14 réponses à ce sujet

[Wolf]

This thread is about somethings which I hope to be improved upon in future Dragon Age content, DLC, Expansion or otherwise:

-1st: Less fetch quests and more side story-like quests to make the world feel more alive and make the story seem more expansive. 

-2nd: Make followers able to be convinced of something contrary to their current beliefs, one example being Fenris not being able to be convinced that mages are people too or Anders not blowing up the Chantry in Act 3.

-3rd: Having some degree of customization in regards to follower armor. For example having a follower start out with a specific outfit, then purchasing or finding upgrades, which would be visible in the character model, akin to the Dragon Age II system  but also receiving new outfits for completing follower-specific quests and finding secret locations (like the "secret hallways" in Hightown) or by completing special requirements.

-4th: Make crafting less about buying the potions and revert more towards a DA:O system. Components would still be found throughout the enviroment, but instead of using money for the potions, the vendor would sell that specific ingredient, saving you the trouble of having to look for it  and deepening the RPG experience. 

Discuss or add anything which you feel would be beneficial to Dragon Age, In a way that would make people who like Dragon Age II or Dragon Age: Origins.

Thank you for viewing this and happy commenting!  

Modifié par Gaiden96, 22 août 2011 - 07:15 .

[Xilizhra]

-2nd: Make followers able to be convinced of something contrary to their current beliefs, one example being Fenris not being able to be convinced that mages are people too or Isabella becoming a less selfish person without having to romance either.

Just rival Isabela in that case.

[Wolf]

Xilizhra wrote...

-2nd: Make followers able to be convinced of something contrary to their current beliefs, one example being Fenris not being able to be convinced that mages are people too or Isabella becoming a less selfish person without having to romance either.

Just rival Isabela in that case.

Maybe Isabella was a bad example... XD

[Sepewrath]

Well I disagree with the second, third and fourth. Fenris spends his life in subjugation to mages, his opinion is not going to change because of a few kind words, especially since mages who abuse their power will always exist. You cant change people's core beliefs just because your the PC, Think about it, if you don't believe in slavery are you suddenly going to believe in it, because someone tells you how good it is?

The clothes change off a romance was random enough, without having people getting new things just because you did a quest. And crafting was just terrible in Origins, there is no reason to have anything, even remotely close to that as it has nothing to do with a game being an RPG.

The first one I can agree with, but I would actually like to see less random side quest and more quest that are offshoots of the main quest. Like in Origins, there were how many side quest that involved the Darkspawn, despite it being a Blight. DA2's were equally random, but at least Hawke being a refugee, it made more sense for him to do oddjobs and high ranking people to come to them later, than it did for a Grey Warden to be clearing out Blood Mage hideouts.

[Wulfram]

The thing is, if you scrapped all of the fetch quests would you get the resources for even one serious story based quest with interesting dialogue and decent combat? I'm not sure really.

[dgcatanisiri]

The fetch quests would be easier for me to swallow if there were some kind of explanation as to how Hawke knows that item x can be swiped (like, say, off the Seneschal's desk, for example) and given to person y who has never previously met Hawke.

However, I would like to have more conversations like the one when you first take Fenris to the Gallows, where you get to discuss their issues and talk about things rationally. Particularly if, say, you're in a friendship romance with Fenris and a mage. something about how Hawke isn't the exception that proves the rule. I know a discussion like that is probably difficult to implement to the satisfaction of every player, but just something to that effect to indicate that they talk about it like reasonable people, not crazy people.

[Wolf]

Sepewrath wrote...

Well I disagree with the second, third and fourth. Fenris spends his life in subjugation to mages, his opinion is not going to change because of a few kind words, especially since mages who abuse their power will always exist. You cant change people's core beliefs just because your the PC, Think about it, if you don't believe in slavery are you suddenly going to believe in it, because someone tells you how good it is?

The clothes change off a romance was random enough, without having people getting new things just because you did a quest. And crafting was just terrible in Origins, there is no reason to have anything, even remotely close to that as it has nothing to do with a game being an RPG.

The first one I can agree with, but I would actually like to see less random side quest and more quest that are offshoots of the main quest. Like in Origins, there were how many side quest that involved the Darkspawn, despite it being a Blight. DA2's were equally random, but at least Hawke being a refugee, it made more sense for him to do oddjobs and high ranking people to come to them later, than it did for a Grey Warden to be clearing out Blood Mage hideouts.

