114 réponses à ce sujet

[eternalnightmare13]

krullstar wrote...

Battling NPC on a bridge.  3 group members went down.  Hopeless situation, so I ran away.  NPC chased me.  Entered Lothering Village and the NPC gave up the chase.  My downed members came back to life, running towards my location on the far side of the 'area'.  As they did, they encountered villagers who wanted to battle me, game cut to video scene, next thing I know, my main character was warped to a new location.

I have had many awkward things happen when battles move away from downed members.  Personally, I think death should be relevant in this game.  If you prevail in a battle but lose a member, then they are gone.  If that sounds too harsh at least put some provision that after so many times down they leave you cause your leadership sucks.

Games without consequence, lose a considerable element of tension/excitement etc.  We already have save features that enable us to backtrack and do right where we went wrong but to have this kind of 'ability' in the game itself - is a minus not a plus.

Anyway, after hours and hours of game play, testing etc I think my comments are all done. 

Characters can leave if your leadership goes too low.  It takes some time but if they don't agree with some choices you make at say Redcliffe and etc their opinion will drop and it will drop depending on how you trreat them in camp.  On the other side they'll get bonus talents to their stats if their opinion goes up toward you. 

If you want to do the whole death thing then simply do not use certain characters if they die so many times in battle.  Sounds like you just started, but eventually you'll have a lot of companions to make this viable to swap out npcs that have 'died'.  You could also completely kick them out of your group if you wanted to do so.

If you don't like the save feature then turn off the auto-save. 

A game developer can't possibly cover every angle and to be frank your desires are rather extreme IMO.  Yet you do  have the option of doing what I said a nd getting pretty close to what you want.  How many games give you that option?  Few.  So, instead of complaining about it - use your head.

[DMTyrisis]

Also, remember that your "downed" characters are not dead, they are unconscious.

[GN-Lelldorianx]

If I remember correctly, playing on the highest setting of difficulty on NWN2 meant downed characters bled out and then died (might be wrong?). I agree, there should be a higher setting. You could always leave them out of your party permanently in future encounters.

[eternalnightmare13]

DMTyrisis wrote...

Also, remember that your "downed" characters are not dead, they are unconscious.

Uh....that's the OP's complaint.

[kungfusam]

Bioware needed to sell the game to more then just the die hard fan base, hence you get alot of dumbing down or removing things



Its all about the flow of the game, and keeping it flowing

[OgrynFlesh]

Precious party members dying was pretty terrifying in Baldur's Gate 1/2. Not only would you have to backtrack (if you din't have a mighty cleric) miles to a temple carrying a pretty heavy gorey corpse, but if the enemy petrified or DISINTEGRATED a man then that was it.

Minsc got disintegrated once. And Aerie once(ha!) got petrified... oh...

Needless to say I was *very* careful. In DA I will occasionally sacrifice a man (or woman) for the greater good, because hell they get right back up. In other games you bet your ass we'd've start running!

Modifié par OgrynFlesh, 29 novembre 2009 - 06:54 .

[marshalleck]

OgrynFlesh wrote...

Precious party members dying was pretty terrifying in Baldur's Gate 1/2. Not only would you have to backtrack (if you din't have a mighty cleric) miles to a temple carrying a pretty heavy gorey corpse, but if the enemy petrified or DISINTEGRATED a man then that was it.

Minsc got disintegrated once. And Aerie once(ha!) got petrified... oh...

A meaningless mechanic which was thoroughly neutralized by the mighty "RELOAD" spell, if I remember correctly.

Rose-tinted lenses, etc.

Modifié par marshalleck, 29 novembre 2009 - 06:54 .

[Nathair Nimheil]

Bioware needed to sell the game to more then just the die hard fan base, hence you get alot of dumbing down or removing things

How is that an obstacle to having an optional "hardcore" mode, or even a level of difficulty that's actually difficult? The forums are thick with people playing with one arm tied behind their back to try and artificially create a challenge, why should that be? There's always easy mode for those that want it, why not the other end of the spectrum?

[Kegfist]

Demon Souls is the game for you

[Mnemnosyne]

I do hate that there is basically no consequence to having a party member go down in battle. Those injuries are so minor, and the injury kits so common, that they're irrelevant. And there's zero chance of them actually dying.

