159 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Yeah, whenever I hear someone use the term "evolution" in game design, I remind myself that alot of branches of the genetic tree of life end in evolutionary dead ends which die out completely and horribly. I really hate buzz-words.

[Firky]

Uh. Didn't you just buy some kind of magic licence in the government district?

[Yrkoon]

LeBurns wrote...

The thing called DA2 recoiled me so far back that I actually had to go to GOG.com and buy Baldur's Gate 2 and replay it.

So I'm playing along and I'm in a city that forbids magic, Athkatla.  So forgetting this I cast a spell or two in town during some fights.  Low and behold the Cowled Wizards show up and tell me NO NO and attack.

So I started thinking well what would have really happened in Kirkwall if magic was actually forbidden there (by more than just word of mouth).  Would the game even be playable?  Waves and waves of enemies and of course you are going to cast some spells, be them either offensive or defensive.  What if everytime you did 20 (5 per 4 waves of course) Templars came after you ... while you are still fighting the enemies that are spawning in.  While maybe more realistic in a city that is full of Templars and forbids magic use, but is it impossible?  Would there even be any Templars left in town after Act 2?  Curious.

Right.  Forgotten in all this is how, in BG2, you could go straight to the government district and purchase a casting  licence allowing you to cast spells  openly.  You could also fight the cowled wizards and after 5 fights with them, they leave you alone for the rest of the game.

They could easily have done this in DA2, but what would be the point?

[Zcorck]

Firky wrote...

Uh. Didn't you just buy some kind of magic licence in the government district?

Yup, think it was 500 gold for the license.
Or just slaughter enough CWs till their most powerful members arrive, after that they won't harass you anymore.

Edit: @Yrkoon: Immersion would be my guess.

Modifié par Zcorck, 08 avril 2011 - 12:44 .

[Fhaileas]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

I don't think we're in Baldur's Gate anymore Toto...

BALDUR'S GATE? THIS.  IS.  KIRKWAAAAAAAAAAAAAALL!!!



YEAAAAAAAAAAAAH! 

[LeBurns]

Yrkoon wrote...

Right.  Forgotten in all this is how, in BG2, you could go straight to the government district and purchase a casting  licence allowing you to cast spells  openly.  You could also fight the cowled wizards and after 5 fights with them, they leave you alone for the rest of the game.

They could easily have done this in DA2, but what would be the point?

Well the point would be that it would kinda make sense.  Is that not even allowed in RPG's anymore?

[astrallite]

LeBurns wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Right.  Forgotten in all this is how, in BG2, you could go straight to the government district and purchase a casting  licence allowing you to cast spells  openly.  You could also fight the cowled wizards and after 5 fights with them, they leave you alone for the rest of the game.

They could easily have done this in DA2, but what would be the point?

Well the point would be that it would kinda make sense.  Is that not even allowed in RPG's anymore?

It's not allowed in Bioware games according to Yrkoon.

[LeBurns]

astrallite wrote...

It's not allowed in Bioware games according to Yrkoon.

Ah!  Well I guess if it's not fun either that makes it a double fail.

[Alelsa]

DraCZeQQ wrote...
Then its a BAD DESIGN, either of the lore, the story or the class ... if they must constantly break their lore and logics of the world they designed to make the game actually FUN ... well its just a sign of really BAD DESIGN!

EDIT: its the same story as TAINT, everyone seems to be pretty much immune to it, except for cutscenes! again BAD DESIGN ... I dont find breaking THEIR OWN rules for the sake of FUN as nothing else then a BAD DESIGN! 

I have two words for you: Games Workshop (and the things you quoted are the precise reason I stopped playing 40K)

[Mantaal]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I was never a fan of the attacks in BG2. It just kind of felt like the Cowled wizards were really weak, since they couldn't throw everything they had to catch the "apostate". The idea was good, but I never really liked it.

In DA2, it would've been the same. Encounters just for encounters sake would've been pointless. If you had been revealed as an apostate to the point of templars attacking you randomly, there's no way you could have an estate. The templars would've seized it. And killed you. I don't believe for a second that Hawke could survive the onslaught of the entire templar order in Kirkwall.

