530 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
How does that make his proposal "not constructive"? You liking it has no bearing on it's constructiveness. No system will ever make everyone happy.

Why should I give up existing gameplay that I like and praise BW for just because SirOccam is not liking something?

You shouldn't. But that doesn't make his proposal non-constructive.

There are pack-rats who like looting. There are people who hate it. And there there are those in between.

I personally consider myself in the middle. I played all Bio games, some a dozen times. I played games with no inventory.
But I am slowly getting tired of dumb looting...looting that really adds nothing. The MMO kind, together with it's soulless gameplay. Loot, level, balance escalation and progression who looks like it's there just because...

Let's face it - the inventory/loot system DA:O used was seen a zillion times before. Some change would be nice. There's a zillion RPG games for pack rats out there.

It is non-constructive if it negatively impacts gameplay of others. You might not agree, but a system needs to be an improvement and not an improvement for some and at the same time a step back to others.

I love looting. The more the better. I was suprised that it wasn't my main income source, though. I always thought that this was the case.

No. There aren't a zillion games out there which feature looting. They have been replaced by a zillion games that try to please the lazy action game crowd.

What worries me is the fact that the inventory already has disappeared completely from ME2, just because people didn't like the cluttered inventory, omni-gel and that money had no real value. I was one of them. That ME2 solution was horrible, though, and was in no way ever proposed by gamers. I was there on the old forums and watched and participated in the discussions. And I am getting enough of the shooter-type-like crowd that wants to get rid good game mechanics just to satisfy their hack and slash urge. This is supposed to be an RPG and one of the things RPGs are about is looting, trading, and customizing the outfit of your henchmen. I will be opposed by anything that even remotely smells like an ME2 solution. One can streamline loot and the inventory for those who don't like it, but I really wouldn't care if it stayed the way it was. I am willing to think about solutions for those who don't like it, but I certainly don't want it removed. I don't have any respect for those that even try to propose that. The genre has been dumbed down enough.

[AllThatJazz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That poor, poor puppy...

Bioware is just kicking it around the office now.

Hey, as all the cool kids say - Puppy Schmuppy. Is an extra kickable puppy created everytime I mention the word toggle, or just come up with an idea for one?  Either way, I could be on a roll, here 

Hangman's Tree: Depends on what you mean by 'jobs' for characters who don't loot. If you mean extra quests, effectively, that are universally available, then sure - I mean, I'll never argue against moar game content . If you're talking about quests only available to those who don't loot (not sure how this would be implemented anyway), then that's more problematic as it would mean missing out on a fair bit of content (quests, NPCs, conversations etc) - which from a gameworld POV is more than the equivalent of picking up tier 3 shortbows or whatever.

[upsettingshorts]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
It is non-constructive if it negatively impacts gameplay of others. You might not agree, but a system needs to be an improvement and not an improvement for some and at the same time a step back to others.

A feature that fits such a narrow qualification for being constructive doesn't really exist.  But more on that in a second.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
That ME2 solution was horrible, though, and was in no way ever proposed by gamers. I was there on the old forums and watched and participated in the discussions. And I am getting enough of the shooter-type-like crowd that wants to get rid good game mechanics just to satisfy their hack and slash urge.

And I'm tired of condescending people who think because a mechanic or feature is lifted from a shooter than it must be the result of some basic, childlike compulsion.

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
This is supposed to be an RPG and one of the things RPGs are about is looting, trading, and customizing the outfit of your henchmen. I will be opposed by anything that even remotely smells like an ME2 solution.

But what if that solution negatively impacts my gameplay?  Sounds like you will have a hard time coming up with anything that would actually satisfy your own rigorous requirements.  If I were to follow them, I'd view your entire post - especially the bit below - as not remotely constructive.

AngryFrozenWater wrote... 
I don't have any respect for those that even try to propose that. The genre has been dumbed down enough.

That's quite a non-constructive, condescending, and presumptive position you've taken there.  Care to re-examine your own rigorous definition of what arguments are constructive, or are you comfortable with your foot in your mouth?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 12 octobre 2010 - 10:45 .

