2816 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaguemaster]

Trash loot was awful in origins, and still bad in DA2. Better replace it with gold outright. Or leave only useful loot in fixed locations\\drops.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wulfram wrote...

I'd like to see a lot less loot in the game. Just give me the 90% of stuff that it's obvious I'm never ever going to use in gold, rather than making me go to the shop to turn it into gold.

A better solution, I think, would be to impose weight limits.  That way you'd just leave useless loot behind.  It wouldn't clutter up your inventory, but if you happened to need a low-level shield for something you could get one by killing someone who had a shield.

[Tsuga C]

^returning. Edit function isn't working.

[Johnny Jaded]

One thing that really grated me about DA2 was the UI - it was minimalist and generic and out of place; the clean cut, orange, geometric shape was more fitting for a sci-fi game than a fantasy. In Origins, the UI fit with the genre - the map looked like an actual parchment map, the journal was a leather bound book, the GUI had a medieval feel to it with the gold/bronze colouring. It's little touches like that which show though and care has been given to it. And, more importantly, it distinguished it from other titles - stop drawing on Mass Effect and let Dragon Age remain it's own, distinctive IP.

Mark Darrah wrote...

So things like searching, stealth, traps, puzzles?

Oh, Maker, yes!  I'd also ask that any alternatives to combat (ie. talking one's way out of a fight), grant the same amount of experience as combat.

In DA:O, I noticed that fighting your way through every encounter yielded more XP than not. In DA2, there was a fight very early on (during the quest to find Anders) where you're confronted by a group of Fereldens - having Carver confront them yielded the same XP as simply fighting them. However, all other such encouters in the game (ie. rescuing Feynriel from the slavers) gave more XP for the combat.

Thinking one's way out of a predicament should be just as rewarding, if not more so, than simply killing everything.

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Deeper dig: is the issue that you didn't know what you'd say, or that you did or said something unexpected?

For me, I despise not knowing what the character will say. I'd much rather see the paraphrase system be scrapped, but - since I expect it's here to stay - far more care needs to be given to the paraphrases so that they accurately reflect what will be said and/or done. You need to give us more player agency, not remove it.

Deviija wrote...

-Keep all LIs as bisexual options, offering more player choice to everyone rather than being exclusive content only some people will play with certain PCs. More freedom = more roleplaying.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except this (and the voiced protagonist - it doesn't bother me
overmuch). Sexuality is part of a person's character - they should have a preference whether they show it or not. Making everyone bisexual for the sake of "equal roleplaying options" cheapens the characters and is
demeaning, in my opinion.

On the subject of romances, I'd like to see a character that is strictly gay.

Mark Darrah wrote...

If the story demands a human-only (or dwarf, elf, or qunari only for that matter) than we would do that.

Anadvantage of a single player race is that it allows us to offer a lot more customization options. Customization is definately a place we want to focus.

One could argue that a single playable race limits customisation - it's a double edged sword. One of the reasons I
enjoy (fantasy) RPGs so much is that they usually have a variety of races to choose from - I'm human, I already know what it's like to be human, so I rarely - if ever - play as a human, and I'm I'm not the only
one to feel that way. Of course, having said that, there's likely those who feel the opposite.

chuckwells62 wrote...

I would like to see actor Alan Rickman voice a character in the next DA game.

Oh, hell yes!

Modifié par Johnny Jaded, 20 mars 2012 - 09:30 .

[Mmw04014]

I hope you return to giving big enemies better loot. I remember beating the rock wraith, walking over to it, excited for whatever coolawesomeepic item it was going to be, and finding out I only got like 20 silver. Serious let down.

I don't mind junk items, just make sure only low level enemies drop them and make sure to give some really good stuff to high level/boss enemies or hard to reach chests.

Modifié par Mmw04014, 20 mars 2012 - 09:22 .

[Darji]

darth ****** wrote...

You can't please everyone, so I don't think the DA team at Bioware should take these negative comments to personally. Saying something sucks without offering a solution is just noise anyway. That being said...

I have three main bones to pick with the design and implementation of DA, and the are as follows:

Combat:

Combat in DA2 didn't suck, I know people who are big fans of hack n' slash/beat'm up games that really enjoyed it. The problem is that this IP's core audience is not hack n' slash/beat'm gamers, but RPG and strategy fans. What DA:O did well is that the combat was more about target selection, threat management, and priority processing by the player. The later being an emergent experience, as I've seen several different ways to play DA:O well. Your core audience is going to want to see a return to this in DA3. The average human mind can only track around 7 things reasonably well at one time, throwing in melee style button mashing on top of the above was just to much overhead. Auto melee worked fine.

