It would be nice if the new project is for current consoles. The current consoles are at the end of their lives, developers have been working with them for years. They know them inside out. They could easily make one last DA game to make the most out of the consoles we have now before the series moves on. Sure the new consoles will be capable of more but developers won't be able to make the most of it. It will probably be a good game, but not as good as it could be - if you know what I mean. I find explaining things hard!
I don't want it rushed though of course.
Bring Inon Zur back too. I don't think it would really be Dragon Age without him.
Mark Darrah on the conclusion of Dragon Age II
Débuté par
Chris Priestly
, mars 19 2012 02:56
-
Ce sujet est fermé
- Show only BioWare posts
Retour en haut
#2652
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:10
Rorschachinstein
-
- Members
- 882 messages
Statulos wrote...
RonixisJK wrote...
Another possibility for more companion
interaction would be being able to learn things from them, like the
specializations from the first game. (To some extent, I think in my head
this is going on - why would Hawke have gone through all of this
demon-summoning and blood sacrifice stuff for the Blood Mage
specialization when you could just ask Merrill?) It could be something
else, though, like perhaps a language. I figure if some Dalish elves say
something in their language, and I've been living with Merrill for
three years, I should have some idea what it is they're saying, and
maybe it could appear as a subtitle.
Speaking of specializations,
it does seem that people should notice something like blood magic, and
have a reaction to it (as has been suggested before). I think it's also
an area where companion customization shouldn't be opened up as much as
DA:O was. If you want to make someone like Wynne a blood mage, or have
your companions go and fight in only their undergarments, it's logical
for them to refuse.
I like your idea of making the crunchies have a narrative impact. Blood magic is the most evident, but also others such as reaver (a kind of masochistic blood-thirsty warrior linked to dragons) should have similar effects.
We got a bit of that with Morrigan´s shapeshifting, Leliana´s bard, Oghren´s berserker and so on; so going deeper into that will do no harm.
I think they were trying to do that with Blood magic in DAII but it got to complicated so it got scrapped.
Anyways, this has always been something that might add a more in depth take at connecting gameplay and story. In fact, In DA:O there were quest that only certain characters could do if they had certain abilites. Not just lockpicking for rouges with high enough cunning.
#2653
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:12
Frenetic Pony
-
- Members
- 32 messages
If I was in charge of designing Dragon Age 3...
Well what is the gameplay about, what is the primary focus? A major facet of the game being tactical combat. Controlling one character at a time as a light quasi action game is fine, but a focus definitely needs to be found. So tactical combat it is.
If I was designing controls for the console I'd have the four face buttons each correspond to a chosen ability of my current character. By pressing the left trigger I would then replace what the face buttons do with an ability from my party. E.G. I would put mage Jeremiah's fireball spell under "A" and theif Falcone's backstab under "B". Then to access those abilities while controlling main warrior character "PC NAME" I would hold the left trigger down, then press A or B respectively while selecting a target. This could be extended to six different abilities if you included both shoulder buttons.
To switch characters I would then have the player hold down the right trigger. Each character would then be assigned to a face button, and perhaps a shoulder button each if you can have six characters in your party (which I would do). So PC NAME is A, and mage Jeremiah is right bumper. To switch from PC NAME to Jeremiah I would hold right trigger and press right bumper.
Now that controls for a tactical combat game playable on consoles and gameplay focus is out of the way. Dragon Age 3 would be a series of small open world areas you traveled through and back and forth too. Each area offering a new location perhaps a somewhat larger and more open than say, something similar from Fable 2 or The Witcher 2 so there's more to see in a large game and doesn't get slightly annoyed that they've spent eight hours seeing the same rocky canyon from various angles.
And finally the story would settle around people and their relatable struggles between each other. Maybe even a central antogonist that is a charismatic but violent new emperor who unleashes unspeakable evils in his egotistical and misguided quest to bring "the best" sort of people to rule the world, which according to him would also be good for the peasants. Or something. Point is the central focus would NOT be a high fantasy black box type enemy who's only detectable motivation is "I am evil".
Well what is the gameplay about, what is the primary focus? A major facet of the game being tactical combat. Controlling one character at a time as a light quasi action game is fine, but a focus definitely needs to be found. So tactical combat it is.
If I was designing controls for the console I'd have the four face buttons each correspond to a chosen ability of my current character. By pressing the left trigger I would then replace what the face buttons do with an ability from my party. E.G. I would put mage Jeremiah's fireball spell under "A" and theif Falcone's backstab under "B". Then to access those abilities while controlling main warrior character "PC NAME" I would hold the left trigger down, then press A or B respectively while selecting a target. This could be extended to six different abilities if you included both shoulder buttons.
To switch characters I would then have the player hold down the right trigger. Each character would then be assigned to a face button, and perhaps a shoulder button each if you can have six characters in your party (which I would do). So PC NAME is A, and mage Jeremiah is right bumper. To switch from PC NAME to Jeremiah I would hold right trigger and press right bumper.
Now that controls for a tactical combat game playable on consoles and gameplay focus is out of the way. Dragon Age 3 would be a series of small open world areas you traveled through and back and forth too. Each area offering a new location perhaps a somewhat larger and more open than say, something similar from Fable 2 or The Witcher 2 so there's more to see in a large game and doesn't get slightly annoyed that they've spent eight hours seeing the same rocky canyon from various angles.
And finally the story would settle around people and their relatable struggles between each other. Maybe even a central antogonist that is a charismatic but violent new emperor who unleashes unspeakable evils in his egotistical and misguided quest to bring "the best" sort of people to rule the world, which according to him would also be good for the peasants. Or something. Point is the central focus would NOT be a high fantasy black box type enemy who's only detectable motivation is "I am evil".
