25 réponses à ce sujet

[lx_theo]

 Bioware, you can do the same thing with weapons as you talked about doign with armor: Change it based on the class. 

Let's start with an example. Let's say a mage is wielding a great sword. The great sword for the mage could be slimmer, with a longer handle (sort of like a mage staff, but still distinctly  a greatsword). The animations for the basic attack and holding could be much more flowing, like how one would fight with a staff. 

All combinations could get that treatment. 

Modifié par lx_theo, 22 avril 2012 - 02:55 .

[lx_theo]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Nope, soooooo bad

Thank you, you're so very helpful. 

But of course you must have a bunch of ideas on what is better than this.

Even better yet, maybe you may have an idea about what's bad? What's so wrong with it?

Of course you say 0% of anything useful. That's what people like you do.



If you don't like the idea adn don't have constructive criticism to make it better, don't post anything and let the thread die.

Modifié par lx_theo, 22 avril 2012 - 02:12 .

[brushyourteeth]

This is an interesting idea, but it wouldn't be my favorite because it just isn't practical or realistic. Why would a mage want to wield a greatsword, when a staff makes for much more powerful spellcasting?

I know it's kind of a bummer when you find an awesome weapon in-game and can't use it because of your class restrictions, but you get to pass them along to your companions or use them in your next playthough - until you find something better for your current class.

I guess I'd be interesting in hearing more about why you think it'd be a good idea.

[lx_theo]

brushyourteeth wrote...

This is an interesting idea, but it wouldn't be my favorite because it just isn't practical or realistic. Why would a mage want to wield a greatsword, when a staff makes for much more powerful spellcasting?

I know it's kind of a bummer when you find an awesome weapon in-game and can't use it because of your class restrictions, but you get to pass them along to your companions or use them in your next playthough - until you find something better for your current class.

I guess I'd be interesting in hearing more about why you think it'd be a good idea.

Why I'd think it'd be a good idea is because I recall a bit of sentiment where people missed the ability to use the weapon combinations they wanted like in DA:O in DA2. I'm pretty sure this was because of class idenity, no? The same reason they had a limititation on armors. I figured they could try to implement the same idea they were talkin gabout doing for armors for weapons.

[Dejajeva]

I'm all for being able to do more within your class- and I thought I'd really enjoy being able to use any weapon I wanted regardless of my class, but I just played the demo of Kingdoms of Alamrururar or whatever it's called and I found it kind of confusing. Then again I found the combat weird to begin with, but it's probably because I'm so used to being in the DA world that playing any other system feels..off.

[Dakota Strider]

The difference in what was allowed in DAO, and allow every weapon, is that even in DAO only mages could use staves, and rogues and warriors could both use bows. It makes no sense, that anyone other than a mage can use a magic staff. I suppose a thief or warrior could hold one, and hit things with it. But in the hands of anyone other than a mage, it is just a stick. A mage might be able to use some non staff weapons, but they would be putting themselves at a disadvantage to do so, since their staves are much more effective weapons, in their hands.

An RPG is meant to be about choices. Sometimes, you have to choose between two things that you want. Do you want to have a warrior with all their combat skills, or would you like to be able to use magic? It is also a matter of game balance. If you allow a character to be able to do everything, then it becomes so powerful, that it skews the game play.

[lx_theo]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
Sorry, you're right there.

Being a class you should wield a weapon that has affiniation with that class.

I know that in DAO being a mage in a mage related class you could wear other weapons than only a staff. But you could never wield a shield or a broad sword if I recall correctly.

The thing is: being able to customize weapons to all classes would blurr the whole concept of teambuilding. I like the idea that a team has a tank/mage/rogue and one of your choise companion to have a balanced team. If you take all of that out what is having multiple companions ever being of use if they can be everything? (exept liking one better then the other of course).

I don't know. Guess I'm being "old fashioned" here.

Fair enough. People tend to want the ability to choose though. Some people even want to take away the classes altogether and go a route like in Skyrim where you upgrade the style you want to play.

I get what you're saying, though why not have the limitations on companions and not the Player Character?

[Dakota Strider]

lx_theo wrote...

I get what you're saying, though why not have the limitations on companions and not the Player Character?

Removing or limiting companions in the game, would totally make Dragon Age, and other Bioware games, as a totally different game.  You would miss out on all the conversations.  And there is actually pleasure in putting together a party of characters that have different strengths and weaknesses, and then be able to succeed in combat and other situations.  It creates tactical challenges, and for many of us, the game is meaningless if there is no challenge.

Skyrim may allow a character do everything, but that is a different world, in a different universe, with different rules.  And unless you play Skyrim for a very, very, very long time, you do not have the skill to be good in everything.  The system there tries to maintain balance as well.  You can be mediocre in all sorts of skills, or be really, really good in one, and decent in a couple others.  Also in Skyrim, you are for the most part limited to one companion (unless you use mods) that you do not have very much control over, and has very terrible conversation options.  Skyrim does some things well, but I do not want to turn DA3 into it, for the most part.

[lx_theo]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

This lx_theo I could relate to.

But then again there had to be some limitations because of the fact that in the game you get to have specialisation point when you level up. If you can wear all weapons where would the leveling system be?

Do not know if there is a way to combine that.

I'd imagine something along the line of what DA:O had. Everyone had the ability to access the skill tree for the weapons they could use. Once you picked what weapon type you'd use, it'd be pratical to ignore the other ones.

On that note, I'd also think it'd be good to make a melee staff skill tree. 

[lx_theo]

Dakota Strider wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

I get what you're saying, though why not have the limitations on companions and not the Player Character?

Removing or limiting companions in the game, would totally make Dragon Age, and other Bioware games, as a totally different game.  You would miss out on all the conversations.  And there is actually pleasure in putting together a party of characters that have different strengths and weaknesses, and then be able to succeed in combat and other situations.  It creates tactical challenges, and for many of us, the game is meaningless if there is no challenge.

