114 réponses à ce sujet

[daem3an]

I never really liked how in many games resurrection is a commonplace, everyday occurrence. I much prefer this system. You get wounded badly and you're out of the fight, and weakened until you can get some medical attention. Permadeath from a single battle seems extreme, but I think it would be interesting if there was a limit to how many wounds a character can sustain simultaneously before they're either a. dead permanently, or b. forced to stay at the camp for a fixed period of time until they're fit to fight again.

[DarwinJames]

I agree. If a party member dies, party member should be dead.

Go you one further. If your character dies, your character is dead. This has to be self imposed. Delete your character, start over.

Needless to say, I have not gotten very far in the game! But it does add something.

[Kela_Ravenwood]

Koyasha wrote...

Honestly, given the way the game is set up I would be just as, if not even more happy with an approval penalty for each time a party member falls in battle. Somewhere between -5 and -20 approval (depending on difficulty setting) when a party member falls would be awesome, because it would make the most sense, without limiting the game in a way that might be a little too much, considering the relatively small number of available companions.
It also makes for very good logic - anytime they fall, it's pretty much your fault because they're following your orders. If I'm knocked out and a hair from death under someone's command, I'm going to think less of their ability to command and lead. If it happens often, I don't think I'm going to want to fight under their leadership anymore.
The best thing about this sort of penalty is it's more likely to be the kind of penalty you accept and move on with, rather than reloading every single time.

Ok, but what if the ONLY reason you died, repeatedly is because you keep running off and attacking 10+ people, who up until that point hadn't seen you yet, while your party in nearly out of power, still fighting another creature, you where told to fight as well, but couldn't be bothered, and you are already half dead. That has happened more times then I can count. They also for no apparent reason will stop attacking the creature I want them to attack, even when that creature is one hit from death, and attack some other creature instead.

When they do what I say without fail, and then die then I would except a performance it.

Modifié par Kela_Ravenwood, 30 novembre 2009 - 01:52 .

[Kela_Ravenwood]

Nathair Nimheil wrote...

You only rarely are forced to take characters with you. Much of the game is soloable if you want.

You don't even have to tell characters to leave your camp. Just don't take them with you from the party selection screen.

I don't begrudge you for wanting challenge.

Which urinates all over immersion. (As we keep pointing out to you, again and again.)

So you have no problem TELLING THE PERSON THEY CAN'T go with you cause they are too injured, if it is the DEV that does it, but if you do it yourself it breaks immersion.

You know life was also better back when we had to walk to school up-hill, both ways, in five feet of snow... oh, wait no it wasn't.

Prem-Death is was a hold over from the days when they way Game makers made money was by you pumping quarters into a machine, it was NOT fun it was Frustrating.

[DaeFaron]

Heh, yep your henchmen dies they are dead, you die you gotta start over.



Hows that sound?

[menasure]

well there was one game where i did not care about party wipes: ufo enemy unknown. every succeeded mission gave you enough gold from sold alien stuff to buy a complete (rookie) squad. that was actually more fun than training your squad up to a rambo point using lots of reloads when one of them died. when one of your oldtime survivors (usually high rank officer because of that) was killed in action it only made the moment in game more special.

in a rpg like this a dead for real concept would prove to be problematic though because the active characters are very limited in number and the whole story is actually a fight against all odds setup.

[Faerell Gustani]

JKoopman wrote...
Some (most) people play games for enjoyment, relaxation, and stress relief, not to masochistically have their ass kicked by something that's ostensibly supposed to be entertainment just so they can brag about their "accomplishment" to their friends. All ultra-extreme and frustrating death penalties do is cause those people
to give up and go do other things with their time, which I suppose is fine if you want gaming (specifically PC gaming) to go the way of the comic book industry circa 1990 where the fanbase became so cloistered and introverted that it scared away most potential new fans and slowly collapsed in on itself. It's sad that I can see it happening already.

Asking for an "extreme" difficulty mode is one thing, but to bemoan how far gaming has "fallen" simply because being downed in combat doesn't result in perma-death or you don't have to repeat a boss encounter 10 times to survive it smacks of the same elitism that nearly killed my other childhood hobby. Rather, I look at it as a positive sign of how far gaming has come since the days of Donkey Kong and Prince of Persia that it no longer has to rely on contrived penalties and frustratingly difficult encounters to pad out gameplay.