Modifié par Frenetic Pony, 21 mars 2012 - 06:15 .
#2654
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:14
Rorschachinstein
-
- Members
- 882 messages
Cathey wrote...
It would be nice if the new project is for current consoles. The current consoles are at the end of their lives, developers have been working with them for years. They know them inside out. They could easily make one last DA game to make the most out of the consoles we have now before the series moves on. Sure the new consoles will be capable of more but developers won't be able to make the most of it. It will probably be a good game, but not as good as it could be - if you know what I mean. I find explaining things hard!
I don't want it rushed though of course.
Bring Inon Zur back too. I don't think it would really be Dragon Age without him.
Saying next gen is around the corner is absolute horse*****. And it makes me mad at Nintendo for bringing up the Wii U because Sony and Microsoft shouldn't even be competing with those jokers since Nintendo has to carry its own system with first party titles. Microsoft in particular despises going next gen because their games have been selling well. DAIII for 360, PS3, and PC? Hell yes. Maybe a port for Next gen, but I really hope Bioware doesn't do an exclusive.
Inon Zur is WIN. Florence and the Machine credits song was lovely.
Modifié par Rorschachinstein, 21 mars 2012 - 06:17 .
#2655
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:32
Zanallen
-
- Members
- 4 425 messages
Alain Baxter wrote...
Wow! Have I been living under a rock lately! I didn't know about the wiki article on DA3 and just read through it.
Um... yeah. Playable Dragons..<_<
This is one of the core reasons why we the dev team want to engage with the community and when we have something to show you, will do so. There's a lot of good & bad ideas out there (sometimes crazy... I'm not sure what we feed our designers), but until you see something from us, please take what you read within the web with a grain of salt (or lyrium).
Mind you, thinking about it, playing a dragon would be cool but the conversations...
TwinkleToes (thief): Hey, Flamee! What do you think we should do?
Flamee (Dragon): KAAWWWW!
TwinkleToes:... but we always just eat them. Can't we sneak by them or something?
Flamee: KAAWWW!
TwinkleToes: Fine. But let me loot them first. I hate looting them after they've been though your digestive tract...
Flamee (annoyed): KAAAWWWWW!
Flamee? That is sooo close to being a Secret of Mana reference.
#2656
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:33
Sylvius the Mad
-
- Members
- 24 106 messages
Everyone hopes for that.Cygnus x1 wrote...
The Best of DAO and DA2 in DA3
Thats what I'm hoping for.
But we all differ as to what the best aspects of each were.
#2657
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:34
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
PixyMisa wrote...
Exactly the problem. A grown up RPG is about love and death, not just sex and violence.Chad Vital wrote...
1 - a grown up RPG game
Umm what the heck does that mean lol? Talk about vague. Don't you have sex in Dragon Age? Isn't there violence? How is that not grown up? When I think of mature RPGs I think of Dragon, Skyrim, Oblivion, and Mass Effect.
That's DA:O vs. DAII in a nutshell.
I found DA2 to be about love and death. DAO has as much sex and violence as DA2. So what you have said is both of them in a nutshell.
#2658
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:37
Pasquale1234
-
- Members
- 3 058 messages
DAYtheELF wrote...
I prefer fixed as it is more true to life. My warden tried so so so hard to get down Morrigan's pants (including doing something bad to Wynne) until about halfway through the game when she/ I finally realized that Morrigan was straight. It made the game more realistic, cuz come on hasn't that happened to most of us in some way, shape or form at some time? Although in an ideal world everyone would be bi, that just isnt how it works and it did seem a little odd.
However, I do like the idea of characters that are say 90% straight or gay, but if you make the right choices they could eventually be romanced. I know people who identify as gay, but have been in a long-term heterosexual relationships because they found "that one person". A mix of total gay, total straight, total bi, and flexibles would be so cool!
Sexuality is a spectrum, and I would prefer for the game to reflect that. And if that means I cannot romance my favorite person, or makes me decide not to romance anyone because I don't like my choices? Well, that's the nature of the beast. It makes our characters and NPCs have more depth, history, and emotion IMHO. <3
As a practical matter, I think they need to keep all of the LIs available to protags of either gender. I've seen arguments that it is unrealistic, but it is also unrealistic to think that in the entire city of Kirkwall, there are only 4 possible people the protag could date. I don't expect BioWare to develop romance plotlines for every NPC in the game, but if they are going to do romance in games, I think they need to do it in a way where protags of either gender have equal access to their preferred LI.
#2659
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:38
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Everyone hopes for that.Cygnus x1 wrote...
The Best of DAO and DA2 in DA3
Thats what I'm hoping for.
But we all differ as to what the best aspects of each were.
Ay, there's the rub. That is the task of the developers to figure out what is the best aspects. We can only give our opinion and hope it builds into a viable consensus for them to gleam some useful knowledge.
#2660
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:38
Frenetic Pony
-
- Members
- 32 messages
To then continue on into the territory of originality.
Rather than just being able to access abilities via a button press on a console controller or hotkey press/hotbar click on the pc, why not be able to access entire chains of abilities? I refer to the ability to semi program the AI of your party members from Dragon Age. In this case, you'd build a chain of one or more abilities to happen in a sequence, and then assign that to a button/hotbar slot/etc.
For example you could have your healer buff their own healing ability and then heal each party member and/or ally that is below 50% of health. Or you could chain together a warrior's characters ability to knock down an enemy and then a rogue's ability to do extra damage to a prone character. You'd target an enemy, select the appropriate single command, and it would happen.
