2816 réponses à ce sujet

[cogsandcurls]

I've been thinking a little more on this topic and I feel I need to mention a few things.

Firstly, DA2's dialogue wheel/personality stacking system. I just want to say how much I love it. I didn't realise how much I loved it until I recently played Mass Effect and found that the dialogue options were basically good/neutral/jerk instead of diplomatic/sarcastic/agressive. It's like....the fact that that stacking system defined your attitude, but not your views. My paragon Shep is going to do the "good" thing because her personality compells her to. Meanwhile, I can quite happily stack up dialogue choices to make a Diplomatic Hawke but whether that Hawke has a thing against mages, or is a huge anti-templar revolutionary? That's completely up to the player. I know that sounds like splitting hairs but the fact that personality and worldview aren't tied together makes the characters you can create infinitely more variable, and I thought it was great.

Second thing which was so obvious to me I forgot to say it last post: thank you, thank you, thank you for the bisexual love interests. I know the team got/gets flak for it from certain quarters but not only was it a really nice way to include a section of the playerbase that's usually ignored, it also just helped to expand player choice exponentially, which is always a plus. I really appreciated it and I know a lot of others did too, across ALL sections of the playerbase. (Case in point: my bf is currently playing DA:O and is so charmed by Alistair he's disappointed that his male Warden can't romance him. I'm looking forward to telling him that he can romance whoever he so chooses once he gets to DA2). I don't know if this will change for future installments, but I just wanted it on record that many people really appreciated that as a mechanic.

To the DA team - thank you for being so communicative about this. Ultimately I trust the judgement of the team and I know that whatever decisions are made will, in the end, be what the team truly believes will be best for Dragon Age. But that fact that you're open to (and responding to!) fan feedback is really refreshing and, well, heartening.

[Thor Rand Al]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
Q: Will we be going to silent protagonist?
A: A few months back, I noted that we'd be continuing on a voiced protagonist. We feel the voice improves the overall experience, thought we know that some of your disagree. Sorry! STILL, we have, however, heard feedback on paraphrase clarity. What I've often seen is feedback that the paraphrases fail when your character DOES something unexpected. Would you folks agree that moments of action or major choice are the issue that most needs to be addressed?

This is very very good new's ty, in fact I'm estatic I don't have to go back to a silent protag.  As far as the dialogue wheel, well I for one had np with DA2's not knowing whats being said but that's just me.

I do have a question though that hasn't I don't think been (so many pages lol) asked.  Will our new protag get the same kind of personal attention as Hawke, n what I mean by that is will there be those bittersweet parts where you want to sit there n cry along with your protag, (losing sibling, mom) where you can see the pain n anguish on our character.  Yes for some of us this is just as important in a story-based game because we can feel closer to our character that we've invested time n energy n emotions in.  Hawke is the perfect example of what I mean.  Will the agrro, snarky, diplo be left in?  That's another part of DA2 that makes the character feel more real, gives them life.

I hate saying goodbye to Hawke, I absolutely adore n love Hawke for so many reasons n it was a very very sad day today when I came on BSN n saw that Hawke was no more.  You broke my heart Bioware n that is so what makes for an excellent protag and story, when u don't want to give something up.  Anyways, sorry, I'm done rambling.  Thank you so much Bioware for giving us some excellent games and protag's.  Looking forward to more.

Modifié par Thor Rand Al, 20 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[Varus Torvyn]

I'm glad BioWare put in the dialog wheel, because Hawke was voiced...no more blank expressions when your character was in dialog was a major step forward.

The wheel doesn't matter, voiceover does.

[RandPC]

I realize the idea of Dragon Age being a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate has been abandoned, and accept that's not a style of gameplay Bioware cares for at this point... I hope you feel there is some merit in looking at what went right in your older games be it Baldur's Gate or Mass Effect 1, Or Dragon Age or Jade Empire even. And consider what went wrong in Dragon Age 2, and given the cancellation of an expansion there's clearly an acceptance that something didn't work out there.

To a large extent DA2 felt like it was designed to appeal to those that didn't like DA:O, and in the process you forgot much of what made the original game great and alienated more of the initial audience then had probably been intended.


From a PC specific perspective I'd like to see at least an option for something overhead tactical pause & play style from DA:O, I didn't care much for the hack and slash action oriented nature of DA2.
I understand this may not be viable however, and if not I'd hope that some element of tactical combat can be reintroduced. DA2, for all the lipservice that was paid to tactics and ability to create tactical strings never felt or played like anything but a straight up action game with lots of abilities in combat situations.

