236 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

I agree with the previous poster about having class specialization be tied to in game decisions. Having the Arcane Warrior class be unlocked by finding the soul gem in the Brecilyan Ruins was brilliant.

Having your NPC companions teach classes to you once you became "besties" was okay... but a little overplayed. I mean, one class doing it would be okay (like Morrigan being the only Shapeshifter you ever actually talk to, this makes sense) but every character but Wynne and Sten doing it? That's just a little overboard. I mean, don't we run across enough Crows in DAO to have one of them teach us the ropes?

All that aside, I think the overall suggestions on here are good. While not all of them are easily attainable, at least Bioware should have a good "To Do List" for DA3 or even a DA2 expansion.

[Foolsfolly]

I agree with the previous poster about having class specialization be tied to in game decisions. Having the Arcane Warrior class be unlocked by finding the soul gem in the Brecilyan Ruins was brilliant.

I'd like thing to impact the game a bit more. Everyone points to Blood Mage and Templar first but Bard's more interesting to me.

Bards are spies. They charm, sing, tell stories, and are masters of the clandestine. They should get dialogue options unique to them. They should be able to manipulate others better (like a class that allows you to be Bhelen).

Assassin which makes you able to actually be an Assassin.

These things would be tough to implement properly, but the rewards in replay value alone would be high.

[Flashing Steel]

Foolsfolly wrote...

I'd like thing to impact the game a bit more. Everyone points to Blood Mage and Templar first but Bard's more interesting to me.

Bards are spies. They charm, sing, tell stories, and are masters of the clandestine. They should get dialogue options unique to them. They should be able to manipulate others better (like a class that allows you to be Bhelen).

Assassin which makes you able to actually be an Assassin.

These things would be tough to implement properly, but the rewards in replay value alone would be high.

I agree.

To add to what i'd like to see...

- Cities that are full of life! I can't help but look at assassins creed and think why did whoever developed Kirkwall think 'yeah, that's awesome!' when it's totally void of the bussling, noise and interaction a real city would have. Makes me question whether the Kirkwall developers have seen a real city. 

- I'm all for some branching with in the storyline too, give the player some room to really dig in and do some role-playing. Not only that but it would do wonders for replay value.

- The specializations in DA2 i felt were just boring. I felt as though the companions had all the interesting stuff while the player was saddled with the bog standard specs, it made my hawke feel generic and uninspiring. I'd like to see some specializations with more imagination, i think DA:O had that, and was pleased to see Awakenings added to that.

Modifié par Flashing Steel, 09 octobre 2011 - 01:41 .

[Foolsfolly]

- The specializations in DA2 i felt were just boring. I felt as though the companions had all the interesting stuff while the player was saddled with the bog standard specs, it made my hawke feel generic and uninspiring. I'd like to see some specializations with more imagination, i think DA:O had that, and was pleased to see Awakenings added to that.

I don't think they were boring, personally. I think they work fine. Force Mage, Blood Magic, Reaver, Beserker, Assassin, and Duelist are great specs. And I find them more enjoyable than anything in DA:O or Awakening.

In my opinion, of course.

[Kuramyra]

More sex, you could ****/kiss tons of people in DA:O but in DA2 its a love interest or the blooming rose, Hawke needs to work on his playa skills. Making my Cousland a playboy was quite fun and added a nice touch of "spoiled prince" to his personality imo.

[Foolsfolly]

I don't know. I know you can sleep with all four love interests in the same game plus all the hookers the Blooming Rose can throw at you. And that one male elf hooker in act one. Plus Zevran.

I don't know how many people the Warden can sleep with but Hawke gets around too.

[Fast Jimmy]

I didn't know you could "attain" all four LIs in one play through? I thought conversations forced you to pick one verse the other before the relationship could be "consumated."

[Kuramyra]

Depends on the order you do them in, Fenris has to be first if i recall otherwise he won't do the dirty with you cause Isabela probably gave you herpaz if you do her first.