To swing the game a little towards action, which is just plain fun, the rather over the top "kill" moves could easily encompass a quicktime event. It's worked for other things, so when your warrior leaps at a troll of some sort you'd be treated to a quicktime event. Press "X" quickly enough and the last troll is finished off. Or if the character you control has a "dodge" power, timing it with the swing of some giant club might be required, the point is there are ideas out there.
Further an idea that has been present, even in the first dragon age, but was never really explored was environmental concerns. For example, cliffs. An ability to get knocked down + a cliff could mean the enemy is knocked over the cliff, though I can see trouble for party members getting insta killed that way. Still, things like ballistae being present are neat, but why not make them repositionable? If you find two ballistae abandoned you could point them down a hallway, lure the enemies down the hall and then have two party members manning the weapons just let loose once your lure is clear.
Rather than just being able to access abilities via a button press on a console controller or hotkey press/hotbar click on the pc, why not be able to access entire chains of abilities? I refer to the ability to semi program the AI of your party members from Dragon Age. In this case, you'd build a chain of one or more abilities to happen in a sequence, and then assign that to a button/hotbar slot/etc.
For example you could have your healer buff their own healing ability and then heal each party member and/or ally that is below 50% of health. Or you could chain together a warrior's characters ability to knock down an enemy and then a rogue's ability to do extra damage to a prone character. You'd target an enemy, select the appropriate single command, and it would happen.
To swing the game a little towards action, which is just plain fun, the rather over the top "kill" moves could easily encompass a quicktime event. It's worked for other things, so when your warrior leaps at a troll of some sort you'd be treated to a quicktime event. Press "X" quickly enough and the last troll is finished off. Or if the character you control has a "dodge" power, timing it with the swing of some giant club might be required, the point is there are ideas out there.
Further an idea that has been present, even in the first dragon age, but was never really explored was environmental concerns. For example, cliffs. An ability to get knocked down + a cliff could mean the enemy is knocked over the cliff, though I can see trouble for party members getting insta killed that way. Still, things like ballistae being present are neat, but why not make them repositionable? If you find two ballistae abandoned you could point them down a hallway, lure the enemies down the hall and then have two party members manning the weapons just let loose once your lure is clear.
#2661
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:40
Rorschachinstein
-
- Members
- 882 messages
Pasquale1234 wrote...
DAYtheELF wrote...
I prefer fixed as it is more true to life. My warden tried so so so hard to get down Morrigan's pants (including doing something bad to Wynne) until about halfway through the game when she/ I finally realized that Morrigan was straight. It made the game more realistic, cuz come on hasn't that happened to most of us in some way, shape or form at some time? Although in an ideal world everyone would be bi, that just isnt how it works and it did seem a little odd.
However, I do like the idea of characters that are say 90% straight or gay, but if you make the right choices they could eventually be romanced. I know people who identify as gay, but have been in a long-term heterosexual relationships because they found "that one person". A mix of total gay, total straight, total bi, and flexibles would be so cool!
Sexuality is a spectrum, and I would prefer for the game to reflect that. And if that means I cannot romance my favorite person, or makes me decide not to romance anyone because I don't like my choices? Well, that's the nature of the beast. It makes our characters and NPCs have more depth, history, and emotion IMHO. <3
As a practical matter, I think they need to keep all of the LIs available to protags of either gender. I've seen arguments that it is unrealistic, but it is also unrealistic to think that in the entire city of Kirkwall, there are only 4 possible people the protag could date. I don't expect BioWare to develop romance plotlines for every NPC in the game, but if they are going to do romance in games, I think they need to do it in a way where protags of either gender have equal access to their preferred LI.
You only need to have the companions romancable.
#2662
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:40
Sylvius the Mad
-
- Members
- 24 106 messages
I don't accept the unrealistic argument. The game doesn't require that all of the LIs are bi. The game only requires that all of the LIs are oriented such that the PC is a viable partner. In one playthrough, a given LI might be straight, but in the next playthrough that LI is gay. The two playthroughs exist independently. The characters in each playthrough exist independently.Pasquale1234 wrote...
As a practical matter, I think they need to keep all of the LIs available to protags of either gender. I've seen arguments that it is unrealistic, but it is also unrealistic to think that in the entire city of Kirkwall, there are only 4 possible people the protag could date. I don't expect BioWare to develop romance plotlines for every NPC in the game, but if they are going to do romance in games, I think they need to do it in a way where protags of either gender have equal access to their preferred LI.
I like having all of the LIs available to any PC.
#2663
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:44
Cyne
-
- Members
- 872 messages
I'd like the option to become good friends with my opposite-sex companions without it evolving into a romantic relationship. And definitely give people static gender preferences; if they're straight they should remain straight in every play through regardless of my own character's desires. It feels more authentic that way.
What I want most of all is an engaging, deeply complex and branching storyline, something that will make me weep and laugh and want to play over and over again just to see the different outcomes. Something that doesn't get tedious and make me wonder what my purpose is 6+ hours into the game (DA2). It doesn't have to be the about warden again, and it doesn't have to revolve around the blight or templars/ mages, it can be something entirely new. The key is to have it be engaging and unique. (Maybe have it explore Orlais or have some new king try to take over and destroy Thedas, idk) DA:O did this amazingly well. The gradually heightening excitement and multiple beginnings and endings made it a pleasure to play through.
No repeated environments, please. No ghost white darkspawn, no giant-boobed Flemeth. And re-introduce the origin stories. These helped anchor my character well and put the rest of the game into context. I really hope the option to be an elf or a dwarf will return, as well as MORE options, such as to be a qunari or a human elf-sympathizer. No insta-enemies dropping out of the sky, no over the top ninja moves unless they make sense, no dog spell. Make everything revolve around the story. For example, if the story calls for junk items, then have them, otherwise leave them out. And for god's sake, have Sandel do something besides stand around looking goofy and saying 'enchantment'. (I have little doubt he'll return in DA3, lol.) I like the character, don't get me wrong, it just seemed as though even Bioware didn't know what he was all about.
