10 réponses à ce sujet

[Tragick Flaw]

Decided to start posting some of my (horrible) ideas for things could be in DA3, as supported by my ever horrible logic and arguments.

I've always been slightly bothered by the limitations of party size in games. In DAO, the Deep Roads are built up as a dangerous place and yet the Warden decides that it is perfectly fine to wander off in a group of four. So I was rather happy with the inclusion of all other surviving companions from DAII being NPCs during final fight, it was a nice touch.

I've decided to post this in the gameplay forum because while I think my reasons for wanting this are purely story based, it would have a massive impact on gameplay as well. I will also admit that some of these ideas, all even all of them, could be covered with NPC characters entirely, but it is fun to control the whole group, rather than part of it.

Exclusions and inclusions with story could be reinforced with changing of a party. I liked the sequences in which Fenris and Anders left the party after an event because it was reinforced by gameplay. The same could be said for inclusion, that rather by merely having an ally as a NPC, we could be given full control, giving a much more satsifiying gameplay interaction in allying up. Would you rather have a companion, especially a returing one from DAII or DAO, as a NPC following you around, or would you rather control them in the quest?

There's also a sense scale that could aided by the changing of party size. A more personal quest could be left to only the player character and a companion quest could be simply the pair. There could be even restrictions (though this starts to limit player choice and would have to be used rarely), as say I don't think Anders would have liked to have Fenris on his companion quests. Then, in the more major sequences, you could have a larger party. I think my beginning on the Deep Roads and the end of DAII summarizes my feelings on that.

Varying size also allows for more dynamic events. ME2 had a sequence where during a boss fight one of the three squadmates was knocked out, leaving you with only yourself and the remaining squadmate. A party could become larger due to some quest event, or smaller, or even be switched up entirely.

This could also allow for 'guest companions'. Certain characters from before could become companions for a quest or to emphasis a situation's seriousness/conclusion by becoming companions. You could be working for character throughout the story, only for things to escalate to the point that for the end of the sequence/quest/etc. that they join you as a companion to finish things.

So what do you think of my (horrible) idea? (I have habit it seems of making fun of my ideas)

[DarkAmaranth1966]

Great idea, even if we get only 4 controllable and can bring the rest as uncontrollable helpers (like the dog now) Or if each of the four had something they could summon to aid the party, either would help.

[BomimoDK]

Or just have ye olde 6 slot parties and ramp up the all-out combat with bigger enemies. One reason why BG felt so intricate and violent in combat was that it wasn't 4 versus 6. It was either 6 versus 16 or 6 versus 3 dragons.

I'm confident that another two slots and a rebalancing would lend the Deep Roads a much greater sense of mortality. I mean. How many of you take two mages along to have CC and restoration covered? That's one slot left for DPS and one for tanking. Not very combat effective. Even if you merged the mages into one, you've still got a "situation"

Knocking out a companion in such a D&D inspired ruleset (and especially with my playstyle where i have one set party and specialize the companions) would render the whole encounter unbalanced and possibly unbeatable. I'm all for a extremely challenging and even frustrating encouter because of balance. I'm NOT for taking out my CC, Heal, DPS, Tank or Archer in the name of challenge. It's going to end in people not playing.

My specialized companions is another reason why i hate those Forced companion parts and i'll always hate them. If there's anything i want out in DA3, it's that. I don't give a **** about cop-out endings or recycling. Just let me keep my party. I really don't need another Two-hander that is unspecced in my already warrior heavy party. 

Modifié par BomimoDK, 20 mars 2012 - 05:53 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Even if we can't run a party greater than four, being allowed to split the party and play through simultaneous events consecutively would be terrific. KotOR2 did this very well. DAO also offered this option in the final run through Denerim.

I like having the opportunity to play some of my party members without my PC present.

[berelinde]

Call me nostalgic, but I miss that six-person party. More banter, more interjections, more interaction. Plus, more opportunities to influence your companions.

[Xewaka]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Even if we can't run a party greater than four, being allowed to split the party and play through simultaneous events consecutively would be terrific. KotOR2 did this very well. DAO also offered this option in the final run through Denerim.
I like having the opportunity to play some of my party members without my PC present.

Rescuing the Warden(s) from Fort Drakon controlling the companions was extremely fun.

[BomimoDK]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Even if we can't run a party greater than four, being allowed to split the party and play through simultaneous events consecutively would be terrific. KotOR2 did this very well. DAO also offered this option in the final run through Denerim.

I like having the opportunity to play some of my party members without my PC present.

Or just remove the invisible border that your whole current party must be within or else they will run to you anyway. Even with party AI disabled. In BG i could have one in the INN and another at the weapon store. That would be great. It would also allow more advanced tactics like hammer and anvil or surrounding an alley and such.

That constraint alwasy annoyed me in Origins and 2.

[BomimoDK]

Sorry. Double post.

Modifié par BomimoDK, 20 mars 2012 - 09:42 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

BomimoDK wrote...

Or just remove the invisible border that your whole current party must be within or else they will run to you anyway. Even with party AI disabled. In BG i could have one in the INN and another at the weapon store.

That was nice.  You'd only get the "You must gather your party before venturing forth" message when you tried to move between areas, but not between sub-areas.

I'd love to see this design return.

[SuicidalBaby]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BomimoDK wrote...

Or just remove the invisible border that your whole current party must be within or else they will run to you anyway. Even with party AI disabled. In BG i could have one in the INN and another at the weapon store.

That was nice.  You'd only get the "You must gather your party before venturing forth" message when you tried to move between areas, but not between sub-areas.

I'd love to see this design return.

cant wait for Enchanded edition to come out.  Hopefully the upgrade to BG gets the treatment it deserves.

[BomimoDK]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BomimoDK wrote...

Or just remove the invisible border that your whole current party must be within or else they will run to you anyway. Even with party AI disabled. In BG i could have one in the INN and another at the weapon store.

That was nice.  You'd only get the "You must gather your party before venturing forth" message when you tried to move between areas, but not between sub-areas.

I'd love to see this design return.

The tactical limitations are more prominent than first assessed. I wonder if Bioware ever really thought about it? I mean, everyone just HAD to make traps when fighting the Illithid in BG2 and no one took out Aec'Letec without splitting the party the first time around. Man. If i could. I'd even pull the final battle in the BG1 undercity out of the temple and into the streets.