I kind of agree with the idea that a hit to approval would be a nice penalty whenever they go down. If your leadership led them into almost dying, then they probably think less of your leadership whenever they fall. If each time they fall in battle they take a -5 or so to approval, then death would have some significance.

And it would also definitely be nice if there was an optional difficulty setting where there was a chance of the main character or party members actually dying permanently. Baldur's Gate had this in that a 'chunked' character could never be resurrected, and the Fallout series, well, didn't have resurrection at all. If someone died, that was it for them, permanently.

It is sad that we've fallen so far that asking that there actually be consequences for failing is described as "rather extreme."

Modifié par Koyasha, 29 novembre 2009 - 07:00 .

[GN-Lelldorianx]

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

Bioware needed to sell the game to more then just the die hard fan base, hence you get alot of dumbing down or removing things

How is that an obstacle to having an optional "hardcore" mode, or even a level of difficulty that's actually difficult? The forums are thick with people playing with one arm tied behind their back to try and artificially create a challenge, why should that be? There's always easy mode for those that want it, why not the other end of the spectrum?

I agree, as I progress through the game things seem only to get easier. Once you figure out what works, you're golden. Morrigan's spell combos, my main's dual-weapon DPS (~6 hits per second), and so on... an optional hard-core would be awesome.  Personally, my method of playing with 'an arm tied behind my back' is to do as I said above - when a companion dies, I leave him out of my group (unfortunately, cut-scenes ruin that aspect, but I guess doing that introduces too many variables for BioWare to handle in a reasonable amount of time).  So far, Leliana is 'dead' in the camp forever

[kungfusam]

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

Bioware needed to sell the game to more then just the die hard fan base, hence you get alot of dumbing down or removing things

How is that an obstacle to having an optional "hardcore" mode, or even a level of difficulty that's actually difficult? The forums are thick with people playing with one arm tied behind their back to try and artificially create a challenge, why should that be? There's always easy mode for those that want it, why not the other end of the spectrum?

I guess because in the end the hardcore will make the game harder for themselves, in the end I reckon there focus is what the majority want

[Nathair Nimheil]

in the end the hardcore will make the game harder for themselves, in the end I reckon there focus is what the majority want

I have to say I don't find "It's 'cause Bioware doesn't care about you" a very satisfying explanation.

[Majspuffen]

Well, if they walk around with 10 injuries they should be dead in my opinion.

[Tennmuerti]

What would pernament death do besides force people to use the most OP spell combo of all time more frequently. Save-Load.



Honestly did anyone really backtrack miles and miles in games like BG2 to get a rez rather then just reload?

If you char got permanently dead in an older RPG like BG series did you just reload and retry the battle or did you tough it out and continued the game without them?

If you used the first option then I fail to see the need for permanent death or harsh penalty, since if you use Save/Load before you will use it in this game anyway.

If you do the second option of playing hardcore and not reloading because of party member deaths then I fail to see the problem of doing the same in DA:O, simply dismiss the said character after battle so that you can never use them again.



In all honesty this topic has been done to death already. Major death penalties add nothing more then an inconvenience of a reload.

[Mnemnosyne]

I reloaded and did the battle again, of course. The point is that battles are harder if you can't just let people die without consequence. If everyone must survive the fight, then the condition for victory is harder than 'one person must survive'.

And you know, sometimes if I didn't have a recent save because I'd forgotten, I sucked it up and trudged back to get them raised. Or even continued playing without them, accepting the loss because I didn't feel like reloading from a distant save.

Even back in BG2 you could set it to an easier setting where characters could not die permanently. But on the harder settings, they could. Why not have it the same here?

[Nathair Nimheil]

Even back in BG2 you could set it to an easier setting where characters could not die permanently. But on the harder settings, they could. Why not have it the same here?

And there is, quite honestly, no reason to argue against having such an option. If you don't want it, don't use it.

[Tennmuerti]

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

Even back in BG2 you could set it to an easier setting where characters could not die permanently. But on the harder settings, they could. Why not have it the same here?

And there is, quite honestly, no reason to argue against having such an option. If you don't want it, don't use it.

If you tied permanent death to a dificulty option this would force anyone wanting more dificult battles to suffer the death penalty as well, which like has already been said is nothing but an inconvinience of a reload.
What is stoppintg you from telling a party member to permanently leave you when they die? If you want a penalty for deaths, use it.