Bring back aerial view. Slow combat to more realistic speeds. Give companions more varied personalities; make them have their own love interests and their own adventures that don't involve you. Give them both positive and negative traits. If Aveline regularly took bribes from Varrick's brother for example, in order to help make her job as captain easier, it would've made her character more complex and increased tension between her and Varrick, and by association, Hawke. This slight tension would've added a depth to their relationship that it currently lacks. Little things like that would make the characters more human.
I would love to see other mage towers being explored in DA3. I want to see how mages are treated in other lands, maybe they aren't under chantry's watch in some places and are actually revered. That would be cool. Why oh why did every mage and their grandmother resort to blood magic in DA2? Blood magic was originally a forbidden, dark and mysterious thing. DA2 managed to turn it into some kind of running joke.
I want the protagonist to know what he is doing at all times and have a PERSONAL, SELFISH reason for doing it. Don't have him saving a random wanderer's life just because he's there, or because he's the designated 'hero'. Make him do it because he remembers being desperate at some point and can relate, or have him be disgusted at the destruction all around him to the extent that he'll go out of his way to help. Give emotional weight to his decisions, make them matter to him, and to his companions. The companions should have their own personal reasons for doing things too and these should at times conflict strongly with what the protagonist wants. Reveal these through party banter and side quests. Things like that would add volumes to his character.
All in all I think DA3 has a lot of potential and I hope and expect it will be better than its predecessor. I hope also that it will be officially announced soon! (why hasn't it already?)
What I want most of all is an engaging, deeply complex and branching storyline, something that will make me weep and laugh and want to play over and over again just to see the different outcomes. Something that doesn't get tedious and make me wonder what my purpose is 6+ hours into the game (DA2). It doesn't have to be the about warden again, and it doesn't have to revolve around the blight or templars/ mages, it can be something entirely new. The key is to have it be engaging and unique. (Maybe have it explore Orlais or have some new king try to take over and destroy Thedas, idk) DA:O did this amazingly well. The gradually heightening excitement and multiple beginnings and endings made it a pleasure to play through.
No repeated environments, please. No ghost white darkspawn, no giant-boobed Flemeth. And re-introduce the origin stories. These helped anchor my character well and put the rest of the game into context. I really hope the option to be an elf or a dwarf will return, as well as MORE options, such as to be a qunari or a human elf-sympathizer. No insta-enemies dropping out of the sky, no over the top ninja moves unless they make sense, no dog spell. Make everything revolve around the story. For example, if the story calls for junk items, then have them, otherwise leave them out. And for god's sake, have Sandel do something besides stand around looking goofy and saying 'enchantment'. (I have little doubt he'll return in DA3, lol.) I like the character, don't get me wrong, it just seemed as though even Bioware didn't know what he was all about.
Bring back aerial view. Slow combat to more realistic speeds. Give companions more varied personalities; make them have their own love interests and their own adventures that don't involve you. Give them both positive and negative traits. If Aveline regularly took bribes from Varrick's brother for example, in order to help make her job as captain easier, it would've made her character more complex and increased tension between her and Varrick, and by association, Hawke. This slight tension would've added a depth to their relationship that it currently lacks. Little things like that would make the characters more human.
I would love to see other mage towers being explored in DA3. I want to see how mages are treated in other lands, maybe they aren't under chantry's watch in some places and are actually revered. That would be cool. Why oh why did every mage and their grandmother resort to blood magic in DA2? Blood magic was originally a forbidden, dark and mysterious thing. DA2 managed to turn it into some kind of running joke.
I want the protagonist to know what he is doing at all times and have a PERSONAL, SELFISH reason for doing it. Don't have him saving a random wanderer's life just because he's there, or because he's the designated 'hero'. Make him do it because he remembers being desperate at some point and can relate, or have him be disgusted at the destruction all around him to the extent that he'll go out of his way to help. Give emotional weight to his decisions, make them matter to him, and to his companions. The companions should have their own personal reasons for doing things too and these should at times conflict strongly with what the protagonist wants. Reveal these through party banter and side quests. Things like that would add volumes to his character.
All in all I think DA3 has a lot of potential and I hope and expect it will be better than its predecessor. I hope also that it will be officially announced soon! (why hasn't it already?)
#2664
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:49
AngryFrozenWater
-
- Members
- 9 026 messages
Up until recently, any feedback that points into the direction of DA:O-like features (no matter what) have been dismissed. I still have the idea that no matter what, we'll end up with more of the same of DA2 and ME. Also, there have been lots of promises in the past that never have been delivered. One was made by the doctors. DA2 should build on the strengths of DA:O. It was supposed to be a "primary mission statement". Then we had the promise that the PC's decisions would "shape the world". One of the official podcasts talked about that. All those promises were made based on player's feedback. None were delivered. Although I keep giving my feedback it feels like carrying water to the sea. I am serious about this: Are you guys looking for confirmation of the direction you have taken with DA2 or are you really willing to change 180 degrees if it turns out that is what people want. Didn't I read that DA2 already has taken a 180 degree course change and BW will not do it again?Mark Wilson wrote...
+1!John Epler wrote...
You guys are great. Being able to rationally and civilly discuss things with a fanbase isn't necessarily something every developer has, so we're happy we can do it.DAYtheELF wrote...
PS, John, the fact that you and so many BioWare people are even here and reading all of this and replying and whatnot makes me love you all so much more than I already did.You don't HAVE to do this, yet you do. Thank you!
Lots of great feedback in this thread - fantastic to see so many people getting involved.