I don't think this form of combat (hack n' slash style) should be thrown away, quite to the contrary. In fact, Bioware could refine and inject this style of play into a spin off series (the implications of this COULD be phenomenal), but the core IP should appeal to the core audience.

Continuity Issues:

Your Technical QA really needs to develop a graphical tool that quickly and easily convey's the flow and branching incumbent to dynamic player defined story telling. Furthermore, this tool needs to be filtered down to your main test floor so that your testers can modify aspects of this player defined decision tree so that the existing implementation of player defined world events can be manipulated on the fly. You guys have way to many problems here, no matter how good the game is one of this IP's star features is seeing your decisions continuously impact the game world. The DA team has no doubt pulled punches so to speak in this area because of the potential issues revolving around keeping previous world states straight, and this will no doubt continue until a remedy is found. It my be time consuming and expensive, but it IS worth it.

Generics

Generics is sometimes a necessary evil. Especially with huge games like this, content creation can get costly. So developers often reuse old materials (maps, models, sound effects) to keep production on time and under budget. Intelligent players get that, so there is definitively wiggle room here. But when your seeing full-blown areas that are basically copied and pasted into new content, your hurting the exploration aspect innate of any RPG (player knows the layout, they know where to go). So we need a compromise, perhaps modular level design. I wouldn't recommend doing this for release, but within your own world editors, create levels as a series of interchangeable tiles. Randomized levels are not new, and I wouldn't encourage it as a feature in the game, but for content creation it may just be the ticket. The implementation would be expensive if done "perfectly" but don't look for perfect, look for good enough. Your artists can correct any issues an case by case bases, and perhaps that will help building workable areas in a timely manner while still giving the players somewhere unique and new to explore.

Well, that's my rant. Bottom line, I love this IP. I've got every DLC for both games, expansions, and I'm eagerly looking forward to what DA team at Bioware has in store for use next. Good luck team.

These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Modifié par Darji, 20 mars 2012 - 09:24 .

[Rorschachinstein]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Awesome. Cause I wouldn't want to discuss story with the coding team and vice versa.

But it would be great to talk to the coding team.

I could ask them to let us disable the depth of field effects in cutscenes.

Yeah. I've never heard anything from them.

[Lady_K]

Mark Darrah wrote...

Sorry, let me clarify:
This would allow us to have greater numbers of armor, clothing etc...

Honestly, if I had to choose between greater numbers of customizable armor and race choice in the next game, I'd choose Race Choice hands down. We all did fine with less armor in DA:O, I think we can do without more armor in DA3.

[Uccio]

Some more:

- Origins combat style, a bit faster though.
- no anime armors/weapons or characters. More "real" medieval reguired.

[Wulfram]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

A better solution, I think, would be to impose weight limits.  That way you'd just leave useless loot behind.  It wouldn't clutter up your inventory, but if you happened to need a low-level shield for something you could get one by killing someone who had a shield.

No, weight limits just mean that towards the end of dungeons I end up having to divide weight by cost every time I pick something up.  

Which is not fun at all.

edit:  And since the end of dungeons tends to be where the really big plot events occur, that's when I'd really prefer not to be distracted by such silly book keeping.

Modifié par Wulfram, 20 mars 2012 - 09:27 .

[Arppis]

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

Modifié par Arppis, 20 mars 2012 - 09:26 .

[Rorschachinstein]

Keep all romances bisexual- No exclusives. Lest we remember that awful ME3 hoopla

[Norolim]

Left my feedback here. In a less usual form.

[Darji]

Arppis wrote...

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

No you are not inferior... You are a different auience thats nothing bad. And quite hoenstly If they want to go only for Money the Mass Effect crowd would probably the much better choice. But people need to know this at a very early state.  So that you wont hear much ****ing and complains during the deveope process.

Personally I would be out if they want to go for the DA2 and ME audience but thats my taste in games.

[kinniph]

Here is what I would like to see. A game more like DA:O not DA II.

Bring back creating your own character. I already am a human IRL so I mainly play as an elf, dwarf or something.

Bring back gearing your party members. that's what part of playing RPG is about. What gear best suites your mates or what makes them look cooler.

Don't dumb down the gear by ratings. I personally took offence that the game assumed I was to dumb to know what gear did more damage or whatever. This goes for what's "junk" loot also.

