252 réponses à ce sujet

[the_one_54321]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
I believe that there's also more potential for rich stories, for deeper RPG mechanics, for more choice, and for something even more epic to come.

What does this mean? I ask because we've heard all that same language before and what we were then given was... decidedly not.

I am not here to bash or to point fingers. What I wish to do is to cut through all the marketing and talk about bare bones specifics.

What is "deeper RPG mechanics?" That's one point that is very specifically on my mind.

I don't care what anyone thinks an RPG is or isn't. That term means 100 different things based on 100 different people. What I'm interested in hearing about is what are the bare bones specific features that the players want to see in the next game.

I'll give you an example:
If there is no detachable overhead tactical camera in DAIII, you may as well count out my sale right now. I won't buy DAIII unless it has that feature. It doesn't matter to me if other people think that this feature is RPG or not. It is either in the game or I walk.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 27 mai 2011 - 08:34 .

[abaris]

I can name about two things:

I don't want to be a monkey when playing a fantasy RPG. Cut down on the jumps and flips and for gods sake, get rid of the exploding bodies.

When I play a companion based game, I want to be able to talk to companions - not only when the game feels like it.

Everything else I can't really judge, since these two points in the demo made me decide, DAII wasn't for me.

[Chickenhawked]

"Deeper"? "Epic"? The fact that he can't even come up with decent buzzwords speaks for his inability. He should throw in some "dark" and "mature" too, at this rate.

[Romantiq]

He throws these cool words like epic and rich without knowing what they really even mean.

[upsettingshorts]

Because Sylvius isn't here to, I'll say it.

Mike Laidlaw himself specified that the detach-ability of a camera is what makes it inherently tactical.

Ergo, a lack of detach-ability is less tactical.

And yes, I'd like that back. I don't need the hyper-zoomed out view, but detaching it from the selected character? Kind of a big deal.

[the_one_54321]

Chickenhawked wrote...
...

Romantiq wrote...
...

Not even close to what I'm interested in talking about. Please list some mechanical features that you want to be in/out of the game.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 27 mai 2011 - 08:40 .

[Chickenhawked]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Chickenhawked wrote...
...

Romantiq wrote...
...

Not even close to what I'm interested in talking about. Please list some mechanical features that you want to be in/out of the game.

http://social.biowar.../index/7002407  Done.

[the_one_54321]

Chickenhawked wrote...
http://social.biowar...1/index/7002407  Done.

That's some really nice detailed stuff. But I can't post in that forum.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Because Sylvius isn't here to, I'll say it.

Mike Laidlaw himself specified that the detach-ability of a camera is what makes it inherently tactical.

Ergo, a lack of detach-ability is less tactical.

Mike's exact phrasing was that the detachable camera "the key to tactical play".  Therefore, a game without a detachable camera - like DA2 - isn't tactical at all.

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

I have always felt that the key to tactical play was actually freeing your camera from the character you're controlling to issue precise orders

Source

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 27 mai 2011 - 08:52 .

[the_one_54321]

So you want a detachable camera?

[upsettingshorts]

Yes. They can keep the level of zoom-out that they had in DA2. But I'd like to be able to move the camera. Especially when paused.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Yes. They can keep the level of zoom-out that they had in DA2. But I'd like to be able to move the camera. Especially when paused.

Absolutely.

Even the moveable targetting camera that was shown in the DA2 press demos would be a massive improvement over DA2's release version.  They told us, days before release, after the game went gold, that the detachable targetting camera was in the game.

And then it wasn't.  And they never mentioned it again.

Which was weird.  The auto-attack disappeared from the console versions in exactly the same way, and they we quite vocal in their insistence that its exclusion has been an accident, and that they would patch it back in (which they did).

Does their different reaction to the missing camera mode tells us something?  Was that exclusion not an accident?  Or was it just not something they could fix with a patch?

We don't know, because they won't talk about it.

Now that Mike's back, I think I'll ask him.

[the_one_54321]

I am also very interested in hearing what people think about the dialog interactions.

And not just the people that agree with me.

Good discussions come primarily from disagreements. If some people hated the radial menu and others thought it worked out well, it will be by talking about that disagreement that further improvements can be made.

And there are many other aspects of the game that relate to "deeper RPG mechanics."

While I would actually prefer that people completely ignore the term "RPG" I would still like to hear what they want and don't want included in the game in relation to that term. Someone above mentioned controlling the companion equipment. I could certainly live with that, but I could also live without it. One thing I could not live without is a deep, detailed and interactive level-up system for my character and the companions.

[ItsTheTruth]

The marketing department hasn't come up yet with catchy slogans for DA3, to repeat in every single interview and podcast. A few suggestions:

- Make your own weapons like Batman, fight like Thor!
- I want something awesome to happen even when I'm not pressing any button!
- Better than DA2!

[the_one_54321]

That's not helping. At all.

[upsettingshorts]

I thought DA2's VO/paraphrase/wheel/icons was good.

However I am not averse to a compromise solution to show the full line, perhaps upon highlighting a paraphrase for a couple of seconds, the resulting full line appears. However, I would be against the exclusive combination of VO and full line, for a number of reasons. Considering BioWare's statements regarding the future of voiced protagonists, I would therefore support trying to figure out ways to improve the effectiveness of the paraphrases and/or pursue compromises such as the one I described.

One other complaint I did have though was that often I'd get a "STAR" symbol dialogue option and had no idea where I acquired it, nor could I go and look it up.  It just seemed to appear out of nowhere.  That was... not helpful.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 27 mai 2011 - 09:05 .