That doesn't sound like a willingness to accept feedback.Mike Laidlaw said...
I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat the Blight. Good for us!"
Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 21 mars 2012 - 06:58 .
#2665
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:51
Frenetic Pony
-
- Members
- 32 messages
Towards a more roleplaying aspect.
First off please do not include any sort of explicit morality systems, nor explicit systems of disposition, nor illogical systems allowing the gaming of npc's. I know, everyone likes bars. And npc's are part of Bioware games, why not give them a bar you can fill up? Because then the npc becomes a bar you can fill up and not a character you're interested in as part of the fiction. Your selling your own characters short by reducing their relationship to the player as some sort of number the player wants to get higher.
And as for dialogue options, I've always wondered why it's almost impossible for the player to be the "bad guy", or a schemer, or etc. You are almost always given the option of being "sociopathic ass that kicks puppies" or "paragon of virtue and justice" or perhaps "I have no strong feelings on any subject whatsoever." Sure sure, you have to save the world, because you happen to live in it. But why can't you be the guy that ends up with the barony title and a room full of gold laughing as your peasants beg you for food? Or maybe a world famous and dashing rogue that absconded with the King's daughter? Or something besides "guy that saved the world and is possible a sociopathic ass"?
Regardless,
Note, anything mentioned here, after, or previously in this thread is legally usable by Bioware and EA and I hold no claim to it.
First off please do not include any sort of explicit morality systems, nor explicit systems of disposition, nor illogical systems allowing the gaming of npc's. I know, everyone likes bars. And npc's are part of Bioware games, why not give them a bar you can fill up? Because then the npc becomes a bar you can fill up and not a character you're interested in as part of the fiction. Your selling your own characters short by reducing their relationship to the player as some sort of number the player wants to get higher.
And as for dialogue options, I've always wondered why it's almost impossible for the player to be the "bad guy", or a schemer, or etc. You are almost always given the option of being "sociopathic ass that kicks puppies" or "paragon of virtue and justice" or perhaps "I have no strong feelings on any subject whatsoever." Sure sure, you have to save the world, because you happen to live in it. But why can't you be the guy that ends up with the barony title and a room full of gold laughing as your peasants beg you for food? Or maybe a world famous and dashing rogue that absconded with the King's daughter? Or something besides "guy that saved the world and is possible a sociopathic ass"?
Regardless,
Note, anything mentioned here, after, or previously in this thread is legally usable by Bioware and EA and I hold no claim to it.
#2666
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:51
Rorschachinstein
-
- Members
- 882 messages
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I don't accept the unrealistic argument. The game doesn't require that all of the LIs are bi. The game only requires that all of the LIs are oriented such that the PC is a viable partner. In one playthrough, a given LI might be straight, but in the next playthrough that LI is gay. The two playthroughs exist independently. The characters in each playthrough exist independently.Pasquale1234 wrote...
As a practical matter, I think they need to keep all of the LIs available to protags of either gender. I've seen arguments that it is unrealistic, but it is also unrealistic to think that in the entire city of Kirkwall, there are only 4 possible people the protag could date. I don't expect BioWare to develop romance plotlines for every NPC in the game, but if they are going to do romance in games, I think they need to do it in a way where protags of either gender have equal access to their preferred LI.
I like having all of the LIs available to any PC.
Is that why Anders was more than just friends with that fella you do for his recruitment mission if you're a guy?
makes sense.
#2667
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:53
Big I
-
- Members
- 2 882 messages
Here's my feedback on what I'd like to see in the next Dragon Age game - let the player avoid bad outcomes.
In DA2 I was incredibly frustrated that no matter what I did certain plot enforced failures were set in stone. I could never save Leandra, stop Anders or decide which sibling died in the beginning. For that reason those situations rang completely hollow for me. I felt nothing except anger at the game when those scenes occured. In contrast scenes like Isabella returning at the end of Act 2 or stopping Anders from killing the girl in his Act 2 quest not only gave me a sense of satisfaction, they also made me care about the content of those scenes.
I understand that inducing a sense of loss is an incredibly powerful storytelling technique, and as such is attractive to game developers to make players care about the narrative. However for many people, myself included, placing a pre-ordained outcome of personal suffering in a story in which the protagonist is a hero of Herculean stature, and whose choices radically alter the world around them, not only fails to engage us emotionally but makes us question and ridicule the developer logic behind such scenes. In DA2 I could not believe that the same character that could slay dragons and alter politics would be unable to do something as simple as catch one murderer, or turn in a would be suicide bomber.
Daivd Gaider has in the past mentioned his unhappiness with the Redcliffe quest outcome in DA:O. By pursuing certain quest outcomes and putting in extra effort one could avoid the Sophie's Choice aspect of the quest between the arlessa and her son, thus avoiding the outcomes that to his mind were the more dramatically powerful. While I understand his logic I do not agree with it; my sense of pride and accomplishment in that quest was greater for me than was, for instance, my pity for Fenris at seeing him betrayed by his sister in his DA2 Act 3 quest, or other such scenes of mandated loss.
In story instances where the outcomes do deal with themes of loss, I would much prefer to choose between outcomes with different positives rather than outcomes with different negatives. To return to the above Redcliffe example, if forced to choose between the arlessa and her son I would do so only reluctantly and with distaste as both options seem to be failures. In comparison the choice at the end of DA2 Act 2 to preserve either Isabella's freedom or the Arishok's life, or the one at the end of the Landsmeet in DA:O between saving Loghain or keeping Alistair as a companion, were much more engaging because I wasn't choosing how to lose, but rather in which way I would like to win. DA2 devs have mentioned in the past that at one point in DA2 development the idea was mooted that Leandra's death be avoidable, but only through pursuing morally questionable choices (e.g. killing other univolved NPCs to keep her "alive", possibly in a ghoulsih state of half-life). The existence of such an outcome, even if I never took it, would have made that scene actually matter for me.