[Kuramyra]

Also special dialogue options depending on specializations, Berserkers get more "angry" dialogue, blood mages can interrogate people with magic, assassins get tons more murder knife options, spirit healers being able to help random injured people/animals on your journey, ect..

[Vlad_Dracul]

What i want personally? Nothing more and nothing less than 150% epic game. So deep story, that weaker people and kids will ****** their own pants during game, especially in cutscenes.
So I want make a choices like destroy whole Chantry or unroot Quanari power. I want decide about conquer of Minrathous and see a Kal Sharok or try to reborn power of magisters over the world, stronger than ever. View on glorious Starkhaven city above giant Minanter River. Zevran as ruler of Antiva in practice, Oghren as Grey Warden Commander with longer beard, Shale in mortal state, called as "Tiny Bird Destroyer" now.
Meeting between Velanna and Merrill, two Dalish Pariahs, in the name of Elven race in unending degradation. Sea battle included Sirens Call II. and Templar ship in Isabela name.
Hawke as powerful leader of templar or mage side, lord of Order or Chaos.
And my Warden as most mysterious person, still working in shadows, even with face behind the mask, and without voice, if this is necessary.
Return of most interesting NPCs from older games (for example - DAO: Lanaya - DA2: Athenril) cannot be wrong choice too.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Am I the only one who DOESN'T want Morrigan, Flemeth or the Child to appear at all?

[billabong2606]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Am I the only one who DOESN'T want Morrigan, Flemeth or the Child to appear at all?

Yes.. I think you are THE ONLY ONE..  No offense, but what's the purpose of creating an epic rpg saga if the storyboard wasn't continued from it's previous installment? 

[xkg]

Flemeth is ok (DAO - "the old witch" version not the "super cool" new one)
Morrigan - I'am indifferent about her.
OGB child - oh jeeeezzz - I was indifferent about that too but now I'am so sick of hearing about this child .... I just hope it wont show up in DA3.

Modifié par xkg, 10 octobre 2011 - 09:30 .

[FASherman]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Am I the only one who DOESN'T want Morrigan, Flemeth or the Child to appear at all?

No, you aren't.

[leonhart87]

okay people.  this is my first post on bioware. so, what i would want to sse in DA3?
DA:O was awesome and i still do playthroughs with different charakters. DA2 wasn't bad, but it was missing a real story in my opinion. it was more like a big sidequest. the combat was good, but the random enemys just had TOO MUCH health. even on an easy setting it took forever to kill one normal monster. just mashing the "X" button... even es a mage.
many of you already said much of the technical aspects of the changes "we" want/ would prefer.
what i want to ask of you bioware, is to combine the good parts of the 2 games and bring back what you are known for. a great and deep story. i don't want to restrict the developers in any way. but just read my idea. and to all the dragon age fans reading it. give me your feedback.

dragon age was about the darkspawn. but there was an other story going on. the story of morrigan and flemeth. how about creating an epic story of that. just like in the baldurs gate series (baldurs gate 1 & 2 + expansions!!!)
morrigan and her child with the soul of an god. the eluvians and their connection with the "old" elves. about flemeth and her plans (request in dragon age 2). ok. i don't say "give me my warden back". it could be a new charakter. but how about having the warden and hawk as companions? the warden could be following you to save his/alistars child and morrigan. and something similar for hawk. let them be a part of your team with their own stories. there is so much potential to the story of the witch of the wilds ^^ that way, the savegames would/could have a huge impact to the story.
like: did the warden join morrigan in witchhunt? child of alistair,
warden or even none of both?
what i want is an epic quest with deep and huge story. with shocking plot twists.
that said... with a new charakter how about having the choice playing as human, dwarf, elves AND qunari? xD

ok. i think i said enough. please let me know what you think of that ^^

Modifié par leonhart87, 22 octobre 2011 - 11:29 .

[TwistedComplex]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I agree with the previous poster about having class specialization be tied to in game decisions.

Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope Nope 


What if i want to be a duel weild warrior but i want to make mage sword and sheild decisions? 