[hangmans tree]

It should be evenly matched. Quests and jobs to earn decent sum, but leave a margin for some looting if you want the cases filled to the brim (to complement each other). And when you're a scav, you may earn excessive funds (by looting everything in sight), going beyond the marker of decency

[AngryFrozenWater]

hangmans tree wrote...

About the money:

It is also possible to accumulate over 1,000Gold prior to the Landsmeet without making any Potent Lyrium Potions. This requires you to do all the available quests (including downloadable content), pass all the money-related coercion dialogues, steal from all out-of-combat NPCs and in-combat enemies, and sell all items to merchants, except for the items of your four party characters. If you don't want to worry about money and the tasks required for money, you can spend time producing Potent Lyrium Potions.

It clearly says the 1000 is all the money you can get by:

do all the available quests (including downloadable content), pass all the money-related coercion dialogues, steal from all out-of-combat NPCs and in-combat enemies, and sell all items to merchants, except for the items of your four party characters.

And that is taking some origin quests into account. please read Profitable quests and you'll see that there is little gold unless you do eeeeverything right - quest options despite your alignment, certain/specific party members and so on...

Nope. Read it again. The 350 part is specifically about looting. The 1000 part mentions stealing (which is not much, mind you) from out-of-combat-NPCs (they are still alive) and in-combat-enemies (who are also still alive). That is not looting.

As a matter of fact, it has to be not inclusive, because I am reaching both numbers now. I have made a post about a warrior, a rogue and a mage. And the numbers I got for the mage and rogue are somewhere below 1200 when adding the money spent and the money left. I still had items in the Peak's party chest and in the inventory that I didn't count in.

Sorry.

This page provides a guide on the best ways to make money in Dragon Age: Origins. Money can be earned by completing quests, selling items, stealing, or looting fallen enemies and containers. You are occasionally given the chance to ask for monetary rewards above the 'normal' quest reward, and at times the success of such attempts
depends on your coercion skill. Money is used for purchasing items, making donations and bribes, and improving the strength of an allied army for the final battle.
You will be able to accumulate at least 350 prior to the Landsmeet, if you've collected all the loot items and sold everything to merchants without donating anything. This amount is enough to buy 3 or more of your dream items from any merchant. It is also possible to accumulate over 1,000 prior to the Landsmeet without making any Potent Lyrium Potions. This requires you to do all the available quests (including downloadable content), pass all the money-related coercion dialogues, steal from all out-of-combat NPCs and in-combat enemies, and sell all items to
merchants, except for the items of your four party characters. If you don't want to worry about money and the tasks required for money, you can spend time producing Potent Lyrium Potions.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 12 octobre 2010 - 10:58 .

[hangmans tree]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

About the money:

It is also possible to accumulate over 1,000Gold prior to the Landsmeet without making any Potent Lyrium Potions. This requires you to do all the available quests (including downloadable content), pass all the money-related coercion dialogues, steal from all out-of-combat NPCs and in-combat enemies, and sell all items to merchants, except for the items of your four party characters. If you don't want to worry about money and the tasks required for money, you can spend time producing Potent Lyrium Potions.

It clearly says the 1000 is all the money you can get by:

do all the available quests (including downloadable content), pass all the money-related coercion dialogues, steal from all out-of-combat NPCs and in-combat enemies, and sell all items to merchants, except for the items of your four party characters.

And that is taking some origin quests into account. please read Profitable quests and you'll see that there is little gold unless you do eeeeverything right - quest options despite your alignment, certain/specific party members and so on...

Nope. Read it again. The 350 part is specifically about looting. The 1000 part mentions stealing (which is not much, mind you) from out-of-combat-NPCs (they are still alive) and in-combat-enemies (who are also still alive). That is not looting.

As a matter of fact, it has to be not inclusive, because I am reaching both numbers now. I have made a post about a warrior, a rogue and a mage. And the numbers I got for the mage and rogue are somewhere below 1200 when adding the money spent and the money left. I still had items in the Peak's party chest and in the inventory that I didn't count in.

Sorry.

WTF? Nope what? Human, can you read what I wrote or not? What is wrong with you?
I wrote:
1. Looting is about 350
2. Other means alltogether about 1000
3. In that 1000 only about 240 plus board jobs is from quests.
Lyrium making not taken into account.
The art of reading and comperhension is lost to you or what?