Well you missed the point i think. The important thing is not that Templars attack you. the important thing is realism. Just dont cast Bloodmagic in the middle of 20 Templars and 1000 civilians. They might not like it.

In BG2 they did not attack you right on. They just tolt you its not allowed and left you. If they catch you a 2nd time Casting magic they attack you. Its not a Quest or something. Its a "hey maybe you should not do that because there are rules in this city".

[iamthespark]

I think the problem is that 90% of the game takes place in Kirkwall - so if you werent able to cast a spell for 90% of the game, the mage class would be useless and the game wouldn't be as fun.

[LeBurns]

iamthespark wrote...

I think the problem is that 90% of the game takes place in Kirkwall - so if you werent able to cast a spell for 90% of the game, the mage class would be useless and the game wouldn't be as fun.

That's the point.  Why would anyone with ANY common sense make such a game?  Am I supposed to pretend to be that stupid?

Modifié par LeBurns, 08 avril 2011 - 01:46 .

[gotthammer]

iamthespark wrote...

I think the problem is that 90% of the game takes place in Kirkwall - so if you werent able to cast a spell for 90% of the game, the mage class would be useless and the game wouldn't be as fun.

It's a dark fantasy, right? Then give serious consequences: the story is about a 'rise to power', right? So if Hawke is seen casting spells within the city, have him exiled out of Kirkwall and have his 'rise to power' from there.
IMHO, that'd be more interesting than what they have now. It'd raise questions like, 'how will he become champion now?', or 'will he turn to blood magic by making a deal w/ a demon?'...stuff like that.
That and it would definitely make the game more replayable.

[ransompendragon]

LeBurns wrote...

iamthespark wrote...

I think the problem is that 90% of the game takes place in Kirkwall - so if you werent able to cast a spell for 90% of the game, the mage class would be useless and the game wouldn't be as fun.

That's the point.  Why would anyone with ANY common sense make such a game?  Am I supposed to pretend to be that stupid?

Yes, yes, you are.

But since the games have evolved to be so streamlined you probably haven't a clue how to properly role play stupid!

At least in my case that must be the problem. (Right, if it isn't fun I must be doing it wrong?) Or wait, maybe we are stupid for expecting a good game? Going back to the motivational posters thread. Much easier than thinking.

[Alelsa]

iamthespark wrote...

I think the problem is that 90% of the game takes place in Kirkwall - so if you werent able to cast a spell for 90% of the game, the mage class would be useless and the game wouldn't be as fun.

The answer to that is to ensure the game takes you to areas the Templars can't police for most combat scenes, such as whatever villages and hamlets sit outside Kirkwall's walls, the sewers, private dwellings and business properties, ruins in nearby forests, etc.   Also there could be quests to get permission to cast spells (or at least to get the Templars to turn a blind eye).   Its all about making things like that work as part of the game, rather than thinking of it as getting in the way. 

[Taura-Tierno]

Mantaal wrote...

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I was never a fan of the attacks in BG2. It just kind of felt like the Cowled wizards were really weak, since they couldn't throw everything they had to catch the "apostate". The idea was good, but I never really liked it.

In DA2, it would've been the same. Encounters just for encounters sake would've been pointless. If you had been revealed as an apostate to the point of templars attacking you randomly, there's no way you could have an estate. The templars would've seized it. And killed you. I don't believe for a second that Hawke could survive the onslaught of the entire templar order in Kirkwall.

Well you missed the point i think. The important thing is not that Templars attack you. the important thing is realism. Just dont cast Bloodmagic in the middle of 20 Templars and 1000 civilians. They might not like it.

In BG2 they did not attack you right on. They just tolt you its not allowed and left you. If they catch you a 2nd time Casting magic they attack you. Its not a Quest or something. Its a "hey maybe you should not do that because there are rules in this city".

I'm all for removing the Blood Mage spec for the sake of realism, since ordinary people seem prone to not report mages, but blood mages is something different ...  

But casting ordinary spells should also attract the templars very quickly. I wouldn't want them to remove the mage class for the sake of realism, though. Sure, they could've thrown in some minor explanation for why Hawke isn't apprehended, but short of being a gray warden there doesn't seem to be a reason for a mage to be allowed to walk freely, not in Kirkwall, so it just feels like any such explanation would've felt pretty empty. So therefore, I don't really mind that particular lack of realism, because I'd rather have the mages. 