TL,DR: Give players the option to achieve an optimal outcome in situations through extra effort and quests. If the player must be forced to lose or suffer something, allow them to choose between different positives (the honorable Arishok or Isabella the lovable rogue) rather than different negatives (Meredith the crazy templar or Orsino the blood mage).
In DA2 I was incredibly frustrated that no matter what I did certain plot enforced failures were set in stone. I could never save Leandra, stop Anders or decide which sibling died in the beginning. For that reason those situations rang completely hollow for me. I felt nothing except anger at the game when those scenes occured. In contrast scenes like Isabella returning at the end of Act 2 or stopping Anders from killing the girl in his Act 2 quest not only gave me a sense of satisfaction, they also made me care about the content of those scenes.
I understand that inducing a sense of loss is an incredibly powerful storytelling technique, and as such is attractive to game developers to make players care about the narrative. However for many people, myself included, placing a pre-ordained outcome of personal suffering in a story in which the protagonist is a hero of Herculean stature, and whose choices radically alter the world around them, not only fails to engage us emotionally but makes us question and ridicule the developer logic behind such scenes. In DA2 I could not believe that the same character that could slay dragons and alter politics would be unable to do something as simple as catch one murderer, or turn in a would be suicide bomber.
Daivd Gaider has in the past mentioned his unhappiness with the Redcliffe quest outcome in DA:O. By pursuing certain quest outcomes and putting in extra effort one could avoid the Sophie's Choice aspect of the quest between the arlessa and her son, thus avoiding the outcomes that to his mind were the more dramatically powerful. While I understand his logic I do not agree with it; my sense of pride and accomplishment in that quest was greater for me than was, for instance, my pity for Fenris at seeing him betrayed by his sister in his DA2 Act 3 quest, or other such scenes of mandated loss.
In story instances where the outcomes do deal with themes of loss, I would much prefer to choose between outcomes with different positives rather than outcomes with different negatives. To return to the above Redcliffe example, if forced to choose between the arlessa and her son I would do so only reluctantly and with distaste as both options seem to be failures. In comparison the choice at the end of DA2 Act 2 to preserve either Isabella's freedom or the Arishok's life, or the one at the end of the Landsmeet in DA:O between saving Loghain or keeping Alistair as a companion, were much more engaging because I wasn't choosing how to lose, but rather in which way I would like to win. DA2 devs have mentioned in the past that at one point in DA2 development the idea was mooted that Leandra's death be avoidable, but only through pursuing morally questionable choices (e.g. killing other univolved NPCs to keep her "alive", possibly in a ghoulsih state of half-life). The existence of such an outcome, even if I never took it, would have made that scene actually matter for me.
TL,DR: Give players the option to achieve an optimal outcome in situations through extra effort and quests. If the player must be forced to lose or suffer something, allow them to choose between different positives (the honorable Arishok or Isabella the lovable rogue) rather than different negatives (Meredith the crazy templar or Orsino the blood mage).
#2668
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:56
zombifiers
-
- Members
- 2 messages
Wow, this thread is big! Apologies if any of my input's already been mentioned. I'm not sure I have it in me to go back and reread the whole thing.
My biggest request in this new game, more than anything else in the world, is please please please please please please please no more mandatory sidequests like in Dragon Age 2. I hate doing sidequests. I really hate them, and I never do them in any game ever, and Dragon Age is no exception. To find that pretty much the entire first act of DA2 was nothing but sidequests that were mandatory was awful. It was so grueling to get through, and if I hadn't been reassured by friends that the whole game wasn't like that, I would've stopped playing and returned it on the spot. Please put the sidequests back on the side where they belong.
Gameplay-wise, I would really like to see a setup where you didn't have to pause the game mid-battle in order to get the full benefits of a tactical assault. Is there any way to make this more fluid? I understand that this is likely a challenge with consoles moreso than PC, because there's only so many buttons on a controller to work with, but breaking the flow of combat to gain the advantage almost felt like cheating sometimes.
As far as the story goes, I'm really hoping for a third installment that's strong in its own right and also doesn't ignore the rest of the series. I want to know why the Warden disappeared a few years after Awakening, I want to know what ultimately became of Hawke. I want to know where Morrigan disappeared to at the end of Witch Hunt and what she activated the Eluvian for. I want to see all of my old friends again, and I want to know what they've been up to, and what part they're playing in the overall story of the world. It was such a delight to see Alistair and Zevran again in DA2. I want to see them, and everyone else, again in the next game.
Curious, though, on the subject of the story. Are you going to be running two completely different storylines in one game? One that deals with the Old God Baby and one that doesn't? I mean, the thing has to be important, right? Otherwise, it would feel like such a kick to the gut that I made such a difficult decision to go ahead and force Alistair to make the damn baby if it turned out that it wasn't really all that important at all. And I'm sure that people who decided against it don't want their version of the story shat on, either.
And when I say that I want the game's story to be "strong in its own right" I mean... I don't want the story to really feel so much like Dragon Age 2. For a very large portion of the game, I felt like I was kind of wandering around without a purpose. The whole "I just want to help my friends" motivation is fine for a protagonist, but it just felt kind of hollow in DA2, because none of my friends had one united goal that we were all working towards. I felt a lot like my Hawke was just everyone's personal Errand Boy, and because of it, he just so happened to be in the right places at the right times in order for the story to press forward. He never felt like a catalyst to anything, never felt like he was in control, never really felt like the main character of the game at all. He was just. Some guy. Who was there when the world's events unfolded around him. The game was kind of like a patchwork quilt, with a bunch of different parts sewn together in order to create one big game, but the only thing that connected them was the thread. The major time gaps in the game didn't help with this, either. What the hell was everyone up to during those years? A whole lot of nothing, I guess. I don't know. You guys never told us.