[AngryFrozenWater]

My characters have far more than a 1000. You want my saved games? I'll be happy to mail them to you.

Edit: As long as you agree that you can have about 1350 max (which I don't - I reach over 1200) then we're OK.

Edit 2: My first warrior was a disaster and didn't get over 550.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 12 octobre 2010 - 11:20 .

[twincast]

Felfenix wrote...

Why not just have less drops, but of higher quality, and gold instead of vendor trash?

This. (Pretty much.)

[DPB]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

No. There aren't a zillion games out there which feature looting. They have been replaced by a zillion games that try to please the lazy action game crowd.

Diablo and its clones. Hack and slash action RPGs that feature an excessive amount of looting - there were far more of these released in the last 10-15 years than traditional RPGs. The trend to have everywhere swamped with loot was not pioneered by traditional RPGs, it comes from monty haul hack and slash games like Diablo.

[hangmans tree]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

My characters have far more than a 1000. You want my saved games? I'll be happy to mail them to you.

So math is not so good either, huh? point 1 and 2 added together give you about 1400gp. I dont need your saves, what I need from you is focus and thinking, otherwise you just ****** me off with your (missed) statements. Why? because it seems I wasted much time invested in having a conversation with you.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I made a mistake, hangmans... Sorry about that. But I don't need your aggression either. I added these two statements to that post while you were getting angry.

1) As long as you agree that you can have about 1350 max (which I don't - I reach over 1200) then we're OK.

2) My first warrior was a disaster and didn't get over 550.

BTW: I am getting enough of your attitude. Tone it down a bit. This game is supposed to be fun. I am OK that you don't like me, but if you have any issues with me then please use PM.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 12 octobre 2010 - 11:26 .

[hangmans tree]

Ok, fine.

Now the riddle. Why the quest rewards is only 240gp, and that is some maxed amout? Why other actions give you more than 1000gp? And thats only netto sum. Subtract all the money you have to spend on bribes and the like, invest (some quests) and give if you're not blackhearted greedy bastard. Do you still not see the problem I was talking about?

[Sidney]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
How does ME2 make you make choices?  You can still pick up every weapon you find, and all of the weapons you have are available to you even in the middle of a mission.

I agree that choices are good.  Individual inventories with volume and weight limits would do this nicely.  ME2 does nothing of the sort.

No all weapons available to you are not on each mission. If I suddenly get on a mission and discover - gosh I wish I had the Flamethrower and not a Mini-Nuke I'm out of luck. You have to make choices among your weapons at the mission start. Same with armor. I wish I'd brought my melee upgrade on the armor on a husk level, I can't just pop it on my suit,  it is back on the normandy.

[AllThatJazz]

hangmans tree wrote...

It should be evenly matched. Quests and jobs to earn decent sum, but leave a margin for some looting if you want the cases filled to the brim (to complement each other). And when you're a scav, you may earn excessive funds (by looting everything in sight), going beyond the marker of decency

Not a bad idea, but doesn't this risk making looting a bit irrelevant? If looting only becomes about, essentially, being a bit greedy? There's a difference between something being an optional part of gameplay and something being rendered pointless by the introduction of a new game mechanic or of different content (that's not quite phrased correctly, but I hope I'm making it clear enough)  I should say, as well, that I only came into this debate after people started suggesting making big changes to the loot/inventory system - so it had already moved on from 'more quests, please!'

From what I remember, however,  I could earn a 'decent sum' by doing quests, looting chests, crates and big boss creatures anyway, and leaving the grunts more or less alone. Towards the end of the game (I'm remembering the Deep Roads onwards, which was the last bit I went to as part of the 'gathering allies' main quest), I was leaving a lot of stuff behind but still had a fair amount of cash. I've never read the money-making guides or anything, but I never got the impression I was struggling financially past the very beginning of the game. I was only playing on normal difficulty, does this make a difference in any way? Also, I should point out that, apart from a few exceptions (Wade, Sandal, maybe a magic dagger), I don't tend to kit myself out using merchants very much. I like using things I find much better.  