I want some ability to approach combat tactically if we choose. I'd rather strategize how to face a tough battle with a handful of foes then a wake of 10 enemies followed by another wave of 10 enemies from the sky in which I race to push the "awesome button" fast enough to beat them.
Also while ambushes can and should happen at times, and surprises like that do make sense. You should be able to see most enemies coming and react and strategize a means to deal with them. With DA2 even if you had been able to play the combats in a tactical fashion there would have been no point bothering with tactics when people will randomly fall down from the sky in waves. Tt destroys any reason or attempt to deal with anything tactically.
Fast and fluid combat doesn't HAVE to be button mashing action.
I think there can be some balance between DA:O and DA2 in combat style, both in pacing and speed of the combat (slow and tactical vs fast and furious hit buttons awesome happens) and in choices and tactical options.
More exploration with abilities (a la combos in DAO), less binary combos.

In short: More tactics, more choice, less hack and slash and less press button see awesome happen.


Get rid of the constant waves and waves of filler enemies. Enemies randomly dropping out of the sky because it's time for a new batch, enemies popping up from the ground. It's neither plausible nor fun. It looks ridiculous, it feels ridiculous, and it makes for miserable combats. It felt like something I'd expect from a SNES side scrolling action game. Not an RPG from 2011. Perhaps budget and a desire to get a sequel out rapidly to capitalize on the success on Dragon Age was part of the reasoning, but that's irrelevant. In the end it made for a horrible experience.

The recycled dungeons. I want to go to a new area and actually feel like I am somewhere else. Not going to 10 different areas, and feeling like I've been to the same place 10 times. There is no sense of exploration, and it's difficult to care much about the world or city when every place I go is largely just a repeat of 2-3 maps.
Whether this was a budget or time issue I don't know. I do know that seeing the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over again for hours at a time is mind numbingly boring. Please, something new.


While I liked the silent protagonist with fully written dialogue options, you've (Bioware) implied in the past that such a design was only ever used because of technical limitations, and such options were never intentional.
That's fine, while I disagree that it's a terrible means of design I do feel there are definitely positive and negatives to both silent protagonist with fully written dialog vs more central singular character with voiced dialog in a structured path.
I do hope you find a way to do the fully voiced protagonist and top down storyline without denying players control over their parties and characters. Other developers have managed fully voiced protagonists without eschewing player control and choice.
Don't assign the PC a motive and desire for all of their actions. Leave it to the player or at least, don't contradict the player if he does it himself - to assign his character motives. Quoting an earlier poster "Don't assume that the PC defeated the slavers because he hates slavery. Don't assume that he spared a murderer's life because he thinks the killer can be redeemed. Don't assume that he disapproves of his companion's hatred just because he stopped his companion from exacting vengeance."

As yet another poster said-
"The PC's motives are not yours to assign. I don't need a Commander Shephard in Dragon Age, I want to play my character, not Bioware's."

Thus far Bioware's fully voiced PC's have felt more like your character, and your story. I want to see my character with my influence on the story. Mass Effect 1 and DA2 failed at this for me,
*In the interests of disclosure I haven't play a great deal of Mass Effect 2/3 a few hours of each though I did play ME1 to completion once, neither appealed to me much but I've heard some say ME2 at least did well in this respect. Alas, I've heard ME3 failed here too*

Choices that matter. Choices that come to bite me in the ass later. I LOVED Witcher 1 & 2 because of this, they were both immensely flawed in some respects but they were absolutely unmatched in this regard. Bioware was once the king of this, CD Project Red took your throne and ran so far off with it that their out of sight and impossible to imagine you matching.
I sat here and really tried to thing of any choice that made a big difference in DA2.. and frankly, I couldn't come up with even one. And that's depressing. Oftentimes there didn't even seem to be much effort made to present the illusion of meaningful choice or consequences.