Cannot nope hard enough. In fact i have a video for this

[dsl08002]

what i want to see is a little bit more connection with origin such as refering to the hero of ferelden and the actions because now the dlc feels only conntained to DA2 and it doesn´t really right now effect the story line in a big matter

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Okay, I'll go for a tl;dr here. I'll probably repost this as a blog entry too.

To be honest, I'm not very enthusiastic about the Dragon Age franchise, or BioWare in general. Hell, even this forum wears at me (and the community is the biggest reason I'm here).

But knowing full well that no one from BioWare will ever read my posts, let alone respond to them, I may as well keep talking at brick walls - it's all I've done since arriving here.

I would like Dragon Age 3 to adopt some new (or old) design principles. Ones that don't necessarily translate in an "old school" cRPG, but an honest attempt to emulate the experience of PnP RPGs on a computer (consoles are computers too). Either that or ditch making an RPG completely. Dragon Age as a Jade Empire esque Action game would actually be pretty fun imo.

So, what do I mean by that?

- Statistical representation of characters in a way that's reasonable and transparent. Basically, a solid foundation for a character system.

BioWare has been really bad at this since moving away from established licenses. One of the biggest blows to statistics based gameplay is it's presentation. People hate maths. They hate the idea of stacking numbers that don't really affect how they play unless they do absurd calculations on how it all comes together rather than a simple, overarching and universal system by which to measure statistical representation of characters. Fallout's SPECIAL does this very well and despite being all sorts of broken, Elder Scrolls character systems also handle this particular area well.

Rather than clear up some of the cluster of the Dragon Age: Origins character system, Dragon Age 2 revels in making things less universal and more ambiguous.

Does having more Strength make actually your character stronger? Does it help them carry more stuff? Do more physical damage? It does... but only if you're a Warrior? Wtf is force and why is Dexterity it's boost stat for Rogues but STR is it's boost stat for Warriors. Isn't physical Force the same either way? Magic increases your ability to resist magic, but not Willpower? Dexterity has no affect on attack speed or accuracy, but it increases damage for Rogues and no one else? Cunning increases defence but doesn't open up conversation options? Lolwut?

While RTFM is a valid response for someone like me who's been playing RPGs for over a decade, this is exactly the reason why many people are hesitant to get into RPGs - on the face of it, it relies on needlessly complex formulas that are arbitrary, changing in meaning depending what character you play and is ultimately, something that's not only confusing but unsatisfying.

Meanwhile, millions upon millions of kids and even adults buy Pokemon games. It's quite the complex game when you get to battle systems, but there are overarching rules and stat systems which are presented in a way easy to understand. The Pokemon with the higher Speed stat will attack first unless there's an exception. If your Pokemon has a high Defence and HP stat and theirs has a low Attack stat, then you can be pretty sure you can take what physical attacks they serve up. Then there's the types system. While the exact formulas for them are probably complex, it doesn't matter because the system you're given can work for noobs as well as pros.

It has enough depth for extreme number crunching and metagaming, but is also transparent enough for children to understand. I would honestly hope that Dragon Age 3 sets a higher entry bar than Pokemon does, but I sorely wish that the concept of clarity and transparity is not lost. Because that is vital.

mrcrusty went on a tangent!
It's super effective!

This problem also extends to the Talent Trees. While I don't like that they've managed to cut out the concept of "skills", I don't mind the idea. However, I believe that their requirements ought to be a mixture of both levels and Attributes.

I mean, you could max out Talent Trees without raising the relevant attribute once. Sure, you'd be gimped as hell with the equipment lockout an what not but it's possible AFAIK since there is not hard limitations. (I've got other ideas with equipment too now that I think about it)

--------

- Use mechanics and triggers to allow small story branches which allow players to tell their own stories.

BioWare has a bad reputation with this, period. It gets in the way of cinematic storytelling (which IMO, should be cut down on) so I don't know whether this is a realistic point to work on or not but I definitely feel it would enhance the narrative. Faction mechanics would work wonders here, as would a basic economic system. A law and order system would also be useful.