This is what differentiates "hardcore gamers" from "casual gamers".  Hardcore gamers are here for a challenge.  We want to test the limits of our reflexes, minds, hand-eye coordination, etc.

Sports also fall into this category.  Some people play sports for fun...casually.  Others are professionals, or people looking to get professional, so they're looking for a challenge and to improve themselves.

While multiplayer PvPgames flesh out the sports analogy much better, similar concepts can be drawn to singleplayer RPGs.  There is a serious tactical aspect to RPGs and people who really love tactics (like me) are drawn to RPGs for that reason, (I also love RPGs, but if I want to roleplay I'll stick to tabletop and LARPs, videogames have far too limited interaction).  In this sense you're playing against a computerized opponent, and the dumming down of the AI and making the game easier in general is a serious detriment to the enjoyment of the game.  It removes the challenge.  Without challenge the game becomes just a cinematic and might as well be a movie.

I don't necessarily fell that "perma-death" is the correct solution, as I too fall into the category of gamers that remedy death with a "Reload" spell.  I think the best solution to the Lack of consequence for falling in battle would be the following:
1. Fewer injury kits (and fewer materials to create them)
2. Injury kits cannot be applied in combat.

I have no idea how many times when a couple of my guys fall, I just have Wynne throw a Ressurection there and bring them back up, and immediately use an injury kit.  Follow it up with a mass heal and mass rejuvination and they're fine and dandy again.
This will remove the res and repair recovery strategy, and this will make retreating to camp a more appealing action instead of packing dozens of injury kits.
Also, who uses anything but the lesser Injury kits?  My guys never fall enough times for that to be an issue.

[jackkel dragon]

Koyasha wrote...

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.

This may have been said already, but there was a hit to approval in one of the death scripts in the toolset. The line was commented out, maybe the developers thought it was too harsh.

Even so, I agree that people who want super-hard mode should get it, as long as the work was already put into it. (Not that it matters to me, I play on Easy with hundreds of healing items. I never have to worry about consequences.)

[DaeFaron]

Well, I did not have the tactics on, for Wynne to cast revive I had to do it manually, though you could sell all your injury kits and not get any, that'd fix one of the problems for the 'hardcore' group no?

[DragonRageGT]

To turn this game into a Hardcore Diablo II thing it would require a whole re-balancing it, imho. I like that it is way harder than it would if perma death was implemented and I believe that there are mods for that, perhaps appliable to party members as well?



Mind you that a true hardcore mod would have to prohibit saves of any kind or make auto-saves at the end of a session that could be loaded only once at the start of the next. Then I'd like to hear who is willing to lose a main character after some 90 hours into the game... or even a party member after you've established some intense relationship with them. I'd kill myself if I'd lose Leliana now, for instance... perhaps she would do the same! =)

[TileToad]

Obviously, as it stands, DA:O would not benefit from the introduction of permanent deaths. There simply aren't enough characters to sustain such a system, nor make it fun. If one could've chosen from well over 25 characters however.. Now that would've been shweet!



For those who find these ideas too hardcore or whatever nonsense, perhaps shooters are better suited for you guys. Those are the games where difficulty level is the only interesting gameplay factor, after all. No worries about cumbersome micro managing, healing, or what have you. Just set your desired level of difficulty then point and click your little reticle untill it says: the end. No hassle, no burning DVD's.

[DaeFaron]

If there was a perma-death system that wasn't scripted *Like, henchmen A comes with you into this area, and gets killed*, It'd have to be worked out in a good way. Nothing completely random and chance for me to like it.

[Fraegster]

Perma Death Woowooo!



/rolls eyes

[Khumak]

There's really no way around the save/load issue unless you add a hard core mode where your game ends and all saves are deleted if you die. Most people wouldn't enjoy that.

A more reasonable solution would be to require that all party members survive every fight or you get a "you lose" cut scene and the game auto loads your last save. That's basically what I use as my own self imposed house rule. Currently playing through on nightmare with no potions allowed. No deaths so far. Some of the battles have taken quite a few tries before I could win under those conditions, especially the ones with scripted "no prep" starts.

And yes I do use force field sometimes.

Modifié par Khumak, 30 novembre 2009 - 12:52 .