More unique areas. DA II used the same dungeons over and over again.

No more enemies popping out of thin air. You can't properly set your party up.

Bring back friendly fire even on the lower dificulty settings. When you launch a fire ball you should have to watch out for your party members.

No dialog wheel. Every option in DA II pretty much was the same. I like telling NPCs I hate them sometimes.

You can tell I like the older RPGs more. BG I&2, NWN, IWD and such. They made you think more and had more depth. DA II just didn't have that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wulfram wrote...

No, weight limits just mean that towards the end of dungeons I end up having to divide weight by cost every time I pick something up.  

Which is not fun at all.

So don't do it.  If it's not fun, don't do it.

If you're doing those calculations, then you've made a conscious choice to use loot to maximise your wealth.  Which is fine, but if you don't enjoy doing that then why are you doing it?

In Skyrim, I stopped picking up anything I couldn't obviously use right away pretty quickly.  And that makes sense.  Everyone has a weapon, so everyone drops a weapon.  You don't need to pick then up.

edit:  And since the end of dungeons tends to be where the really big plot events occur, that's when I'd really prefer not to be distracted by such silly book keeping.

I don't understand.  It's your character doing the bookkeeping.  It's your character who chooses whether to collect the loot.  If you've designed a character you find unfun to play, that's no one's fault but yours.

[the_one_54321]

Arppis wrote...
Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

I liked ME2. I don't want Dragon Age to be anything like Mass Effect. At all.

[darth gringo]

Arppis wrote...

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

Not by any means my friend.  Your player experience is as valid and important as anyone elses.  I'm willing to bet that Bioware feels the same, which is why they probably made DA2 combat they way they did, to bring in that large Mass Effect audience.  But no matter how you slice it, we are talking about two different kinds of gamers here.  I enjoy both styles, but the majority will always prefer on style over the other.  An absolute answer will unfailingly be a wrong one, compromise is the key.  The DA IP is taking off, if Bioware wants to take their clientle with them, spin-offs are definetly an option.  They could play with optional combat modes, but your talking about two large systems driving the same mechanic.  That's a tall (and expensive) order.  Really, Bioware is going to have to make decisions, and everyone posting in this forum (inlcuding you) are trying to help them get there. 

Modifié par darth gringo, 20 mars 2012 - 09:33 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Arppis wrote...

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

The point is Dragon Age isn't Mass Effect, Origins sold well, better than DA2 actually. The series can stand on it's own with out being a paraphrase predetermined mess.

[Arppis]

Darji wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

No you are not inferior... You are a different auience thats nothing bad. And quite hoenstly If they want to go only for Money the Mass Effect crowd would probably the much better choice. But people need to know this at a very early state.  So that you wont hear much ****ing and complains during the deveope process.

Personally I would be out if they want to go for the DA2 and ME audience but thats my taste in games.

Well, I'm sure they need some time to figure this out. And they did say that they are going for compromise.

I'm a guy who likes Dragon Age Origins, Awakening, DA2, Jade empire, Kotor and Mass Effect games. I like them all. Sure they have their flaws, but they are still worth my time and I am enjoying myself when playing them.

So I'm not too picky about some minor details. Because the DA:0 controls didn't turn out so well on Xbox360, I just switched the game on casual and played it for the story. On DA2, I notched up the difficulty, because the controls were more refined and accurate. Same goes for ME1 and ME2 difference, controls were better so up goes the difficulty.

What I'm trying to say is that I guess I can live with DA:0 combat. It's not optimal for me, but I can live with it.

darth ****** wrote...

Not by any means my friend.  Your
player experience is as valid and important as anyone elses.  I'm
willing to bet that Bioware feels the same, which is why they probably
made DA2 combat they way they did, to bring in that large Mass Effect
audience.  But no matter how you slice it, we are talking about two
different kinds of gamers here.  I enjoy both styles, but the majority
will always prefer on style over the other.  An absolute answer will
unfailingly be a wrong one, compromise is the key.  The DA IP is taking
off, if Bioware wants to take their clientle with them, spin-offs are
definetly an option.  They could play with optional combat modes, but
your talking about two large systems driving the same mechanic.  That's a
tall (and expensive) order.  Really, Bioware is going to have to make
decisions, and everyone posting in this forum (inlcuding you) are trying
to help them get there. 