CHOICE in other areas besides story also:

I understand the desire to streamline and simplify the gameplay, but please don't go the Mass Effect route of streamlining just equating to removing all RPG elements.
I do want an RPG, not a story driven action game.
Customizable companion equipment.
Secondary skills that matter, not only combat skills (If it's going to be marketed as an RPG, allow us some real role playing)
More skills. You didn´t have to slice more than half of DA:O skills, only the useless/redundant ones.
I don't want all combat all the time with occasional interruptions to talk. Give me some non combat skills, and secondary skills that actually matter.
Perhaps these were cut with the intent to simplify and open up the game to a larger audience which is a noble goal but in practice it just limited my choice and cut down on my experiences.
Don't limit weapons or weapon styles by class. DA:O was much better for customization. Choice is good, customization is good.
Another issue I had with DA2. If you were not a healer you had to use Anders, if you were not a tank you had to use Aveline. This design seriously limited any real choice in terms of group composition. Two of your slots while hypothetically at your choice are clearly predefined in practice. This severely limts player choice in a game that already stripped away player choice in far too many areas.

Dragon Age 2 was all about less choice, less consequence, less options. I was deeply disappointed with how throughly Mass Effect evolved to strip all choices out, I sincerely hope that the market success of Mass Effect won't lead you to feel that choice and options are inherently bad in all areas. You've succeeded before by allowing the player choices and options, the market has shown it can be done and can be appreciated.

Also, as someone else said "Some actual sense of reality on your choice on specializations. So you decide to be a Blood Mage, everyone is afraid of them but they just "pretend" you´re not one?"


I loved the concept of the friendship/rivalry system, but in practice it was entirely binary in nature. Good/bad with nothing in between. Rivalry just meant being a jerk to your companions at all times. I think/hope that there was more to the idea behind rivalry

The companions in DA2 were enjoyable, one of the few aspects I liked. But... I found the lack of interaction with your companions very disappointing. I hope this can be brought back to the level we say in DA:O.

While the story and characters of DA2 didn't appeal to me, I really appreciated the attempt to do something different and unusual.
No big bad central enemy, no epic story with world shattering consequences, no travels all over the world, characters development over 7 years of time. It was different, and atypical from Bioware. The story often felt aimless, with dubious motivation and sometimes thrusting us into one direction for no apparent reason then you felt we had to do task X now.... but that was poor writing IMO, the idea behind the direction you went was very unique and I think it can be done well.
And it's very very difficult to deny that Bioware can and has written terrific stories.

I LOVED the racial origins in DA:O however, I wouldn't at all mind a return to that either. It was certainly creative and unique and encourages multiple play throughs. Budget and time limitations could rule this out though, and I can understand that.

I don't want to see an open world game, it doesn't suit Bioware's strengths as a developer IMO.
I don't dislike open world, it's difficult to do well I think but it can be very enjoyable. The style however definitely doesn't suit the experiences Bioware's games have traditionally given nor does it play well to your developmental strengths.


I HATED the dialog wheel, I'm sure this will stay but I feel the need to put forth my opinion. I loath it. It was the single biggest irritant with the Mass Effect trilogy. One nice little kind remark, one rude, one a token exploratory comment and all reactions easily spelled out. Dragon Age 2 took all of the bad and somehow made it even worse. (Look! Say this for romantic option! Look say this for token mean option! look say this for token nice option!) so the player doesn't have to do any thinking at all, or reading, or listening to the dialog.
What I wouldn't give to see this whole style of dialog and all of the thought behind it thrown out.
I know it will stay, but you asked for our thoughts and here it is.


In truth I doubt I'll buy Dragon Age 3, I disliked Mass Effect 2 and 3, and I disliked Dragon Age 2. At this point simply buing a Bioware game without trying it first is an outdated concept for me, I've been burned too many times recently doing this.
DA3 is likely far enough into development that meaningful changes based on anything you here in this thread is unlikely.
But I'm willing to be convinced to buy it, I WANT to be convinced. I want to think the Developer that was once far and away the best developer, someone you always bought instantly... isn't now a developer that's largely irrelevant, and while I can only speak for myself as opinions will naturally vary I fear that's the path your most recent games are leading me.


Oh, and from a purely PC perspective while I realize you're EA owned and likely have little say in most purely financial/business decisions... I sincerely hope Dragon Age 3 isn't another Origin only property. I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to use an EA service regardless of it's merits or advantages. EA's proven hundreds of times over for well over a decade that customer happiness, and satisfaction is irrelevant. I'm a walking dollar sign, and not a person.
I may have to be a dollar sign for EA, how much control Bioware has I have no clue... but allow me to be a customer of yours and not a sentient dollar bill.
Also, no more Bioware points please. I earn money in real currency, allow me to pay you for your products not fictional points.