To be perfectly honest, these types of aspects work wonders with a setting like Dragon Age 2's. A tight place, with plenty of people and organisations to explore and interact with, all intertwined into an overarching narrative.

Imagine that spending x sovereigns on merchants allowed them to upgrade their store, perhaps at the expense of others. You could open up questlines depending on the merchant you shop with. "Take out the competition" and such.

Make it as open ended as possible, where you can either aid your favoured merchant in killing or dissauding the others or by helping the collaborators by feeding the merchant false information. You could also contact neutral merchants and swing them one way or the other.

If you're unable (or unwilling) to stop the situation from escalating, then let the merchants hire mercs (relative to their wealth) to take each other (or the "top dog") out with you caught in the middle. You can save them, or simply let them die and reap the consequences.

A difficult fight, pissing off most merchants in the area if you win or letting the merchant with the shiniest loot and best relationship with you, die. Or something.

You could have a variety of quests structured in this manner. Origins had a little of this with the various job board quests and the like but the problem was that they were far too linear and scripted. Whereas my merchant example automatically triggers depending how you've interacted with the merchants in buying/selling and adjusts certain quest parameters and aspects based on those interactions (cheap vs high quality mercs, who sides against who, etc). It's more "organic".

--------

- Make use of non-cinematic character interactions

This one is simple. In order to maximise the amount of extra branching content for any future installments, BioWare needs to abolish the concept of having cinematics for everything and limit them to narrative and companion relevant events only.

How can this be done? Simply put, copy Alpha Protocol's email system. It's good, it works and the current Dragon Age 2 mailing system can be adapted to handle interactions with minor characters in side quests in a way that allows your character to have "conversations" (writing mail back) as opposed to simply running along and doing their bidding with no say like an errand boy/girl.

My previous merchant example can be done this way quite easily. They send you letters instead of speaking to you in public for fear of exposing their plots.

Non-cinematic conversations and interactions via an Alpha Protocol esque mail system. Do eet.

--------

- Give people more than just killing

Bring back non-combat skills and expand them. If necessary, tie them into the Talent Tree concept. Something like a Smithing Talent Tree is sorely missing and would fit into the series like a glove.

Crafting Poisons, Medicines and Traps could easily be incorporated into the Talent Tree concept too.

Also, dare I say it? An ENCHANTMENT! Talent Tree would also work out.

If you want to give players more than just filler combat and cinematic choose your own dialog responses gameplay, then do exactly that.

Games like Neverwinter Nights 2 had an excellent crafting system. It allowed for significant depth for people who wanted to do it and rewarded their patience, but never punished people who stayed away. Similarly, the potion crafting in Oblivion (Alchemy) was really well done too.

Bring back Thievery, hell, make it a mechanic. Let NPCs steal from you and sell your stuff to merchants requiring you to buy it back! This goes well with what I wrote before about mechanics for a merchant questline.

Build up a Talent Tree focused on Thievery and Counter-Measures to it.

--------

RE: Conversation Skills, I tend to think that the personality paradigm ought to be player-initiated without paraphrasing with skill checks opening new avenues of conversation instead of instant win.

i.e Using an Intimidatig skill or tone does not get the bandits to go away, it gives you the chance to reason with them. What gets them to leave is the strength of your arguments which is dependent on your/their situation. Having a high enough [Intimidate] can get them to hesitate attacking you, but it's showing them the decapitated head from your last kill (as opposed to threatening them with words, or namedropping that you're friends with the local Lord) that actually gets them to flee.

But since BioWare insists on keeping paraphrasing and does not want skill checks, I won't tilt at that windmill.

--------

- Open ended gameplay, level & quest design

This one doesn't really need explaining. If you've played New Vegas or Deus Ex: HR in recent months, you'd know what I'm talking about. Hell, doesn't the MotA DLC have an optional stealth section?

It's a far cry from Liberty Island in Deus Ex 1. But hey, it's a massive improvement on Dragon Age 2 base game, which is what's important.