I feel the same way.
Compromise is indeed best sollution. I'm not asking the DA series to go
full Mass Effect, just asking that the combat would be bit more polished
while having the tactical aspect of the first game.

Modifié par Arppis, 20 mars 2012 - 09:38 .

[Scarlet Rabbi]

Arppis wrote...

Darji wrote...



These are nice suggestions I can live with. Yeah keep the actionary combat for a spin off game.


Also MArk you guys really need to decide who you guys want to have as a customer. The Origins Audience than you really need to scrp most of the stuff DA2 did. Or the DA2/Mass Effect crowd. If we know that than we have atleast a outlook what to expect.

And no you will not be able to please everyone.  You need to decide. Parragon or Renegegade.  And you need to decide early to make the game you guys want to be. Ad not to fight against everything people complaining during the first introduction, or demo or every new information.

Yeah, us who enjoy Mass Effect and enjoyed some aspects of DA2 are clearly inferior customers who shouldn't be taken into account.

Not inferior but different. If you like Mass Effect then go and play it. I like it too, it's a good game, but it doesn't fit into the architecture of DA. Sales reflect that. We don't have to argue about different tastes and prefences, just look for the money.

If you like gimmicky, exploding enemies actionPG's than you are different from those of us who prefer the classical minimal action,choice-driven RPG. Different, not better or worse.

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Morroian wrote...

DA2 had detective style quests but there still could be more variety. As for length I for one would like to keep the quests at a similar length to DA2. The long dungeon crawls in DAO became too much of a grind and its worth noting games like Skyrim don't have long quests either.

I'd take the deep roads from DA1 over the entire two tiny room expedition in DA2 any day, You only spend the whole entire first act preping for it, getting the equipment and gold, and it's two tiny rooms and over in 2.4 minutes, some payout for the whole entire first act of the game. Exploration is a huge part of RPG's why for the love of god do people want that limited to claustrophobic tiny areas? Are people that lazy that everything has to be super simple? I just don't get it.

As per usual you misrepresent things. IMHO it should be at most the length of the deep roads sequence in Awakenings.

As for exploration I regard sandboxes like Skyrim or Fallout New Vegas as providing that, the long dungeons of DAO are just linear sequences moving from 1 room to the next, not exploration at all.

[Starling2105]

There are a lot of strong feelings one way or another over DA2, but I was hoping for an expansion to wrap it all up, or even DLC. Quite sad that won't happen now

[Parahexavoctal]

Deviija wrote...

-Keep all LIs as bisexual options,
offering more player choice to everyone rather than being exclusive
content only some people will play with certain PCs. More freedom =
more roleplaying.

I agree with pretty much everything
you said except this (and the voiced protagonist - it doesn't bother me
overmuch). Sexuality is part of a person's character - they should have a
preference whether they show it or not. Making everyone bisexual for
the sake of "equal roleplaying options" cheapens the characters and is
demeaning, in my opinion.

On the subject of romances, I'd like to see a character that is strictly gay.

I actually prefer to have it be flexible. Have al LIs available regardless of protagonist gender, but adapt the story and background to choices made.

For example, MaleCompanionLI in a game with a male protagonist is an LI option; if protagonist expresses interest in guys early on, MaleCompanionLI might play out like a gay (not bi) character whom protagonist may or may not hook up with. If protagonist doesn't express interest in guys, MaleCompanionLI might play out as a completely hetero character.

The point is that as long as we don't know their stories beforehand and their stories remain consistent for every playthrough in isolation without metagaming, they can come off as believable whole characters and maybe even avoid this whole sensation of everyone being interested in the protagonist.

But when it comes down to it, if the choice is between always bisexual (or protagonist-sexual like in DA2) or fixed sexualities like DA:O and ME, I hands down vote for the freedom of having as much choice of LI as possible (that being bi/protagonist-sexual).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Morroian wrote...

As per usual you misrepresent things. IMHO it should be at most the length of the deep roads sequence in Awakenings.

As for exploration I regard sandboxes like Skyrim or Fallout New Vegas as providing that, the long dungeons of DAO are just linear sequences moving from 1 room to the next, not exploration at all.

I disagree.  Simply selecting where you want to go and having the game deposit you there is a lack of exploration.  Actually having to travel the distance is exploration.

I'm on record having said that DAO's deep roads were too short.  Even with their linear design, and even with exactly the same amount of combat and loot content as they have now, simply giving us twice as much area to walk through would, I think, have made them better.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 20 mars 2012 - 09:41 .