I still didn't find those encounters in BG2 realistic. The first few, sure. But after a while, you'd think the Cowled Wizads would start sending more soldiers and more wizards, to the point of overwhelming the protagonist. Feels like that would've happened in the Athkatla. But in a game, it wouldn't work, because it would kind of break the game to introduce unbeatable battles that cannot be avoided. The same goes for DA2, in my opinion. If the templars should care about Hawke casting spells, then they should care to the point of either driving him to flee Kirkwall, or dying, or being captured.

Just hacking away at a few templars every now and then would feel even more unrealistic, so I'd rather they skip out on the entire subject. 

Yes, it would have been great with some solid, perfectly logical reason for Hawke not to be apprehended. But I can still sacrifice some realism for an important piece of gameplay (the mage class). 

Modifié par Taura-Tierno, 08 avril 2011 - 06:37 .

[S_I_a_D]

Taura-Tierno wrote...
 Encounters just for encounters sake would've been pointless.

...and yet DA2 is already full of "encounters for encounters' sake". Replacing just a few of those with anti-mage attacks surely wouldn't hurt.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I'm all for removing the Blood Mage spec for the sake of realism, since ordinary people seem prone to not report mages, but blood mages is something different ...  

But casting ordinary spells should also attract the templars very quickly. I wouldn't want them to remove the mage class for the sake of realism, though. Sure, they could've thrown in some minor explanation for why Hawke isn't apprehended, but short of being a gray warden there doesn't seem to be a reason for a mage to be allowed to walk freely, not in Kirkwall, so it just feels like any such explanation would've felt pretty empty. So therefore, I don't really mind that particular lack of realism, because I'd rather have the mages. 

I still didn't find those encounters in BG2 realistic. The first few, sure. But after a while, you'd think the Cowled Wizads would start sending more soldiers and more wizards, to the point of overwhelming the protagonist. Feels like that would've happened in the Athkatla. But in a game, it wouldn't work, because it would kind of break the game to introduce unbeatable battles that cannot be avoided. The same goes for DA2, in my opinion. If the templars should care about Hawke casting spells, then they should care to the point of either driving him to flee Kirkwall, or dying, or being captured.

Just hacking away at a few templars every now and then would feel even more unrealistic, so I'd rather they skip out on the entire subject. 

Yes, it would have been great with some solid, perfectly logical reason for Hawke not to be apprehended. But I can still sacrifice some realism for an important piece of gameplay (the mage class). 

Well, then don't get yourself in that position.
Avoiding fights with templars unless absolutely necessary is only logical for an apostate.

If you're complaining that actively fighting templars eventually leads to the player being overwhlmed..really.. You might as well complain that if Hawke declared war on the whole world, he should be able to win, cause loosing isn't fun....

[KalDurenik]

This is one of the things that bother me... With the truckloads of other stuff. Even in "old" games there was no real problem creating a system like this. Hell there are lots of modern games that have a system that is very close to this.

And like someone else said: I played as a blood mage. And everytime i encountered blood magic it was like "Blood magic!? Oh noes evil doers!" Anyway i guess its not that shocking when the game have a book long list of flaws.

[Sabriana]

I waited, and waited and waited for someone, anyone to call Hawke on the carpet for using magic. Being capable of reasoning and logical thinking, I really thought that playing a mage would have its own repercussions/rewards. After all, the heavy tension between mages and templars is harped upon very early on.

Nothing ever happened. MageHawke tosses spells in the Gallows, traipses around with staff and robe, and never needs to hide the fact that she is indeed and illegal and active apostate. So what happens to make things even more unbelievable?

A templar (and one who really should know better for various reasons) tells mageHawke that "mages are not like you and me." Wait! Whut? o_O

Don't give me the "money and status" excuse. The Arl and Arlessa of
Redcliffe had both, plus the kid was a blood relation to Rowan. It
didn't make a lick of difference, because no matter who you are, if
your kid is a mage, then off to the circle with him/her.