That last bit wasn't especially Dragon Age 2 related, just the usual EA hatred rant you've undoubtedly seen a million times. I felt the need to say it however.
Less Origin requirements, and less fictional point systems pretending to be legal currency.


Incidentally Mark Darrah is buried in a grave in Nashkel in BG1. 
It's rather sad and pathetic that I remember that.  

[Illisium]

I have a very simple request; decide whether or not you want to use the character import feature, and stick with your decision.

Leliana shows up in DA:2, even though she was dead in my game. The entirety of Awakening is reduced to one throwaway line on the expedition (which I didn't even get my first playthrough) and a couple of quips from Anders. Morrigan? Well, who knows whether or not she had the demon baby, so let's take the easy way out and just not show her (or the Warden) at all!

If you're going to ask me to make tough decisions to carry over to the next game, I want them to matter. I would rather play a game half or even a quarter the length of DA:2, if it meant that the choices I made really mattered, led me down different paths. I would rather play a game as long as DA:2 that had a clear and coherent narrative, instead of one where the writers are trying to anticipate every decision I might have made, and couch all the dialogue in ambiguity so it doesn't need to be recorded twice.

I'm sorry if all of this sounds bitter; I enjoyed DA:2, I really did. But you need to sit down and decide whether the character import feature is important to Dragon Age, or whether it's something that's just getting in the way of the story you want to tell. Either way is fine; just don't try to have it both ways by half-assing your way through the script, acknowledging my decisions only as much as is strictly nessecary. And you need to decide now, before DA:3 comes out; if you don't deal with it, this problem is only going to get worse as the series goes on. Either way is fine, and I suspect most fans feel that way too, just. . .COMMIT to one.

[Realmzmaster]

GeneralArrow wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

I might be repeating myself, but leave morality to the players, please.

- Let me all possible great decisions. Policy choices, alliances with people, ( Petrice ) must not be made impossible because of the personality. ( renegade or parangon or sarcastic ) Regardless of what is my path, I should be able to choose who are my ennemies or my allies.

- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2. That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing, because it was more difficult to choose our path.

When we see, " oooh this option is the one considered as diplomat or good ", I don't find this interesting. people will always choose the parangon path, because it is the parangon path, not because they considered this decision the better path, regardless of indications.

- I Want to see some guilds as in Skyrim, independent of the main story, but that affect the world around us.

"- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2.
That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is
moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing,
because it was more difficult to choose our path. "

I agree with this!

Actually even in DAO you could tell what line would produce which effect (IMHO). Actually some events and lines should depend on what you did in the game. For example, if you anulled the Circle (before going to Redcliffe) then the only recourse you had with Connor was to kill him or let his mother scarfice herself. Events you did before affect other events.

[LyallxFidelis]

BrotherWarth wrote...

What I want for DA3, more than anything, is for you guys to take your time. There were some bad design choices made with DA2(static companion appearances, ZOMG button=awesome combat, etc) but most of the game's problems, it seems, were caused by a short dev cycle. Recycled environments? I'm sure you guys didn't enjoy doing that and would have made more varied locations had you been given time. Story feeling rushed and disjointed? It seems pretty obvious that the story was supposed to encompass more.
So yeah, bring back origins for our PC, tone down the combat, and put more focus on a coherent and satisfying story. But more than anything DON'T MAKE THE GAME IN 18 MONTHS.

Sounds like you want an option like ME3 to be able to choose if you want more story than combat.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

LyallxFidelis wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

What I want for DA3, more than anything, is for you guys to take your time. There were some bad design choices made with DA2(static companion appearances, ZOMG button=awesome combat, etc) but most of the game's problems, it seems, were caused by a short dev cycle. Recycled environments? I'm sure you guys didn't enjoy doing that and would have made more varied locations had you been given time. Story feeling rushed and disjointed? It seems pretty obvious that the story was supposed to encompass more.
So yeah, bring back origins for our PC, tone down the combat, and put more focus on a coherent and satisfying story. But more than anything DON'T MAKE THE GAME IN 18 MONTHS.

Sounds like you want an option like ME3 to be able to choose if you want more story than combat.

No he wants a game that doesn't feel rushed and half baked.