I've just checked a couple of epilogue saves. Two characters (Grace and Erin) HNF rogues of a good (ish) alignment (what can I say? I like routine :happy:). Grace, my first Origins playthrough, looted pretty ruthlessly throughout, but missed out on loads of quests (many of the merc company ones, the whole rogue quest line in Denerim, the end Mages' Collective quest), ended up fully kitted out in tier 6/7 (one lower tier for sentimental reasons) items with some more powerful things in inventory, and 79 gold. Character two (Erin) completed most if not all quests and jobs, was a fair bit more selective in looting and was similarly kitted out in high-end gear (actually a bit better equipped, as I bought a few more bits and pieces from merchants this time around). Ended with 75 gold. I know I'm not the best at exploring every money-making avenue, but there just wasn't a huge difference for me.

Sorry for wall of text. 

[hangmans tree]

AllThatJazz wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

It should be evenly matched. Quests and jobs to earn decent sum, but leave a margin for some looting if you want the cases filled to the brim (to complement each other). And when you're a scav, you may earn excessive funds (by looting everything in sight), going beyond the marker of decency

Not a bad idea, but doesn't this risk making looting a bit irrelevant? If looting only becomes about, essentially, being a bit greedy? There's a difference between something being an optional part of gameplay and something being rendered pointless by the introduction of a new game mechanic or of different content (that's not quite phrased correctly, but I hope I'm making it clear enough)  I should say, as well, that I only came into this debate after people started suggesting making big changes to the loot/inventory system - so it had already moved on from 'more quests, please!'

From what I remember, however,  I could earn a 'decent sum' by doing quests, looting chests, crates and big boss creatures anyway, and leaving the grunts more or less alone. Towards the end of the game (I'm remembering the Deep Roads onwards, which was the last bit I went to as part of the 'gathering allies' main quest), I was leaving a lot of stuff behind but still had a fair amount of cash. I've never read the money-making guides or anything, but I never got the impression I was struggling financially past the very beginning of the game. I was only playing on normal difficulty, does this make a difference in any way? Also, I should point out that, apart from a few exceptions (Wade, Sandal, maybe a magic dagger), I don't tend to kit myself out using merchants very much. I like using things I find much better.  

I've just checked a couple of epilogue saves. Two characters (Grace and Erin) HNF rogues of a good (ish) alignment (what can I say? I like routine :happy:). Grace, my first Origins playthrough, looted pretty ruthlessly throughout, but missed out on loads of quests (many of the merc company ones, the whole rogue quest line in Denerim, the end Mages' Collective quest), ended up fully kitted out in tier 6/7 (one lower tier for sentimental reasons) items with some more powerful things in inventory, and 79 gold. Character two (Erin) completed most if not all quests and jobs, was a fair bit more selective in looting and was similarly kitted out in high-end gear (actually a bit better equipped, as I bought a few more bits and pieces from merchants this time around). Ended with 75 gold. I know I'm not the best at exploring every money-making avenue, but there just wasn't a huge difference for me.

Sorry for wall of text. 

That's why I want it both constitute to the idea. Right now in given example (prev post) quests take about one sixth of all gold available. Thats really low in my opinion

PS I'd reply in lenght but I gotta leave office in few minutes...

[Lotion Soronarr]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

It is non-constructive if it negatively impacts gameplay of others. You might not agree, but a system needs to be an improvement and not an improvement for some and at the same time a step back to others.

That's not the definition of constructive.
Improvement to some, a step back to otehrs? EVERY system or proposal is like that.

I love looting. The more the better. I was suprised that it wasn't my main income source, though. I always thought that this was the case.

No. There aren't a zillion games out there which feature looting. They have been replaced by a zillion games that try to please the lazy action game crowd.

Tehre's a whoel see of games with tons of drops and looting..From Diablo and it's clones to various MMO's and rpgs. Loot, loot, loot, loot. We're practicly conditioned liek rab rats to pick everything that isn't nailed down. That's why there's so many magical items areound, thet they aren't magical anymore. EVERY SINGLE ITEM on my party members was magical..Magic rare? Magic special? I couldn't take 2 steps wihout tripping over a dragonbone sword. F*** that.

