randName wrote...
Obviously I'm in the camp that want any choice you did have in DA:O and DA2 to stand in DA3, but failing that the broken choices should either be minor elements or elements that you can quickly disregard - as you can kill Imoen in the dungeon at the start of BG2 making her warp off (and then you can finish it by killing her again in the Asylum) - this is an acceptable intrusion into DA3. That said I'll drop that and continue with the related topic of choice within the game.
Fair enough, nothing wrong with asking your choices to be respected and, if not possible, make it make sense. Agreed.
randName wrote...
They really should try to give us more meanigful choices, just like being able to skip the end quest for Anders felt good, more options of a similar nature should be present in the game.
And being kind, jovial or angry should change more than it does, if not they might as well just give us a continue button, since now all it does is that it forces us to constantly reinforce our mannarism while giving us no actual choices.
I like the 3 styles as such, but just want more variation when you use them.
I think that the 3 styles isn't a bad idea and I agree that this should be expanded.
What many people don't realise is that this is actually adapted from the Alpha Protocol system of the "three JB's".
In each conversation, you could choose your tone and dialog inspired by the three J.B's. James Bond (Suave), Jack Bauer (Agressive) and Jason Bourne (Professional). Using a particular tone over one another changes how your character reacts and how NPCs react to you. Certain NPCs like certain tones, and dislike others according to their own personalities.
You can roughly guess how similiar this is to Dragon Age 2's system.
Just like the influence system, Obsidian creates the innovation, and Bioware gets the credit.
But yes, it forces you to play in character, and to use a Laidlaw quote, it rewards you for being consistent. Though Alpha Protocol also rewarded you for being inconsistent. You were a spy, and unpredictability (at least externally) was a good thing.
What would be nicer is if these tones correlated to different ways to complete quests. While this is an obvious point, Dragon Age 2 rarely provides choices in choosing how to complete quests.
I think that using certain dominant tones should either open up, or close down, certain ways to complete quests. For example, if you have a character who is constantly aggressive, why would he be able to talk his way out of problems?
Similarly, if you have a "witty" or casual character, you should be able to talk enemies and prevent combat from happening.
Having a professional, or diplomatic character for example, would work really well with merchants and authority figures. So quests involving those types of NPCs should yield better rewards.
Yeah. Depth is the key.
randName wrote...
I'd also prefer less of a tasklist when doing missions, and never when it comes to talking with companions, as I want some sort of exploration left.
I'm not sure what you mean here, can you elaborate?
randName wrote...
A more open world, at least not one closed off by constant circular narrow path and reused levels ad naseum.
The re-used assets is an obvious one, but I honestly don't think that better exploration is in the cards. Bioware games have always been weak at exploration. While it would be nice and appreciated, I'm not sure how well it would turn out.
randName wrote...
A personal story, and skip the need for GoW and DMC bosses, nor do I want daemons and magic to drive the evil of the world, but people - Merridith would have been a much better character if she wasn't tipped over by an idol, but by her own volition.
The personal story depends on the execution. Mixed on the bosses. From a gameplay perspective, it added some interesting things. From a narrative perspective, it feels a little cheap.
But I don't think those types of bosses are a bad thing if it's done well.
randName wrote...
Combat that feels more real and gritty, less comical and immersion breaking.
Agreed.
randName wrote...
More options to circumvent combat, as in being able to talk to people and have them back off, or killing tons of bandits only makes the game worse, and it doesn't give anything to the game.
Hell yes.
Fallout has a good general theme for this. Or at least people have adapted it to Fallout because it offered so many options.
Action Boy, Stealth Boy, Charisma Boy and Science Boy. That is, to solve quests and problems via combat, stealth, diplomacy or knowledge.
Okay, for a general example, let's take a look at the Hightown mansion quest. The one where you look for the deed/inheritance.
In Dragon Age 2, you slog your way through the level, killing anything and everything in your path.
How about, instead of that, you have multiple ways to complete the quest.
1. You do it like Dragon Age 2, break in and kill everything.
2. You ask Varric to arrange the keys for the mansion to be "misplaced". Or steal them yourself if you are a Rogue. You then can access the mansion through the front door during the day time so there's less guards. This is where you can:
a) Kill them all.
Sneak around the guards, picking door locks and disarming traps and alarms to avoid them seeing you.
3. You ask Isabela or Aveline to arrange a meeting with the noble who owns the mansion. From here you can
a) Persuade him to give you the house/deed using Persuasion skill. Aveline approves, Isabela does not.
Blackmail him into giving you the house/deed using Isabella. Isabela approves, Aveline does not.
c) Intimidate him into giving you the house/deed through violence, either physical or magical depending on class. Neither approves or disapproves, but many comment on it.
Zero change in narrative. There's absolutely no changing to the story.
Now, part 2.
Once you complete the quest in Dragon Age 2, you go to Gamlen/Family and reveal what a scumbag he's been.
Why? Here is where your choices come in.
You arrive home with news. You can:
1. Reveal the truth to the family. This is what happens in Dragon Age 2.
2. Choose to keep the secret of the deed by
a) Lying to everyone that the deed is gone. All that work for nothing, except XP. Sometimes, we have to keep crap options.
Blackmail Gamlen and threaten to reveal his secret unless you receive money and/or fetch quests from him (odd jobs). Carver overhears you, and pissed off, gains lots of rivalry.
c) Give the deed to Carver and let him decide what to do with it. He reads it, gets pissed at Gamlen and beats up the poor fellow. Your family being happy that the issue has closure (minus Gamlen, of course). Carver gains friendship.
Of course, this is just a fancy. And with reality settling in, it's obvious Dragon Age 3 won't have the time for Bioware to develop such depth.
But when we talk about choices in RPGs and when we talk about depth, that is what we mean.
Modifié par mrcrusty, 25 avril 2011 - 12:35 .
Retour en haut
