad that people do approve of the friendship/rivalry system compared to the one in DA:0 where it was next to impossible not to have everyone maxxed the moment they came in the group. Oh, and the characters overall in DA2 were just that much subtler in than in DA:O- complaining about Isabella is silly because that's how she is portrayed in the game- she was betrayed too many times to trust easily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 11:30
|
|
|
Sexgun Rasputin posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-s-rggURqU Party converstations are what I like best about the Dragon Age franchise. Morrigan was a good pairing with just about everyone for this 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 11:33
|
|
|
Arkeus posted:My motivation is that there are specific quests in the game that are only available if you import certain types of saves. Well, yes. They do want you to buy the other games, so they incentivize doing so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 11:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
Zzulu posted:Party converstations are what I like best about the Dragon Age franchise. Morrigan was a good pairing with just about everyone for this They are keeping them for the next game with the opportunity for your character to add to the banter. I'm curious as to how this will play out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 14:07
|
|