THAT ruins MY enjoyment.


That's why a few games that did differently were so refreshing. Not lazyness, but focusing on more important aspect and atmosphere. RPG's arne't about looting - they're about a epic adventure, about story, about characters.

I loved The Witcher - and not because it's for hte lazy or action-y (as you would put it), but because it focused on what is important. Geralt carried a reasonable amount of equipment. He didn't waste time lugging a dozen lootes swords. Magical items were rare (BG1 did this right too). Tehre were only 2-3 armors in the whole game. And I loved it!

Quality >>>>>>>>> Quantity. In every way. Regardless if it's loot, levels or wahtever.

And I am getting enough of the shooter-type-like crowd that wants to get rid good game mechanics just to satisfy their hack and slash urge. This is supposed to be an RPG and one of the things RPGs are about is looting, trading, and customizing the outfit of your henchmen. I will be opposed by anything that even remotely smells like an ME2 solution. One can streamline loot and the inventory for those who don't like it, but I really wouldn't care if it stayed the way it was. I am willing to think about solutions for those who don't like it, but I certainly don't want it removed. I don't have any respect for those that even try to propose that. The genre has been dumbed down enough.

Emphasis. the mechanics was not good to begin with. Equiping your party memebrs? Finding a few magical items ehre and there, buying new ones? sure, why not.
Endless looting? No. Not fun and not really what RPG's are supposed to be about. It's not a loot simulator.

Think about this - let's say that dead drops is almost completley removed. Enemeis almost never drop anything. You get new armor/weapons by buying it or finding in ruins, or stealing it from others.

Does this remove party customization? Hardly. You still get new armor and weapons and items - only where you get them and how is more logical and more limited.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 12 octobre 2010 - 01:02 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

dbankier wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

No. There aren't a zillion games out there which feature looting. They have been replaced by a zillion games that try to please the lazy action game crowd.

Diablo and its clones. Hack and slash action RPGs that feature an excessive amount of looting - there were far more of these released in the last 10-15 years than traditional RPGs. The trend to have everywhere swamped with loot was not pioneered by traditional RPGs, it comes from monty haul hack and slash games like Diablo.

This can't be emphasized enough.

In golden age RPGs, loot was actually fairly sparce. This is due to it being based off of PnP RPGs which tend to not be very loot based. You pick up magic items every now and then, but for the most part looting is a very secondary part of the game if that. If players loot anything, chances are that something is special.

[Leonia]

I don't understand why someone would NEED so much gold, most of the best gear in the game is obtained via questing or looting. What the heck did we need much gold for in Origins except the occasional gift items, potions, and the occasional shiny armour suit here or there. Junk loot is junk loot. It didn't add anything but the mini-game of "manage your inventory". Sigh, I get that enough when I play LotRO or EQII every other day, I don't want to make 50 trips to a merchant in a single-player game to get rid of all the crap that I will NEVER use. Either tone down the amount of junk loot or give us an unlimited amout of inventory space. I could careless about making money in a game where I am not expected to spend much in the first place.

Modifié par leonia42, 12 octobre 2010 - 01:12 .

[DPB]

Lotion: I agree completely, especially on BG1's loot system. Like I said, excessive looting is not a hallmark of traditional RPGs. I find it a little strange to say the least that toning down the amount of loot is somehow seen as a convention from action games and dumbing down, when three of the most highly regarded CRPGs of all time (Ultima VII, Baldur's Gate and PST) had pretty sparse loot.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Indeed. Most of my party in BG1 used normal (but finely crafted) weapons at the end. Only Xan and my PC used magical weapons IIRC.

[AllThatJazz]

dbankier wrote...

Lotion: I agree completely, especially on BG1's loot system. Like I said, excessive looting is not a hallmark of traditional RPGs. I find it a little strange to say the least that toning down the amount of loot is somehow seen as a convention from action games and dumbing down, when three of the most highly regarded CRPGs of all time (Ultima VII, Baldur's Gate and PST) had pretty sparse loot.