One way to accomodate this approach without breaking BioWare's typical linear story is something I like to call "same event, differing points of view".

Essentially, you have certain focal point events and situations that are at the centre of quests with a branching narrative allowing you to progress through that same event from a different point of view depending on your choices. This is different to BioWare's "choice at the end" method, because the playthrough feels different while you're doing it, not just at the end. It also allows BioWare to *gulp* reuse assets as you're not going to change locations too much, but you will change what it means to you.

Let me use an example.

You're at a Tavern, working for the City Guard. It's a huge party, you know there's a Lyrium shipment coming in. Your job is to go around the Tavern and investigate suspicious looking people moving around, trying to find the smuggler. Weaving through lies, deception and half truths, you accuse someone, chase them down and face the consequences for doing so. Hopefully, you get the right person. If you do, they get arrested/killed and the story progresses in favour of the Guard for the next plot point. If not, they get away and the story progresses in favour of the smugglers.

Now imagine instead, you're the smuggler with a package of Lyrium. Your job to is sneak out of the Tavern, avoiding any suspicious looking people who may be working for the Town Guard. Now, let's say you need to actually carry the package out in the open. You can a) use Stealth, praying you won't bump into any of the roaming NPCs, exposing yourself in the process (you'd have to fight your way out) or hide the package somewhere safe in a variety of locations, talking to people in the Tavern to decifer the best one being careful not to expose yourself. If you hide the package in a wrong location, the story progresses in favour of the Town Guard. If you suceed in leaving (or kill the Guard), it progresses in favour of the smugglers.

Would work well if there were ingrained faction mechanics.

All of the assets are basically identical for both questlines. Same Tavern, same NPCs, etc.

The only thing that changes is your point of view and subsequently, your objectives - whether you're working for the Town Guard or for the Lyrium Smugglers.

--------

- Gameplay/Story Segregation

My biggest pet peeve is intentional or obvious gameplay/story segregation. Dragon Age 2 is rife with it. Tie in certain specialisations with the story. Becoming a Blood Mage? Please oh please, make that matter to NPCs. Please allow dream sequences at specific plot points where you can interact and "barter" with demons as a Mage (buying spells or bonuses using your Willpower Attribute).

More class based dialog options with NPCs and companions. They were a nice touch in Dragon Age 2, I'd like to see that expanded.

Do not, do not, do not ever allow for story/gameplay segregation on points that are central to the main narrative. Templars not noticing Blood Magic in the Gallows is never okay. Integrating such things into a Law & Order system might work, or even just a few quests that try to explain it. If Athkatla could handle this problem back in 2000, there is no excuse in 2011 onwards.

--------

- In sync combat

This is my only realistic wish for combat. Make the animations in sync. It forces a rapid redesign of what is/isn't acceptable. It will (hopefully) mean that enemies becoming more rounded and equivalent with the player rather than a mix of crazy low HP mooks and HP bloating crazy people. It (the DA 2 model) takes an element of normality out of combat, making it more like an unsatisfying action game (RTwP will never, ever make for good Action combat).

--------

I honestly have more wishes and demands out there, but this is too long for words already. Not like anyone's gonna read this crap in it's entirety anyway.

In any case, it's just my lamenting over what I think BioWare could do for Dragon Age 3 that would improve the game for an RPG fan like myself, without really touching on things that BioWare really wants to keep (voiced protag, lots o romance, "iconic looks", etc).

There's just the tiniest bit of me that's hopeful.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 22 octobre 2011 - 02:35 .

[bEVEsthda]

mrcrusty wrote...

Okay, I'll go for a tl;dr here....

Okay, just punched in to let you know that I read it.
I don't have much comments. I don't really consider the things you touch as my battle. The point that is important for me is what kind of experience the stat system provides. The mechanic details themselves, I leave to others. But there is this point about gameplay separating from story that struck a note.

One of the things that cause that separation, is how late games reset all combat conditions for each fight. I hate that. I hate it as much as I hate that each fight is 'balanced' to be about the same difficulty. It ruins much of the experience for me.
I greatly resent mana, auto-health and 'unconsciousness' for exactly that reason. Yet it's the standard in all games these days. For the worse, IMO.
 