Modifié par Sabriana, 08 avril 2011 - 07:11 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

But...Hawke..he has botton Awesome...NoooOOOooooobody tells him what to do!

[Taura-Tierno]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I'm all for removing the Blood Mage spec for the sake of realism, since ordinary people seem prone to not report mages, but blood mages is something different ...  

But casting ordinary spells should also attract the templars very quickly. I wouldn't want them to remove the mage class for the sake of realism, though. Sure, they could've thrown in some minor explanation for why Hawke isn't apprehended, but short of being a gray warden there doesn't seem to be a reason for a mage to be allowed to walk freely, not in Kirkwall, so it just feels like any such explanation would've felt pretty empty. So therefore, I don't really mind that particular lack of realism, because I'd rather have the mages. 

I still didn't find those encounters in BG2 realistic. The first few, sure. But after a while, you'd think the Cowled Wizads would start sending more soldiers and more wizards, to the point of overwhelming the protagonist. Feels like that would've happened in the Athkatla. But in a game, it wouldn't work, because it would kind of break the game to introduce unbeatable battles that cannot be avoided. The same goes for DA2, in my opinion. If the templars should care about Hawke casting spells, then they should care to the point of either driving him to flee Kirkwall, or dying, or being captured.

Just hacking away at a few templars every now and then would feel even more unrealistic, so I'd rather they skip out on the entire subject. 

Yes, it would have been great with some solid, perfectly logical reason for Hawke not to be apprehended. But I can still sacrifice some realism for an important piece of gameplay (the mage class). 

Well, then don't get yourself in that position.
Avoiding fights with templars unless absolutely necessary is only logical for an apostate.

If you're complaining that actively fighting templars eventually leads to the player being overwhlmed..really.. You might as well complain that if Hawke declared war on the whole world, he should be able to win, cause loosing isn't fun....

Realistically, it would be impossible for an apostate Hawke to not get in that position, unless he's just supposed to stand around and do nothing. All other apostates seem to be pretty good at laying low, not running around using magic everywhere. Not being able to actually use magic in battles would make the game unplayable for a mage Hawke. Or at least turn it into a fundamentally different game, since you'd have to change pretty much every quest, which I suppose comes down to time and money. I mean, not even DA:O had a different game for mages. Or for the different Origins at all, just an hour's worth of different content at the start of the game.

So, if you cannot make a fundamentally different game, you'd have to cut the mage class for realism. That would make the anti-mage part of the game "well-designed", since this particular problem wouldn't exist. But that would hardly be popular.

[F-C]

comparing to DAO is a bit silly as in DAO you were a grey warden, who for all intents was above the law and given free reign to do as you will.

in DA2 though, you are not a special elite person who is above the law, infact you start out as nothing more than a basic slum-dog and it just doesnt make any sense.


if the authors want to depict a world where magic is taboo they need to put a little more effort into it than letting you cast spells in front of guards, or even in the chantry itself, with zero consequence.

[Sabriana]

F-C wrote...

comparing to DAO is a bit silly as in DAO you were a grey warden, who for all intents was above the law and given free reign to do as you will.

in DA2 though, you are not a special elite person who is above the law, infact you start out as nothing more than a basic slum-dog and it just doesnt make any sense.


if the authors want to depict a world where magic is taboo they need to put a little more effort into it than letting you cast spells in front of guards, or even in the chantry itself, with zero consequence.

Indeed. I don't own Awakening, but I did watch a friend play it. Doesn't the Warden save Anders from the templar woman by conscripting him? And doesn't the templar woman go against all rules (attempting it "on the sly" and in hiding) when trying to arrest him anyways and earns death for it?

[Stegoceras]

It would have been as simple to implement as having a influential templar approach you in a cutscene and taking a hefty bribe so that he will use his influence to make other templars look away whenever you do magic under their eyes.

That should take little time to program and implement into the game, but would have swayed a lot of nay-sayers, you wouldn't even have to add a choice into it, just a cutscene (I mean when did you ever get an important choice) Beyond that it sounds a bit of a lame solution, but I'm sure any developer at Bioware could have come up with a better option than this within their lunch breaks to solve this.

Modifié par Stegoceras, 08 avril 2011 - 10:25 .