[Savber100]

Ok lets see:

1. Isometric Camera
2. Branching Narratives (Come on who would hate a complex narrative which requires multiple playthrough. A gamer is a gamer. )
3. Customization and exploration is key.
4. CHOICES AND CONSEQUENCES. My god... NOTHING can be more important than seeing a choice having an impact on either gameplay and story. Go beyond the normal "extra cutscene".

5. Ok I will need to shout this one over the top of my peers's head

TRASH THE TRADITIONAL STORY ARC OF THE BIG EVIL. IN DRAGON AGE 2, YOU HAD THE RIGHT IDEA WHERE THE CONFLICT WAS HUMAN AND NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING SUPERNATURAL. This was hampered by poor execution sadly and it seems that Bioware is now going for the EPIC THREAT BEYOND THE WORLD'S END.

In fact, just look at the Witcher 2 as an example for what I hope DA3 would be in terms of choices mattering in RPGs.

[GeneralArrow]

Realmzmaster wrote...

GeneralArrow wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

I might be repeating myself, but leave morality to the players, please.

- Let me all possible great decisions. Policy choices, alliances with people, ( Petrice ) must not be made impossible because of the personality. ( renegade or parangon or sarcastic ) Regardless of what is my path, I should be able to choose who are my ennemies or my allies.

- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2. That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing, because it was more difficult to choose our path.

When we see, " oooh this option is the one considered as diplomat or good ", I don't find this interesting. people will always choose the parangon path, because it is the parangon path, not because they considered this decision the better path, regardless of indications.

- I Want to see some guilds as in Skyrim, independent of the main story, but that affect the world around us.

"- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2.
That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is
moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing,
because it was more difficult to choose our path. "

I agree with this!

Actually even in DAO you could tell what line would produce which effect (IMHO). Actually some events and lines should depend on what you did in the game. For example, if you anulled the Circle (before going to Redcliffe) then the only recourse you had with Connor was to kill him or let his mother scarfice herself. Events you did before affect other events.

This is true, to a degree.

[barenas]

Have to say I'm a bit disappointed. I wanted to play out the culmination of Hawke's journey.

[Bru]

My top concerns that I cannot stress enough:

• Being able to choose a race for main character!!!!
• I'd love to see being able to customize all characters with armor like in DAO.
• Party members leaving if they disagree with you enough.  *This helps put more depth into decision making*
• The old decision making in DAO where there was several things to choose from when talking.  Not the simplistic three choice "good, neutral, bad" choices.
• I didn't like being stuck in Kirkwall the entire duration of DA2

To sum it up, I want DA3 to be just how DAO was.  The only thing I really liked in DA2 was the combat system.

[gangly369]

Savber100 wrote...


5. Ok I will need to shout this one over the top of my peers's head

TRASH THE TRADITIONAL STORY ARC OF THE BIG EVIL. IN DRAGON AGE 2, YOU HAD THE RIGHT IDEA WHERE THE CONFLICT WAS HUMAN AND NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING SUPERNATURAL. This was hampered by poor execution sadly and it seems that Bioware is now going for the EPIC THREAT BEYOND THE WORLD'S END.

In fact, just look at the Witcher 2 as an example for what I hope DA3 would be in terms of choices mattering in RPGs.

Haven't played the Witcher series yet (probably get the second one for my xbox in the summer), but I completely agree with you on this one. I guess I've grown to the point where I'm really just not satisfied with seeing the big, evil, scary guy. Obviously theres gotta be a little bit of this in a world like DA, what with all the demons and dragons, and of course darkspawn, but I would be all for the writing team to take another stab at something other than a big huge archdemon (although when the series finally comes to a close, I do fully expect to take one of those bad boys on :happy:)

[Ilysail]

My concern with voiced protagonist vs silent protagonist really just boils down to: Does having a voiced protagonist limit the potential content for the player?
If you had to pay 4 or 5 voice actors to voice multiple races and genders as opposed to 2 for a fixed race with 2 genders, is there any real scenario where the value of the other races outweighs the expense? Especially when you factor in... i think it was between 80% and 85% played human in DAO? (trying to remember from the top of my head sorry)

Obviously multiple race choices is something I value, not just because it allowed customization for an avatar, but because you experienced at least parts of the story from a different angle each time.

Ultimately I'm fine with voiced OR silent characters, I just hope you guys take your time and expand on potential differences between character setups.

And i really wouldn't mind if non-combat skills sneaked their way back in... I'm a sucker for persuasion checks!