Really? BG? I seem to remember having more than enough stuff in both Baldurs' Gate and Torment. Every kobald would drop arrows or a dagger, every goblin a sword and shield. Looting the xvart village or the gnoll fortress was waaaaay more painful than in anything in Origins. And everyone in my party had one magic item at least. 

Besides, if there's an idea of a complete economy change to a low-magic, low money, low loot world where the merchants don't sell anything particularly wonderful, there isn't a crafting rune around every corner and you have to work/explore incredibly hard to find even the most minor of magical items - then oooooooohhhh, yes please. I'm that masochistic. As I've said earlier, some of my fave characters to play have been 'survivalist' types in just such a situation. But keeping other stuff largely the same, just changing looting/the value or amount of loot? That creates a disparity I don't like 

[Lotion Soronarr]

^

Exactly. Enemies dropped stuff they carried, and it was mostly worthless. I never bothered picking up regular shortbows or swords (unless my swords broke..iron rot and all that), and the magical stuff was really rare.



It was perfect.

[AllThatJazz]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

^
Exactly. Enemies dropped stuff they carried, and it was mostly worthless. I never bothered picking up regular shortbows or swords (unless my swords broke..iron rot and all that), and the magical stuff was really rare.

It was perfect.

Sorry, how is that totally different to Origins? Most bodies have a bit of gold, and/or a combo of weapon, ammo, armour, potion, or material they might have used to craft something with (some herbs or metal shards etc) or occasionally something they'd probably be going to sell (silk carpet or whatnot). Yes, the weapons etc level scale - which I don't massively like (but that's a different debate), but they usually aren't magical. Not on non-boss types, anyway. A lot of the time in Origins I didn't bother picking things up cos they were really mundane - it's not a problem that they were there for others to pick up, though.

Sorry edited to be less wrong!

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 12 octobre 2010 - 02:12 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

hangmans tree wrote...

Ok, fine.
Now the riddle. Why the quest rewards is only 240gp, and that is some maxed amout? Why other actions give you more than 1000gp? And thats only netto sum. Subtract all the money you have to spend on bribes and the like, invest (some quests) and give if you're not blackhearted greedy bastard. Do you still not see the problem I was talking about?

In the earlier mentioned money making guide you see a list of some quest that can make you at least 240 gold. In addition to that I can remember the following ones: I have seen a noble giving me 50 gold for rescuing his son. I got 40 gold in cash by getting a key from a prisoner. The Blackstone Irregulars gave me 10 gold for doing their final quest (that doesn't include the previous ones). The final quest from K got me 10 as well (again, just for the last one). Collecting a dozen love letters got me 6 gold. Those are just a couple from the top of my head. Some quests give you a ring, or armor, or a weapons, and such. Which you can sel of course. So, that 240 gold looks rather low to me.

Edit: I know what you are getting at, but that's part of the game.

Here is a silly one: A dwarf noble can make twice as much money by selling his or her loot to Gorim.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 12 octobre 2010 - 03:01 .

[DPB]

AllThatJazz wrote...

dbankier wrote...

Lotion: I agree completely, especially on BG1's loot system. Like I said, excessive looting is not a hallmark of traditional RPGs. I find it a little strange to say the least that toning down the amount of loot is somehow seen as a convention from action games and dumbing down, when three of the most highly regarded CRPGs of all time (Ultima VII, Baldur's Gate and PST) had pretty sparse loot.

Really? BG? I seem to remember having more than enough stuff in both Baldurs' Gate and Torment. Every kobald would drop arrows or a dagger, every goblin a sword and shield. Looting the xvart village or the gnoll fortress was waaaaay more painful than in anything in Origins. And everyone in my party had one magic item at least.

The main difference is that most of the loot in BG isn't worth carrying to take back to a merchant and sell. I could pick up, say 30 daggers, but each of those only fetches 1gp each, and you couldn't even sell some items like quarterstaffs. In DAO, the tiered equipment system means that you're always coming across generic equipment that has significant monetary value (the standard heavy chainmail etc) but has very little worth to your characters because in all likelihood they're already outfitted with unique equipment.

In other words, you're penalised more for ignoring items that are no use to you in DAO than you are in BG.

Modifié par dbankier, 12 octobre 2010 - 03:22 .