[Epona222]

Yes to either the ability to zoom out to something resembling iso view or at least detachable camera - I found placing AoE spells in DA2 more hit and miss than it ought to be, because it was difficult to see the area that the spell would cover even when zoomed out as far as possible, and in some cases hard to target them at an appropriate spot on the ground, when not targetting one particular foe.

If we're going to have AoE spells, we really need to be able to see the battlefield and the area of the spell from a higher angle in order to tactically cast them at the most effective location.

[AlanC9]

Epona222 wrote...

If we're going to have AoE spells, we really need to be able to see the battlefield and the area of the spell from a higher angle in order to tactically cast them at the most effective location.

Or we could just accept the uncertainty. I don't know the exact explosion radius or target location of some of my weapons in a shooter, but I still use them.

Edit: not a serious suggestion, really. My liking for chaos in my tactical-level games is pretty far outside the norm for RPG players.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 mai 2011 - 09:29 .

[the_one_54321]

AlanC9 wrote...
I don't know the exact explosion radius or target location of some of my weapons in a shooter, but I still use them.

Well maybe not the first time, but after you've been playing you should be darn well acquainted with it!

[AlanC9]

Even though I've got a pretty good idea, I still can't place them exactly.

Actually, I've been playing DAO recently with a mouse with no scroll wheel, and I've found that I don't miss the iso view at all.

[In Exile]

the_one_54321 wrote...
I'll give you an example:
If there is no detachable overhead tactical camera in DAIII, you may as well count out my sale right now. I won't buy DAIII unless it has that feature. It doesn't matter to me if other people think that this feature is RPG or not. It is either in the game or I walk.

Shorts already mentioned this, but I would actually prefer a detachable camera. Reason being, the top down perspective is very restrictive because it greatly reduces field of view. DA:O usually forced to to rapidly swith between top down (because it unlocked the camera from one character so you can aim AOEs easily) and OTS (so I can actually see where the enemies are).

One thing that's important, tactically, is to be able to plan ahead. I think that for that reason we need changes to the magical system to allow us to physically alter the world. Barries to stop enemy movement, traps that explode when enemies cross over them. Force Mage is my favourite specialization for that reason. I think this is the direction that the magic system needs to go in.

the_one_54321 wrote...
While I would actually prefer that
people completely ignore the term "RPG" I would still like to hear what
they want and don't want included in the game in relation to that term.
Someone above mentioned controlling the companion equipment. I could
certainly live with that, but I could also live without it. One thing I
could not live without is a deep, detailed and interactive level-up
system for my character and the companions.

I like unique apperances. But I like the sense of progression from equipping characters. My solution would be for each character (except for the PC who would have multiple choices) to have their own style. There would be rogue armours, warrior armours, mage armours but when you equip them instead of the armour having the same model it would have a reskin of the unique model for the NPC.

I think this would be a solid compromise between unique apperance and customizability.

Upsettingshorts wrote..
However I am not averse to a
compromise solution to show the full line, perhaps upon highlighting a
paraphrase for a couple of seconds, the resulting full line appears.
However, I would be against the exclusive combination of VO and full
line, for a number of reasons. Considering BioWare's statements
regarding the future of voiced protagonists, I would therefore support
trying to figure out ways to improve the effectiveness of the
paraphrases and/or pursue compromises such as the one I described.

One
other complaint I did have though was that often I'd get a
"STAR" symbol dialogue option and had no idea where I acquired it, nor
could I go and look it up.  It just seemed to appear out of nowhere. 
That was... not helpful.

The star symbol was supposed to be a ''special effect'' which is useless as a description. It's basically the hit for surprise button, comparatively. But it was a lot like using the ME-style paraphrase again.

I think one thing Bioware needs to change is the ''never use the same words in the paraphrase and full-line'' rule. I think the speech could be novel (and so not redudant) without having to hear a completely new sentence.

That way, it can be like... the paraphrase is the gist, or half-finished thought, and the speech is still novel but not wildly disimilar such that it makes you think someone else is speaking.

[Davasar]

Racial choices and the different reactions from NPCs based off that choice.

This among, many....many other things lacking in DA2.

But these and many other things taken out for "streamlining" (read: Game Devolution) have gone the way of the Dodo.

Right EA...?

Modifié par Davasar, 27 mai 2011 - 09:51 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Or we could just accept the uncertainty. I don't know the exact explosion radius or target location of some of my weapons in a shooter, but I still use them.

The targeting reticles and movable camera are just a proxy, I think, for depth-perception.  Since we're using 2D displays, we need some other way to judge the position of things in the world.  being able to move the camera, or see targetted enemis highlighted, or something, simply makes up for the loss of perception of depth.

I'm inclined to agree that we don't need strict little circles and cones to tell us where are spells are going.  I was perfectly content not to have them in BG, for example.  but I also don't mind them being there, and I know that a lot of people really like them.

But we need a detachable camera or an isometric view, or some other means to look around and determine the relative position of the creatures and objects around us.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I like unique apperances. But I like the sense of progression from equipping characters. My solution would be for each character (except for the PC who would have multiple choices) to have their own style. There would be rogue armours, warrior armours, mage armours but when you equip them instead of the armour having the same model it would have a reskin of the unique model for the NPC.

I think this would be a solid compromise between unique apperance and customizability.

I don't really like that idea, because then we still don't get to choose what they look like.

I would much rather a system like the Diversified Follower Armour mod that allows us to equip ordinary armour on the companions, but also populates the world with companion-specific armour.  So, like with Morrigan in DAO, she can wear any mage robe we choose, and that mage robe has a fixed appearance, but there are also robes unique to her which she can wear to maintain her particular appearance.

That way we get to decide.  And it saves the designers from having to create a different model or texture for every companion for every different kind of gear.