Modifié par Szaiu, 20 mars 2012 - 02:40 .

[MasterSaul]

No more DLC? That really sucks. I became too attached to Hawke. Ending the DA2 experience this way is sad. DA2 felt more personal in many more ways than DA:O. The story was just so different from DA:O and I loved every moment. Working from poverty to a better social status, experiencing the tragedies and joyful moments of you and your companions, speaking your mind among your companions and watching they're reactions and the events of Origins shaped the world. This actually felt like you lived inside the DA universe instead of just fighting for a vague ideal of justice. I guess there won't be any true closure for Hawke but I hope I'll get over it with time. With that said, I hope DA3 is the same as DA2 in a character driven story.

[Mike_Neel]

Oh wow developer/community interaction? Suuhweeet.

Just want to say that I love the Dragon Age Franchise. I was originally a Mass Effect fan and came to this series for more Bioware goodness. So I came into it late but fell in love with the setting, characters, and tone of the series more so than Mass Effect. I love how you take the standard fantasy setting and give it it's own flavor, like how you've made elves unique to your series over other fantasy games.

I know you guys get a lot of hate and unfair criticisms for DAII but there are plenty of people that enjoyed it. In fact I just finished a third playthrough of it two nights ago.

I'd definitely like to see race selection come back in some form though I don't have to have a unique Origin chapter for each race again. While a cool feature it's one I'd be willing to see scrapped if it means getting to play as an elf or dwarf again.

I'd also like magic have more wait on your character, especially since in your Dragon Age setting Magic is such a big deal. There were a few class specific selections in conversations in DAII but no one cared that I was an apostate. In dialogue everyone made a big deal about it but my blood mage Hawke was raining fire while slitting his wrists in public while people just acted nonchalant about it all. Same with BloodMagic. Everyone in my party was busy criticizing Merrill for her blood magic while my Hawke was left alone. But I'm sure people besides me have said this already and I'm just being nit picky. Thanks for the great games guys! I'm optimistically looking forward to what you do with this franchise, especially since you've shown in the DAII DLC just how serious you are about looking at fan feedback.

[K_Tabris]

I really hope that having a voiced protagonist doesn't affect whether or not we can choose what race to play.

:-{

[zara]

Here are my comments and feedback of things I would like to see for future DA games:

1) Ability to change follower armor including visual changes. I like to see all of my party in armor and also to have them look more serious, which the iconic outfits don't allow in all cases. With the iconic outfit system if I dislike the outfit enough, I just don't use or sometimes don't recruit the companion.

2) If the game involves supporting one of two (or more) opposing groups, I would like to feel more a part of the group I am supporting. In DA2 even though I supported the mages, I felt that they didn't react as though I supported them in dialog and actions (kidnapping, one end boss, etc.).

3) If the game will have the friendship and rivalry system and companion quests, in some cases where it would make sense I would like something more to do other than just skipping the quests if you decide not to support the companion's goal in the quests (Merrill's quests). Perhaps you could still do the quest but in an opposing role (with actions as well as dialog).  

4) I liked the personality-based dialog options in that they provided some variety, but I also felt it limiting to have to select from the same three personality types for most responses.


5) I like having noncombat solutions to some problems but would also like to see some where it is not only an option between stealth and fighting. Maybe there would also be a third option for mages, or you might have a political option or have to solve a mystery.

6) If there is any type of multiplayer, please keep it completely separate from achieving the endings of the single player game.  

Modifié par Dee445, 20 mars 2012 - 02:47 .

[LPPrince]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I really hope that having a voiced protagonist doesn't affect whether or not we can choose what race to play.

:-{

It very much will. Hard to implement different races with differing dialogue per race and gender.

It'd also be odd seeing a lithe elf with the same voice as a gruff human or massive qunari.

[Sylvianus]

Realmzmaster wrote...

GeneralArrow wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

I might be repeating myself, but leave morality to the players, please.

- Let me all possible great decisions. Policy choices, alliances with people, ( Petrice ) must not be made impossible because of the personality. ( renegade or parangon or sarcastic ) Regardless of what is my path, I should be able to choose who are my ennemies or my allies.

- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2. That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing, because it was more difficult to choose our path.

When we see, " oooh this option is the one considered as diplomat or good ", I don't find this interesting. people will always choose the parangon path, because it is the parangon path, not because they considered this decision the better path, regardless of indications.