[OgrynFlesh]

Those against permanent deaths might be slightly missing the point. There would be permanent death, but it would never happen to you. You wouldn't LET your people die. Knowing that a single death is a final death, not only would you be far more careful but you would be far more unwilling to say, "what? demons? no problem, mate, we'll be back before dinner!".



If... uh, *when*, my party gets overwhelmed in fights, maybe Alistair is getting brutally battered, I'll turn off his tactics and set him to passive then tell him to run. My main will taunt, get the enemies focus while the rest of the party gets some distance, then I'll start running too. It's that extra tension that if one of us dies then that is it.



Oh, and no. I can't do that myself. I can't kick out a party member or reload. That breaks *immersion*. When I have to do it myself it stops my character from being a heroic/demonic Grey Warden and turns him into a mere avatar. If that makes sense... an avatar representing *my* control over the game.



And yes, I do get quite carried away. Sad, but whatcha gonna do.

[GN-Lelldorianx]

Ogryn, + rep.

I don't understand the dire hatred coming from people like Mr. Tom Smith over there on page 3. It's becoming something of a political debate, almost. What do you care if we like our game one way? You tell us to find another game, how about you find another thread?

This is a discussion that does not concern flametrolls, sorry, go back to 4chan. I understand what it's like to have strong feelings for one side of things in the real world better because of this, why rage at a group of people because they are different?

[Seneva]

So if your PC "dies" it will be game over for you. Start a new game.

[Ekyri]

I don't think permadeath would work, as that would severely cripple story. I think injuries should have more of an effect, as it is now, I can run around with several injuries no problem.

[Seneva]

One option could be the complete removal off the Injury Kits. That way if one of your compagnions "dies" the injuries cant be removed while you're in that dungeon / area.

If you want the heal your injuries you MUST head back to the campsite.

You can also add a temporary "character is recovering from injuries and isn't fit enough for traveling". Put a 20 minute timelimit on it or something like that.



I think that would be a severe punishment for a character "dying"

[Odysseus44]

Do people really feel that reloading is trivial? When a party member dies during a difficult fight and you have to start over the fight because you don't want to lose him/her, I think that adds sufficient incentive to try to keep them alive, no? Provided the fights are challenging enough, of course...



My personal preference is perma-death (with maybe VERY limited possibilities for resurrection), so that if someone dies, then either you accept it and move on, or re-load and try to do better.



What I don't like in the DAO/NWN2 approach is how it trivialize the fall of the party members. It's too easy to sacrifice them if things go wrong for them.



'Drat! I can't use my Fireball against all those baddies around Alistair... he'll die!'

'Oh well.. so will they, and at least he'll go out with a bang...'

One fireball later: 'How do you feel Alistair?"

'Well done...'



Not that I would ever do that...

[Sereaph502]

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?

And how is that an obstacle to having an optional difficulty between easy and normal that isn't quite as easy but not as tough as normal?  Because people like you and the OP whine about how this optional choice somehow ruins their gameplay, because obviously even the THOUGHT of bioware wanting to make the game sellable to more than just the die hard BG fans disguists them.

It goes both ways

Not to say I'm for or against an easier difficulty, I do just fine on normal.  I was just using that as an example.

[Faerell Gustani]

Regarding Rep hits...I just had an idea:



It would be kind of lame to just keep having rep drop everytime they go down. So instead have different variables for ways they drop. You cannot get the same rep-hit twice per character.



So you have the following:



Poor Strategist

The companion thinks you're a poor strategist because the companion dropped while following tactics orders (meaning, tactics turned on, you're not controlling them).



Nearly got me Killed

Your companion believes that you nearly got him/her killed. This means that you were manually controlling the companion when he dropped.



Non-communicative Commander

Your companion believes that they were dropped because you failed to alert them to something. This means that you were controlling another party member and you had tactics disabled at the time this companion fell.



Maybe put in a "redemption" mechanic as well to clear these statuses and regain your reputation with them.



So to recover from Poor Strategist:

You never control the companion for the duration of a fight and they still do over 30% of the damage that fight.



Recovery from "nearly got me killed":

Main character kills an attacker who is targeting this companion.

Or interrupts a spell being cast at the companion. (dispelling hexes and crushing prison count)

Or uses a knockdown/stun to free them from a grab.



thoughts?