The old system, spell slots that depleted, lasting injuries and perma-death, was, to me, much more satisfying. The past affected the future, and would require you to adapt your plans. Also it felt much more realistic. More 'immersive' and less than feeling you played a console platformer.
Those older systems have also provided me with my most 'epic' experiences in gaming, precisely because they can put you in a vulnerable position and force you to make do, survive, anyway.

I know the arguments for all this 'modern' convenience. "People will exploit the system anyway". "Tedius, lets focus on the 'fun'", etc. And I bet it makes it a lot easier to make game-saves on the consoles, as well.
Well IMO, it ruins much of the RPG experience, anyway. And that is bad, anyway.
I say: If it cannot be avoided in another way, let the self-cheaters cheat themselves. And let us others enjoy a fuller experience.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 23 octobre 2011 - 09:03 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

bEVEsthda wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Okay, I'll go for a tl;dr here....

Okay, just punched in to let you know that I read it.
I don't have much comments. I don't really consider the things you touch as my battle. The point that is important for me is what kind of experience the stat system provides. The mechanic details themselves, I leave to others. But there is this point about gameplay separating from story that struck a note.

One of the things that cause that separation, is how late games reset all combat conditions for each fight. I hate that. I hate it as much as I hate that each fight is 'balanced' to be about the same difficulty. It ruins much of the experience for me.
I greatly resent mana, auto-health and 'unconsciousness' for exactly that reason. Yet it's the standard in all games these days. For the worse, IMO.
 
The old system, spell slots that depleted, lasting injuries and perma-death, was, to me, much more satisfying. The past affected the future, and would require you to adapt your plans. Also it felt much more realistic. More 'immersive' and less than feeling you played a console platformer.
Those older systems have also provided me with my most 'epic' experiences in gaming, precisely because they can put you in a vulnerable position and force you to make do, survive, anyway.

I know the arguments for all this 'modern' convenience. "People will exploit the system anyway". "Tedius, lets focus on the 'fun'", etc. And I bet it makes it a lot easier to make game-saves on the consoles, as well.
Well IMO, it ruins much of the RPG experience, anyway. And that is bad, anyway.
I say: If it cannot be avoided in another way, let the self-cheaters cheat themselves. And let us others enjoy a fuller experience.

Well, it's a matter of balance and pacing. Imagine that with DA 2's over the top combat, after a few encounters, you needed to rest, or something similar.

It would break up the pacing of the game. It would also affect how the game is balanced, spells and abilities would have to be carefully managed and they would have to be rebalanced accordingly. Which is something I'm personally okay with, but not something you can sell to most people.

I like the idea (Vancian Casting), but I've always felt it had it's place in a turn based system. Whereas BioWare's RTwP was really pushing it's limits. Definitely not in any system that Dragon Age 2 has. Among other things, it would encourage even more potion chugging, something that I'm not really a fan of. What is this, Diablo or Dungeon Siege? I like the Witcher & Gothic/Risen methods of using potions instead.

Now, regarding unconsciousness, that one is simple. BioWare wants to showcase off their characters and their story. It's not necessarily a game balance thing. So, no losing companions until they say it's okay. Honestly, outside of say, Varric & Anders, you could allow for the permadeth of any of your other companions and just work around their deaths. But, it is what it is. When you put the time and effort into their stories and their "iconic looks", I guess you'd want players to experience it. Origins had this too, though it did allow for a lot more leeway on losing companions.

[Fortlowe]

I'm a gamer. I want to be very clear about what I mean when I say that. I don't just like Action Games. I don't just like RPG's. I don't just like FPS's, or MMPOG's, or platformers, or puzzle games, or sandbox games. I like VIDEOGAMES. Specifically, well crafted videogames. So even though I love a deep narrative, and, narratively, it was as shallow as the morning dew, I loved Borderlands. And Even though the combat was sluggish (and the shuffling!) I loved the sweeping narrative of DA:O.