- I Want to see some guilds as in Skyrim, independent of the main story, but that affect the world around us.

"- Do not give paragon or renegade indications, no even icons as in DA2.
That was Bad. Why not like DAO, there was no indications about what is
moral or no, what is good or no, etc, that was really the best thing,
because it was more difficult to choose our path. "

I agree with this!

Actually even in DAO you could tell what line would produce which effect (IMHO). Actually some events and lines should depend on what you did in the game. For example, if you anulled the Circle (before going to Redcliffe) then the only recourse you had with Connor was to kill him or let his mother scarfice herself. Events you did before affect other events.

There were only different thoughts, different behaviors, differents concepts in the heart of dangerous situations. There were no indications saying me, that's here you mush go to do the best action..

Take the case of Connor. Your concern is to find the best solution. There is no evidence and you're afraid to fail. (The first time you play of course)

You have the option to wait for the circle of mages, but Teagan tells you that it can be dangerous to wait too long.

it was obviously the behavior the most diplomat, but at the same time, you wonder if  it is the most  reasonable? I did not know it was possible to do the mission with the circle after that without consequences.

So I decided to kill Connor immediately, because it seemed the best solution to me. i didn't want to wait the circle. I didn't want blood magic either, because it seemed worse to me. It was not a story of paragon/ renegade or a diplomat, but a decision that must be taken. This was neither good nor bad.

Policy choices, alliances, major decisions such as deciding the fate of people should always be referred to the question of the player, not personality or path, or sometimes like you said because of consequences. I don't know why DA took example on Mass effect. I'd rather see the opposite, actually. mass effect taking example on DAO.

Also, even In mass effect, when you decide to eradicate a species or no, or to ally with someone, it is always about player's choice, not the fact of your paragon / renegade bar. A parangon hero can also think it is better to destroy the genophage with the krogans for the greater good.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 20 mars 2012 - 02:52 .

[Dasha Dreyson]

I'd like lots of NPC interaction. This includes the party as well as general side characters.

I love the banter. I also like obvious signals that let us know when we can trigger more party member statements (like "huh?" and "V" in ME).

I'd love to see party members hang out it two places: one that's theirs (or relates to or help define them), and a centralized location. Maybe even have the personal space have more private conversations (LI or stories from the past) and the public space could have the characters interrupt each other's stories a bit. (You know, since I'm dreaming.)

Cinematic cut scenes are fun, but I'd like to see those for more action parts such as running and less during story events (that aren't the running or fancy sword blow bits). I'd rather have interaction with the game than a shiny scene.

I like replay bonuses such as keeping your gold and such.

I'd also like LI that didn't need to be mothered. I'd also like more friendship/relationship scenes with the party members. I really liked the friendship dynamic that you could achieve with Morrigan, Liara, and Garrus. Going back a bit, Canderous had a wonderful little speech that was possible leading up to the end of KOTOR.

I'm also not a fan of particularly long encounters. DA2 felt odd because the actions were quick and enemies died quickly (and sometimes party members did too), but the encounters themselves could go on for quite a while.

This isn't really development, but please keep using your wonderful voice actors. There are far too many for me to just sit and list that I would love to hear come back again and again. Also, keep up the humor.

Okay, this post is way too long, with way too much stuff in it.

[Athrioc]

Id say, make it more different then the mass effect formula.

It would be nice to have two dynamic games that play very differently and have their own uniqueness to them. I think game character decisions need to be hard and that you really feel the effect of the story...

but more then anything make sure its fun.. and not so many recycled areas like DA3.. ME3 played with geography and had amazing backgrounds with huge reapers in the back, or planets that made you feel like you were in something small. It would be nice to shape the game so that when you are in the world, it feels larger then the sum of its actual parts.. and dungeons should feel more intricate and less like you are turning corners left and right.. its boring... Skyrim did a great job in their cave design, id say look at some of that for inspiration.

[Maverick827]

LPPrince wrote...

It'd also be odd seeing a lithe elf with the same voice as a gruff human or massive qunari.

Qunari is most likely out, but voice really doesn't have much to do with "litheness" or "gruffness."  Why are you already forcing my elf to be lithe and my human to be gruff, anyway?

The right voice can fit an elf, human, and dwarf.

Modifié par Maverick827, 20 mars 2012 - 02:53 .