I didn't mean convincing Fenris that slavery is okay. I meant helping him realise that not all mages are monsters who would drain the blood of a child to perform a party trick. THAT kind of convincing. The characters would keep there core values and beliefs but in certain aspects you could make them "improve" if you believe said aspects are "wrong" or strenghten these beliefs.  (Fenris is still against slavery and blood magic but realises that he shouldn't paint all mages with the same brush, by YOUR influence or if you influence him the other way around he becomes even more mistrusful of mages and continues believing that magic is a curse upon the world and hates everything related to it). Choice is the key word.

[Wolf]

dgcatanisiri wrote...

The fetch quests would be easier for me to swallow if there were some kind of explanation as to how Hawke knows that item x can be swiped (like, say, off the Seneschal's desk, for example) and given to person y who has never previously met Hawke.

However, I would like to have more conversations like the one when you first take Fenris to the Gallows, where you get to discuss their issues and talk about things rationally. Particularly if, say, you're in a friendship romance with Fenris and a mage. something about how Hawke isn't the exception that proves the rule. I know a discussion like that is probably difficult to implement to the satisfaction of every player, but just something to that effect to indicate that they talk about it like reasonable people, not crazy people.

Exactly. What I meant was essentially that fetch quests have at least some dialogue attached to them so as to not make them seem so hollow.

[Gervaise]

With regard to the Fenris thing, from the beginning he does admit that there may be some good mages who don't abuse their power but to date he has not encountered any.  During the game he admits that Bethany/Hawke are strong minded mages who don't abuse their power.  If you simply pursue a friendship with him and are a mage, he will toast you in Act 2 as the "one good mage he has known" and in Act 3 will acknowledge the irony that the only true friend he has known is a mage.  The reason he makes so many negative comments is that most of the mages we meet are either blood mages or abominations, or both.  This includes both your other mage party members.   Orsino did seem like the example of a good mage that you could hold up as an example to Fenris, until the Last Straw and then he just proves Fenris right.

The problem with Anders is that he is not consistent.  He claims to be against blood magic, gives Merrill a really hard time and then by Act 3 is constantly justifying every instance of blood magic that the mage is "desperate".    It would also appear that he applies the same thinking if Hawke is a blood mage.   Anders will not admit that there is even the slight possibility that mages do need some sort of regulation.  However, his use of the bomb is consistent with his thinking right from Act 1 when he claims that Justice is hard, Jusitice is merciless and near the end of Act 3 when he states that there is no one he wouldn't kill to further his cause.  What I would have liked was the possibility to stop Anders, if not by argument then by direct action.   He is actually the only companion where you cannot get him to change an action through your influence - unless you count not killing the mage girl in Act 2. 

I would just like to make the reason you or the other characters do or do not do something to be consistent with logical thinking rather than being an obvious plot manipulation by the writers that has you tearing your hair thinking "I wouldn't do that." or "What the ......!"

[Wolf]

Yes but the way they did it was too subtle I'd say. I loved DA II, even with all it's flaws but these are things that I believe if fleshed out would make for a deeper experience. I'll be happy with anything they put out, these are just personal preferences.

[Sepewrath]

Gaiden96 wrote...
I didn't mean convincing Fenris that slavery is okay. I meant helping him realise that not all mages are monsters who would drain the blood of a child to perform a party trick. THAT kind of convincing. The characters would keep there core values and beliefs but in certain aspects you could make them "improve" if you believe said aspects are "wrong" or strenghten these beliefs.  (Fenris is still against slavery and blood magic but realises that he shouldn't paint all mages with the same brush, by YOUR influence or if you influence him the other way around he becomes even more mistrusful of mages and continues believing that magic is a curse upon the world and hates everything related to it). Choice is the key word.

Well if THEY feel like there is nothing wrong with their thought pattern, why would they change? And I understand you said choice, but when characters are made with issues, just for the PC to make all better, it weakens the character. And Fenris does give some slack to mages, every now and then, including siding with a mage Hawke, who sides with the mages. That's believable character progression, he isn't going to go from hating all things magic to even saying something like "I guess mages aren't so bad" Him tolerating mages, not so much expressing through words, but action that he doesn't believe all mages are abominations waiting to happen, that are beyond saving.

Basically he eases up because of your influence or he never does, because you support his prejudice.

[Wolf]

Sepewrath wrote...

Gaiden96 wrote...
I didn't mean convincing Fenris that slavery is okay. I meant helping him realise that not all mages are monsters who would drain the blood of a child to perform a party trick. THAT kind of convincing. The characters would keep there core values and beliefs but in certain aspects you could make them "improve" if you believe said aspects are "wrong" or strenghten these beliefs.  (Fenris is still against slavery and blood magic but realises that he shouldn't paint all mages with the same brush, by YOUR influence or if you influence him the other way around he becomes even more mistrusful of mages and continues believing that magic is a curse upon the world and hates everything related to it). Choice is the key word.