...Also, this is a minor nitpick, but is there anything you guys can do to make the clothing in these games look less like it's all made out of the same material? It always kind of looked like ladies' dresses were made out of some kind of a smooth leather-- the same as leather armors-- and I side-eyed at it pretty damn hard.
Okay, I think that's it. Sorry for the long post. I hope you guys read it... :c I love this series, and it's really great that I have the chance for my opinions to be heard.
My biggest request in this new game, more than anything else in the world, is please please please please please please please no more mandatory sidequests like in Dragon Age 2. I hate doing sidequests. I really hate them, and I never do them in any game ever, and Dragon Age is no exception. To find that pretty much the entire first act of DA2 was nothing but sidequests that were mandatory was awful. It was so grueling to get through, and if I hadn't been reassured by friends that the whole game wasn't like that, I would've stopped playing and returned it on the spot. Please put the sidequests back on the side where they belong.
Gameplay-wise, I would really like to see a setup where you didn't have to pause the game mid-battle in order to get the full benefits of a tactical assault. Is there any way to make this more fluid? I understand that this is likely a challenge with consoles moreso than PC, because there's only so many buttons on a controller to work with, but breaking the flow of combat to gain the advantage almost felt like cheating sometimes.
As far as the story goes, I'm really hoping for a third installment that's strong in its own right and also doesn't ignore the rest of the series. I want to know why the Warden disappeared a few years after Awakening, I want to know what ultimately became of Hawke. I want to know where Morrigan disappeared to at the end of Witch Hunt and what she activated the Eluvian for. I want to see all of my old friends again, and I want to know what they've been up to, and what part they're playing in the overall story of the world. It was such a delight to see Alistair and Zevran again in DA2. I want to see them, and everyone else, again in the next game.
Curious, though, on the subject of the story. Are you going to be running two completely different storylines in one game? One that deals with the Old God Baby and one that doesn't? I mean, the thing has to be important, right? Otherwise, it would feel like such a kick to the gut that I made such a difficult decision to go ahead and force Alistair to make the damn baby if it turned out that it wasn't really all that important at all. And I'm sure that people who decided against it don't want their version of the story shat on, either.
And when I say that I want the game's story to be "strong in its own right" I mean... I don't want the story to really feel so much like Dragon Age 2. For a very large portion of the game, I felt like I was kind of wandering around without a purpose. The whole "I just want to help my friends" motivation is fine for a protagonist, but it just felt kind of hollow in DA2, because none of my friends had one united goal that we were all working towards. I felt a lot like my Hawke was just everyone's personal Errand Boy, and because of it, he just so happened to be in the right places at the right times in order for the story to press forward. He never felt like a catalyst to anything, never felt like he was in control, never really felt like the main character of the game at all. He was just. Some guy. Who was there when the world's events unfolded around him. The game was kind of like a patchwork quilt, with a bunch of different parts sewn together in order to create one big game, but the only thing that connected them was the thread. The major time gaps in the game didn't help with this, either. What the hell was everyone up to during those years? A whole lot of nothing, I guess. I don't know. You guys never told us.
...Also, this is a minor nitpick, but is there anything you guys can do to make the clothing in these games look less like it's all made out of the same material? It always kind of looked like ladies' dresses were made out of some kind of a smooth leather-- the same as leather armors-- and I side-eyed at it pretty damn hard.
Okay, I think that's it. Sorry for the long post. I hope you guys read it... :c I love this series, and it's really great that I have the chance for my opinions to be heard.
Modifié par zombifiers, 21 mars 2012 - 07:00 .
#2669
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 06:59
Rorschachinstein
-
- Members
- 882 messages
zombifiers wrote...
Wow, this thread is big! Apologies if any of my input's already been mentioned. I'm not sure I have it in me to go back and reread the whole thing.
My biggest request in this new game, more than anything else in the world, is please please please please please please please no more mandatory sidequests like in Dragon Age 2. I hate doing sidequests. I really hate them, and I never do them in any game ever, and Dragon Age is no exception. To find that pretty much the entire first act of DA2 was nothing but sidequests that were mandatory was awful. It was so grueling to get through, and if I hadn't been reassured by friends that the whole game wasn't like that, I would've stopped playing and returned it on the spot. Please put the sidequests back on the side where they belong.
I don't remember there being a manditory side quest not relevant to the story?
Modifié par Rorschachinstein, 21 mars 2012 - 06:59 .
#2670
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:00
Gwynedde
-
- Members
- 17 messages
To tell the truth, I actually did like DAII. It was enjoyable for a couple play throughs, and had some interesting moments...that being I loved the Arishok and the mystique revolving around the quanari. But it did have flaws. Characters for example, Varric was great but sometimes he came off a little bland...I wasn't sure about the developement of Anders, all that angst was making my stomach sick. Isabela...Isabela was eye candy. Yes I liked the characters as a whole compared to DAO, maybe because they seemed more of family. But for DAIII, there needs to be more depth--maybe even get some pointers from the Song of Ice and Fire series.
As for the story, there are many directions where it could go. Personally I would love see more of the qunari, Flemeth too (she needs to play a larger part!) and even Sandal-where did he come from? His powers?
I have been hearing talk about going to Orlais, that would be great but I think I'm more interested in seeing the Tevinter. I may not be such a great fan of the Mage/Templar crisis which probably will continue on, but the Imperium sounds so interesting.