Skyrim may allow a character do everything, but that is a different world, in a different universe, with different rules.  And unless you play Skyrim for a very, very, very long time, you do not have the skill to be good in everything.  The system there tries to maintain balance as well.  You can be mediocre in all sorts of skills, or be really, really good in one, and decent in a couple others.  Also in Skyrim, you are for the most part limited to one companion (unless you use mods) that you do not have very much control over, and has very terrible conversation options.  Skyrim does some things well, but I do not want to turn DA3 into it, for the most part.

.... What?

I don't think you know what I'm saying. The limitations were there in DA2. I'm saying keep the limitations that DA2 had for companions, but allow the choices approach for the PC. It keeps the tactical part.

[Dakota Strider]

@lx_theo. Ok, perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying. But, even the player character had limitations on him/her. Depending on what class you chose in DA2, meant you were restricted. You had more options than the npc companions, but that is because the game dev's were attempting to make each npc have their very own unique style, that could not be duplicated.

Did I understand better that time?

[lx_theo]

Dakota Strider wrote...

@lx_theo. Ok, perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying. But, even the player character had limitations on him/her. Depending on what class you chose in DA2, meant you were restricted. You had more options than the npc companions, but that is because the game dev's were attempting to make each npc have their very own unique style, that could not be duplicated.

Did I understand better that time?

Yeah, I think you did.

In DA:O there was much more ability to choose what weapons you want. There was only a few situations where you couldn't. Like staffs for warriors and rogues.

In DA2 they added in the expanded limitations for the reason you said:To create a unigue adn defined style for each class.

My suggestion is a first draft of an idea to conpromise between the two. It allows choice of the style you want to play. It allows the unique style to be kept. If the limitations in DA2 are kept for companions, then it also keeps the tactical part of picking companions and developing their skills to suit certain needs.

[lx_theo]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

This lx_theo I could relate to.

But then again there had to be some limitations because of the fact that in the game you get to have specialisation point when you level up. If you can wear all weapons where would the leveling system be?

Do not know if there is a way to combine that.

I'd imagine something along the line of what DA:O had. Everyone had the ability to access the skill tree for the weapons they could use. Once you picked what weapon type you'd use, it'd be pratical to ignore the other ones.

On that note, I'd also think it'd be good to make a melee staff skill tree. 

This is a possibility yes. But again; if you do that being a rogue for example all the staffs need to have some kind of magic (healing/fire etc.) attached to it to let your character use it.

If that is made possible that could happen.

But again you would restrain your main character in the long run. If you specialize in a weapon this puts you on the mage path in this example. Later in the game it will be impossible to switch if you want. Or there must be a mythal's favor like in DA2 to change your character around completely.
But is that something you would want?

I don't think it'd need any magic involved. It'd just be the melee staff, without the magic part. Then there could be, like i said, a melee staff skill tree like there is for Two-handed weapons, arrows, etc.

As for setting yourself down a path, that is the case no matter what. The idea isn't choice in the ability to change whenever you want, but choice in being able to have more choice in your character's fighting style.

[Maria Caliban]

You're asking for BioWare to triple the art assets for every weapon and triple the animations for every weapon style. This would be even more resource intensive than Dragon Age: Origins.

What exactly is reasoning behind your proposal? I mean, how does benefit the player or further BioWare's design goals?

[lx_theo]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Sorry for sounding stupid here. But what is the benefit of using a melee staff as a rogue without being able to use magic instead of using dual blades?

A rogue being able to use two handed would be more logical in this case. But it would come down to what I said in my second reply.

A staff is often used as a weapon. Why does it need to be magic only?

it's like being abot to make the choice between wielding a lightsaber (sword) and a double bladed lightsaber (staff). It doesn't need anything it paticularly special.

It's not need, either, if I implied that. It would just make sense, imo.

Maria Caliban wrote...

You're asking for BioWare to triple the art assets for every weapon and triple the animations for every weapon style. This would be even more resource intensive than Dragon Age: Origins.

What exactly is reasoning behind your proposal? I mean, how does benefit the player or further BioWare's design goals?

Fair enough. Though I was suggesting minimal edits to make them better suited to each class and the animations each has it its own. This isn't needed for the idea by any degree, mind you. The important part is the animations.

The idea was that minimal edits to both the weapons and the animations could reduce the workload overall rather than creating entirely new sets for either. Now, I don't know how much work any given path would take, so I prefer the path that takes the least resources and accomplishes this goal.

[Maria Caliban]

Filament wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

What exactly is reasoning behind your proposal? I mean, how does benefit the player or further BioWare's design goals?

BioWare wants the classes to have distinctive animations (you know, rogues backflipping and teleporting, warriors speed-dashing) whereas the player in question wants access to all weapons for each class. I don't think weapons would really need to change appearance for this idea to work, though.

When they say they want warriors and rogues to be distinct, they're not simply talking about looks. As far as I know, BioWare wants the classes to be distinct *mechanically*.

(except maybe Arcane Warrior on the off-chance that it comes back, but I suppose AWs could just use the staff if they didn't want to be too bold ).

They're never bringing Arcane Warrior or Shapeshift back. Never.

[seraphymon]

To me should be able to equip anything. To me thats closer to realistic. Sure ther eis some distinction between mages and frontline fighters, but i think DAo did a nice job of it. I agree about distinction, but what Bioware did was i feel completely wrong. Your just trading one problem for another, in that for alot of people it almost forces you to bring in certain party members, that you may not like to fill in a certain role. There should be much more leeway. I mean like ive always suggested what i would doe for example in rogue dual wielding, and warrior dual wielding, is having them have different talents, instead of the same.