Well if THEY feel like there is nothing wrong with their thought pattern, why would they change? And I understand you said choice, but when characters are made with issues, just for the PC to make all better, it weakens the character. And Fenris does give some slack to mages, every now and then, including siding with a mage Hawke, who sides with the mages. That's believable character progression, he isn't going to go from hating all things magic to even saying something like "I guess mages aren't so bad" Him tolerating mages, not so much expressing through words, but action that he doesn't believe all mages are abominations waiting to happen, that are beyond saving.

Basically he eases up because of your influence or he never does, because you support his prejudice.

True.

[esper]

1. I agree wholeheartly with this. The secondary quest in Da2 was interisting and good. More of them and less of the side quest who I didn't really care about. I want the secondary quest to matter, though. As getting more secondary quest depending on your first quests in the next arc. The secondary quest are a good place to do story branching.
2. Not if it means saying one line and they completely changes personality like Alistar in da:o. I think that you actually has a realistic influenc on the companions in Da2 - I would have like more quest that involved them, though.
3. While I like icon amour, I thinkt that we should have more than one follower armour - or that the uprades were visible.
4. I like the crafitng system better in da2 than in da:o.

[Foolsfolly]

This was disappointing OP.

Your first point is about side quests. Your second specifically mentions a main quest. Your third was about customization and not quests at all. And your final point was about crafting (which is better in DA2 since it was garbage in DA:O and runecrafting in Awakening wasn't ever worth it.)

But this is a good enough of a place to put this.

Side quests in a story driven choice driven RPG shouldn't be just about loot and XP (loot's actually near worthless in DA2 anyway). I say the best side quests for an RPG like this one are ones that offer chances for role-playing.

Choices. I know I'd like choices from some side quests to affect the world, NPCs, and even other quests. But that's quite the demand. For the smaller demand just given choices. I think there's a reason why people really loved the Saarebas quest, or the Magistrate's Order's quest, or the one with the elven Dreamer. These quests had next to no impact in the game but they all offered a choice.

And that's what the next game's side quests should focus on. Quests that allow the player to find their character's beliefs. Challenge them with moral, justice, spiritual, and judgment choices. Less focus on fetch quests or quests that are on rails.

Maybe not ever side quest having a choice in the end (actually it'd get formulaic if the choices only occurred at the end). But much more of them should have that element of testing the character and defining what it is the player's character believes.

That's a bit lofty but it's totally possible. And DA2 got really close to reaching it. Except most of their side quests with dialogue where actually tied to the Mage thing.

[Wolf]

Foolsfolly wrote...

This was disappointing OP.

Your first point is about side quests. Your second specifically mentions a main quest. Your third was about customization and not quests at all. And your final point was about crafting (which is better in DA2 since it was garbage in DA:O and runecrafting in Awakening wasn't ever worth it.)

But this is a good enough of a place to put this.

Side quests in a story driven choice driven RPG shouldn't be just about loot and XP (loot's actually near worthless in DA2 anyway). I say the best side quests for an RPG like this one are ones that offer chances for role-playing.

Choices. I know I'd like choices from some side quests to affect the world, NPCs, and even other quests. But that's quite the demand. For the smaller demand just given choices. I think there's a reason why people really loved the Saarebas quest, or the Magistrate's Order's quest, or the one with the elven Dreamer. These quests had next to no impact in the game but they all offered a choice.

And that's what the next game's side quests should focus on. Quests that allow the player to find their character's beliefs. Challenge them with moral, justice, spiritual, and judgment choices. Less focus on fetch quests or quests that are on rails.

Maybe not ever side quest having a choice in the end (actually it'd get formulaic if the choices only occurred at the end). But much more of them should have that element of testing the character and defining what it is the player's character believes.

That's a bit lofty but it's totally possible. And DA2 got really close to reaching it. Except most of their side quests with dialogue where actually tied to the Mage thing.

Regarding your first point,
I think I made it very clear that these were things that in MY opinion should be improved, so the quick change of topics IS normal.

In regards to the sidequest thing, I realise that it would be incredibly time-consuming, which is exactly why i said that if fetch quests had to be there they should have (imo) some dialogue or small story tied to them. But I do agree that I would prefer more sidequests rather than 400 fetch quests where all you do is randomly acquire an item and then you automatically know who the owner is.
 
I just want more meaningful sidequests, ones that make sense for the character to be tied to, like, say, the main character is a deliveryboy/girl during the beginning. Makes more sense than an ex-mercenary/thief to go around collecting things and handing them over without even knowing who the hell it belongs to.

Oh and thanks for commenting!

Modifié par Gaiden96, 30 août 2011 - 09:07 .