As for gameplay, I liked my Hawke having a actual voice so I wouldn't mind that carrying on to the next game. But I was not a fan of the symbols that told you whether the line was a threat, a token of gratitude or some witty comment. I can read! And so can many others, but if it has to be there it should be an option.
Now this next topic is a soft topic among my group of friends who have played both games. Perhaps one of the best parts of DAO was talking to your companions, yes it was done in DA II but to a limited extent. You couldn't just drop into a conversation whilst adventuring, you had to wait until it came up in your journal. But even when that happened, it was brief and sometimes hardly worth it. This is probably why I did not feel that sense of depth in my companions.
Nothing else comes to mind now, only that I cannot wait for the next game. And that I really hope it does not come out when I'm volunteering in Nepal next year.
Cheers,
Gwynedde.
As for the story, there are many directions where it could go. Personally I would love see more of the qunari, Flemeth too (she needs to play a larger part!) and even Sandal-where did he come from? His powers?
I have been hearing talk about going to Orlais, that would be great but I think I'm more interested in seeing the Tevinter. I may not be such a great fan of the Mage/Templar crisis which probably will continue on, but the Imperium sounds so interesting.
As for gameplay, I liked my Hawke having a actual voice so I wouldn't mind that carrying on to the next game. But I was not a fan of the symbols that told you whether the line was a threat, a token of gratitude or some witty comment. I can read! And so can many others, but if it has to be there it should be an option.
Now this next topic is a soft topic among my group of friends who have played both games. Perhaps one of the best parts of DAO was talking to your companions, yes it was done in DA II but to a limited extent. You couldn't just drop into a conversation whilst adventuring, you had to wait until it came up in your journal. But even when that happened, it was brief and sometimes hardly worth it. This is probably why I did not feel that sense of depth in my companions.
Nothing else comes to mind now, only that I cannot wait for the next game. And that I really hope it does not come out when I'm volunteering in Nepal next year.
Cheers,
Gwynedde.
#2671
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:01
zombifiers
-
- Members
- 2 messages
Rorschachinstein wrote...
zombifiers wrote...
Wow, this thread is big! Apologies if any of my input's already been mentioned. I'm not sure I have it in me to go back and reread the whole thing.
My biggest request in this new game, more than anything else in the world, is please please please please please please please no more mandatory sidequests like in Dragon Age 2. I hate doing sidequests. I really hate them, and I never do them in any game ever, and Dragon Age is no exception. To find that pretty much the entire first act of DA2 was nothing but sidequests that were mandatory was awful. It was so grueling to get through, and if I hadn't been reassured by friends that the whole game wasn't like that, I would've stopped playing and returned it on the spot. Please put the sidequests back on the side where they belong.
I don't remember there being a manditory side quest not relevant to the story?
Seriously? The entire first act was just mini quests to farm gold. Sure, a few of them were relevant (like the one that led you to the Arishok the first time and whatnot), but for the most part, it was just meaningless grinding.
#2672
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:12
Pasquale1234
-
- Members
- 3 058 messages
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I don't expect an answer to that question. If they are still considering it, they're probably not sure they can do it, in which case they wouldn't want to promise anything. And if they're not considering it, telling us that doesn't make anyone happy.Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...
Q: You've said you're going for voiced PC for a while now, but where do you stand on the proposed Mute PC option? Is it still being considered (seriously) or has it been dumped?
I asked that question, and also whether they intend to continue with pre-defined protags or create your own protags, but haven't seen responses to either thus far.
#2673
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:23
katiebour
-
- Members
- 232 messages
John Epler wrote...
makenzieshepard wrote...
It's funny how we can get attached to things, Even if they aren't optimal for our builds. I can't tell you how long I carried the Cousland family sword on my human nobles. And even when I did eventually switch to another weapon I always, always switched back to it to get the the killing blow on Arl Howe. This was my family's sword handed down over generations a symbol of strength and power. And the story and personal touches applied to Starfang and Vigilance made them worthy of being wielded by my wardens.
I guess my point is that as a someone who is not primarily a power/stat gamer don't just make it about choosing +2 awesome or +3roxxors. The weapon should mean something, to me as a player and I shouldn't be discarding something I've been using all along for the thing I pulled off random guys #357 and will discard by dude #375. All the coolest weapons have a history to them, make em count.
Hah. My example is similar, although from STALKER (those of you playing the John Epler Drinking Game, take a drink). One of the earliest weapons I picked up in Call of Pripyat was a less-than-spectacular AK. But through the course of the game, I kept it, I upgraded it and, even when I eventually found weapons that were upgradeable to something far more impressive, I still used it. It was my gun - it had seen me through all sorts of sticky situations, and while it wasn't as fancy as the various weapons that were now prolific, it was still my gun.
Which is to say, I know what you mean. And I like systems that allow you to develop a strong emotional attachment to your equipment. EverQuest was another example where I still used sub-par gear because of the journey I'd undertaken to get that gear.
My Warden wore Nelaros' ring through Awakenings. Stats or no stats, it was a lovely, heartbreaking story, and that little flavor text was perfect
I also really liked the companion's starting gear in Origins and Awakenings- Alistair's token, Anders' fox pendant, Zevran's melted-down belt-of-trophies.
Even the little things build worlds, and characters, and are immensely satisfying to find in-game.
#2674
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:28
castrokid
-
- Members
- 14 messages
Cygnus x1 wrote...
The Best of DAO and DA2 in DA3
Thats what I'm hoping for.
I just want some fraggin' griffins.
#2675
Posté 21 mars 2012 - 07:28
Gwynedde
-
- Members
- 17 messages
Also, I know this may be quite a huge ask but after playing SWtor lately with each class/gender having a different voice actor it was great. Perhaps this could work with an origins setting for the next game? I, among many others that I know are all hoping for a qunari origin.