So, on the most basic level, I want a well crafted, Dragon Age game. Not that DA2 wasn't but it WAS rushed and it felt that way and that gravely affected the result of all the hard work that was put into it. The reactive combat was great....but shallow. Button mashing works for Castle Crashers. Not so much in DA, though. The Artwork was (and continues to be, considering the 2 DLC's) marvelous....but unfortunately redundant. It's plastered on the same background over and over and over and..you get my drift. Streamlining the inventory system was a great idea....but making all but the downloadable items essentially generic refuse was not cool. Felt, like I EARNED the starmetal sword. I feel cheep and lazy using DLC weapons....Except for you Mattock. I love you baby.

So I guess what I want from DA3 (other than a split of the franchise into two parts: an action game like Assassins Creed and a classic RPG like DA:O) is for Bioware to take the very best of DA:O and DA2, and however long it takes, to combine them to make the next installment all it can be.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 23 octobre 2011 - 11:32 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

billabong2606 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Am I the only one who DOESN'T want Morrigan, Flemeth or the Child to appear at all?

Yes.. I think you are THE ONLY ONE..  No offense, but what's the purpose of creating an epic rpg saga if the storyboard wasn't continued from it's previous installment? 

Agree, but of all the subplots in ME, why go with M&F?
They are boring as hell.

[Lotion Soronarr]

mrcrusty wrote...

I would like Dragon Age 3 to adopt some new (or old) design principles. Ones that don't necessarily translate in an "old school" cRPG, but an honest attempt to emulate the experience of PnP RPGs on a computer (consoles are computers too). Either that or ditch making an RPG completely. Dragon Age as a Jade Empire esque Action game would actually be pretty fun imo.

So, what do I mean by that?

- Statistical representation of characters in a way that's reasonable and transparent. Basically, a solid foundation for a character system.

QFT.
As much as I loved Origins in it's presentation, design and everything else, the mechanics and the stst system was literally killing it.

IMHO, Bio should go back to their roots and make something D&D inspired - not a direct copy, as D&D has it's own flaws (like onyl every 2points in an attribute having an effect). But a transparent, intuitive system of stats and progression.
For example: Attributes in the 0-20 (or 25) range, that change very little from game start.
And NO NEEDLES ARTIFICIAL LIMITATIONS. Yes, I want my mage to swing a sword. I want him to be able to learn (to a limited degree) how to use it. He won't be much good with it, but why should he be able to do it?

the whole point of an intuitive system is to maek it simple and as true to life as possible. Why? Because real life is intuitive.

Rather than clear up some of the cluster of the Dragon Age: Origins character system, Dragon Age 2 revels in making things less universal and more ambiguous.

DA2 makes many things more worse. warriors are reduced to DPS. The only stat a weapon has is damage. That's it. Remember BG2 and similar games? Weapons had a whole lot of different stats to trully differentiate them - weight, speed(balance), range(reach), etc...

- Open ended gameplay, level & quest design

This one doesn't really need explaining. If you've played New Vegas or Deus Ex: HR in recent months, you'd know what I'm talking about. Hell, doesn't the MotA DLC have an optional stealth section?

It's a far cry from Liberty Island in Deus Ex 1. But hey, it's a massive improvement on Dragon Age 2 base game, which is what's important.

One way to accomodate this approach without breaking BioWare's typical linear story is something I like to call "same event, differing points of view".

YES. A thousand times yes. Multiple ways to deal with a quest. EXP granted for completion, not kills.

- Gameplay/Story Segregation

- In sync combat

YES.

This is my only realistic wish for combat. Make the animations in sync. It forces a rapid redesign of what is/isn't acceptable. It will (hopefully) mean that enemies becoming more rounded and equivalent with the player rather than a mix of crazy low HP mooks and HP bloating crazy people. It (the DA 2 model) takes an element of normality out of combat, making it more like an unsatisfying action game (RTwP will never, ever make for good Action combat).