One of the major reasons that uncounciousness is used rather then death is because there is no resurection in the DA universe, which makes real deaths that much more meaningfull, believable and dramatic. Honestly I lost count in older RPGs of messed up scenes when some plot character dies and you are going: WTF dudes I have a cleric right here (or any other resurection method) Could have just rezzed him/her you know... why all the drama? >.>

Modifié par Tennmuerti, 29 novembre 2009 - 08:01 .

[L33TDAWG]

I do agree to what he says. There is only injuries and they aren't taht bad and you can heal them anywhere with a kit. It is a little hard to cover every spectrum on such a big game. I play the game on knightmare with Allistair in full Blood Armour and myself in Juggernaut Plate and Shale the most powerful and unstoppable force in the game with Leliana in the back hitting for 700 every now and then. I never die and neither do my party members. 3 tanks or 4 make you invincible the only time I needed to use a health pot is when I battled Phlemeth and The High Dragon. I don't think the death feature is needed that you want, but it couldn't hurt to update it to give it that affect for people who play on nightmare or hard.

[OgrynFlesh]

Tennmuerti wrote...

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

Even back in BG2 you could set it to an easier setting where characters could not die permanently. But on the harder settings, they could. Why not have it the same here?

And there is, quite honestly, no reason to argue against having such an option. If you don't want it, don't use it.

If you tied permanent death to a dificulty option this would force anyone wanting more dificult battles to suffer the death penalty as well, which like has already been said is nothing but an inconvinience of a reload.
What is stoppintg you from telling a party member to permanently leave you when they die? If you want a penalty for deaths, use it.

One of the major reasons that uncounciousness is used rather then death is because there is no resurection in the DA universe, which makes real deaths that much more meaningfull, believable and dramatic. Honestly I lost count in older RPGs of messed up scenes when some plot character dies and you are going: WTF dudes I have a cleric right here (or any other resurection method) Could have just rezzed him/her you know... why all the drama? >.>

Actually someone in Saradush (BG2 Throne of Bhaal) someone gets in the head by a flaming rock from a catapult. I had my trusty Rod of Resurrection so I was given the option of reviving him. Cost a charge though, and those things are rare and expensive. Then everyone died *anyway*... dammit...

[marshalleck]

krullstar wrote...

Technically, as long as there is a save feature, there truly is no consequence.

Solution - make it so that certain things, such as downed members of your group cannot be undone by simply loading a previous save.  If a certain member 'falls' under your command then they will leave you.  Surely a programmer could make it so.

Everyone has their own personal preferences and ideas about what is enjoyable in games. Personally, the games that I have enjoyed the most were ones were the tension level was through the roof. I would opt for running away for my life in a game over god like power any day.

Again this is a matter of personal preference...

So if they die in the future they are dead in the past? 

This is a fundamental flaw of adapting PNP 2nd ed rules to a computer game--in a PNP game, you can't simply reload a saved game to bring a character back to life, unless your DM and everyone else agrees to start the play session over. Permadeath can only be a viable penalty if there is no save/load functionality at all. The reason it worked in for example Diablo 2 was because you can't just reload an old save on the bnet servers.

Modifié par marshalleck, 29 novembre 2009 - 08:12 .

[Nathair Nimheil]

One of the major reasons that uncounciousness is used rather then death is because there is no resurection in the DA universe, which makes real deaths that much more meaningfull, believable and dramatic. Honestly I lost count in older RPGs of messed up scenes when some plot character dies and you are going: WTF dudes I have a cleric right here (or any other resurection method) Could have just rezzed him/her you know... why all the drama? >.>

You're arguing two unrelated things. Yes, permanent deaths without magic res makes for better drama. That has nothing to do with the one survives = all survive battle system. Permanent death in combat (or at least the possibility of it) would bring some of that drama into each and every encounter. Why is that bad?

I understand that you don't feel the need for it, but how is that an argument against having the option available for those of us who do see a need, those of us who would rather not sacrifice immersion by inventing artificial restrictions?

Modifié par Nathair Nimheil, 29 novembre 2009 - 08:14 .

[marshalleck]

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

I understand that you don't feel the need for it, but how is that an argument against having the option available for those of us who do see a need, those of us who would rather not sacrifice immersion by inventing artificial restrictions?

Perhaps I missed it, but why is dismissing a party member an unacceptable solution?