Agreed. A few difficult opponents beat a bajjilion worthless mooks any time.
Of course, if oyu have explonentional leveling, this presents a problem.
You can't have a hero become too powerfull in such a "primitive" way as buffing HP and damage. It doesn't scale well. It doesn't work well. That's a very narrow and shallow represenatation of power.

New skills and player tactics work far better than just inflating numbers.
Honestly, you cna have a game where a character starts and end the game with 100 HP and still feel like you've become very powerfull.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Yes, I want my mage to swing a sword. I want him to be able to learn (to a limited degree) how to use it. He won't be much good with it, but why should he be able to do it?

I think they they should go somewhat back to the Origins model.

Aside from a more meaningful and transparent stats system, there ought to be a split between class-specific talent trees (specialisations) and generalised ones (talents). The generalised ones speak to general skillsets such as various weapon wielding trees, crafting, social skills, even areas like leadership (tactical slots, party buffs and bonuses in conversation) whereas specialisations speak to actual jobs and "specialists" relating to the class.

So, if say, a Mage meets the right attribute requirements, (s)he can gain access to the Weapon and Shield Talent Tree but there's no chance to access the Ranger Specialisation Tree.

This naturally means that the equipment ought to be restricted by attributes only as well. Don't restrict equipment to classes. That really doesn't make sense unless the item itself has magic properties that restricts specific types of people from using it. Why is a Warrior unable to dual wield? Why aren't Mages allowed to wear plate armor? And so on.

To add to this, I'd like a lot more passive and sustained abilities with the ability for sustained abilities to work and combine for more powerful effects. Not only will it add more layers of tactical thinking and character building, but they are probably easier to implement than activated abilities.

So, for example, combining Arcane Shield w/ Shield Wall ought to provide even more bonuses to defence and Constitution, but should also carry an extra penalty to Dexterity.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Agreed. A few difficult opponents beat a bajjilion worthless mooks any time. Of course, if oyu have explonentional leveling, this presents a problem.You can't have a hero become too powerfull in such a "primitive" way as buffing HP and damage. It doesn't scale well. It doesn't work well. That's a very narrow and shallow represenatation of power.

New skills and player tactics work far better than just inflating numbers. Honestly, you cna have a game where a character starts and end the game with 100 HP and still feel like you've become very powerfull.

Yeah. I think what it should come down to what tools are available to you. At lower levels, you're locked out of items and abilities and the ones that you can use are limited. At the end game, even if your physical stats don't change much too much, as long as those options open up, you can feel Godly.

I don't much like the idea of scaling damage, stats or HP/MP for levels. I like the idea of character builds themselves being the most important.

One way this can be done is for passive bonuses for leveling up Talent Trees - Proficient, Expert & Master.

For example, Weapon & Shield. Getting 1/3rd of the talents gets you Profiency, giving you a 10% boost in damage & defence when you use a sword and shield. 2/3rds of the tree learnt gets you Expert, a 20% boost and Mastery (full tree learnt) gives you a 30% boost.

But it's tied to the skills/talents/abilities, not the levels. So in essence, I'd like a system where a level 10 w/ the right attributes and focusing on Weapon & Shield would be better at pure Weapon & Shield combat than a level 20 who raised 10 levels on Archery, 5 levels on Dual Wield and 5 levels at Weapon & Shield. Instead of them being close to equal or even the level 20 winning out due to the boost the levels give.

I accept that some stats ought to be raised but I want the primary advantage for the level 20 character to be that (s)he's got more tactical options, abilities and fighting styles to use.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 24 octobre 2011 - 10:29 .

[Tessaeva]

Humm what can i say, Dragon age 2 is and ok game but is not really a part two of the origin, I was very disapointed with the game, It noway came near to the origin,it lacked content,, the feel of the adventure,i have stored it and rather play origin over then DA2,about DA3 well , as the saying goes, fool me once your fault, but fool me twice that would be my fault, so if there is and third installment, i will rather wait and see after it lanches on comments, and maybe witness thru some friends to see if its worth it. I have lost all trust in this line of games,