72 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

As I recall BG also had a mechanic where it was possible for a character to be "chunked" beyond possibility of resurection (in the game anyway).

And even without getting chunked, resurrection was expensive.  Low-level parties generally couldn't afford it.  And to resurrect someone, you had to carry his body and gear back to a temple - that wasn't a trivial challenge.

BG2, with its high-level gameplay, made death pointless.  But in BG it was a credible and constant threat.

[Realmzmaster]

BG and BG2 allowed for natural regeneration over time. This involved using the rest system or doing very little for 8 hours. It also requires the use of random encounters.

In the earlier crpgs the party would have to rest to regenerate health. Eight hours was required for maximum health regeneration unless the companion was afflicted by poison, disease or blindness. If the party rested with a companion that was diseased or poisoned the companion would die. The point is that the party would have to keep moving to find a healer or use up a remove poison or disease potion or spell.

If the party needed to regain health the party would camp and rest for eight hours or more. In the earlier crpgs there were random encounters that could disrupt that rest. The party could be caught with only one member awaking and it would take a few moments for the rest of the party to wake up. The party would then have to fight with the hit points that had been recovered dependent on the amount of rest obtained.
Another point is that since all spells in D & D based crpgs had to be memorized or prayed for during that rest period if the rest was interrupted no spells would be memorized.

What most of this did was simply reloading the game. In fact a gamer would simply reload until no random encounter occurred.
Another feature of the rest system is where the party rested. I noted camp above. If you rested in an INN depending on the type of room the party recovered a portion of their health.
If the party was sleeping on the floor only spells would be memorized.
If the party was sleeping in a decent room some health was recovered and spells memorized.
If the party was sleeping in a better room more health was recovered and spells memorized
If the party was in the deluxe room all health was recovered and spells memorized.

In DA2 none of the above would really make sense because it occurred mostly around Kirkwall.

It was implemented somewhat in DAO with scripted "random" encounters and by having a camp. The camp did not really serve as a rest area, but more as area to speak to your companions and automatically wounds and injuries were healed. The darkspawn only attacked the camp once and that was scripted not random.

The problem with the system is that it a time sink. If your party got damaged unless it was poison or disease all the party had to do was stand there and healing would occur or try to camp until no random encounter occurred. The gamer simply ended up gaming the system.

The only way to prevent this was to have an internal timer which would time how long the party was at one spot and then send a random encounter. This also allowed the gamer to game the system especially if the gamer wanted the party to grind to higher levels.

Many of the earlier crpgs had areas with a set level. For example the closest area was for the inexperienced party, but to successful navigate the mountains may require a tenth level party. So if the party was at level 8 the party could stand around taking on random encounters until the tenth level. Which may be fun some for some but simply tedium for others.

The earlier crpgs had many of the same balance problems as later ones.

Edited: Missed a word.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 13 juillet 2012 - 07:56 .

[Provi-dance]

I agree, I don't want health/mana to auto-replenish after each battle.

If, for instance, I defeat my enemies with minimal health/mana loss, I want this to be acknowledged by the game, in the sense that I wouldn't need to waste precious resources (potions, healing kits etc.). Auto-healing eliminates this reward.

[Cimeas]

This just isn't going to happen. They may bring back some elements from DA:O but such a painful pointless system for a few thousand hardcore RPG players is not something they will do.


You know it, I know it, it's life.

[Realmzmaster]

BobSmith101 wrote...

philippe willaume wrote...

if the tactics are tunable and the companion do what you ask them immediatlt and not after finish the animation.
Death might be strong but a given compnion can be wounded and has to stay home for one adventure (they did that in silent storm 2) or stuff to that effect I.E wounded companion is sent home, you pick up a new companion from the pool, the clock advances to simulated the time spent getting the wouded out/ replacement to arrive. that companion is not usable untill you go back to camp)

phil

That sort of system requires a large pool of companions which DA does not provide.

It's like one notch below Fire Emblem. Where a character dying is gone for good (aside from the Lord your alter ego in which case it's a reload) but it won't cause too many problems unless you really make a habit of it because of the large roster.

As I recall BG also had a mechanic where it was possible for a character to be "chunked" beyond possibility of resurection (in the game anyway).

The Raise Dead or resurrection spell could fail if done by the party cleric. It did not fail if you took the party member to the temple in BG1 and BG2 even though it was supposed to have a percentage chance of failure.

Certain spells in BG2 were suppose to be able to destroy a party member (Disintergrate,  Prismatic Spray) unless the appropriate saving throw was made. This is because these spells destroyed the body which was necessary for a Raise Dead or Resurrection spell.
In higer level games like BG2 it was not a problem. The party's cleric was usually of high enough level to cast Raise Dead or Resurrection. At that high level savings throws were rarley missed. In BG1 once the party had enough gold it was not that problematic either. 

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 13 juillet 2012 - 07:58 .

[Provi-dance]

Cimeas wrote...

This just isn't going to happen. They may bring back some elements from DA:O but such a painful pointless system for a few thousand hardcore RPG players is not something they will do.


You know it, I know it, it's life.

Yes, the huge DA2 fanbase would be quite disappointed.

Wasteland 2 ... over 3 million dollars from fans... few thousands hardcore RPG players..

Them rich hardcore people!!11 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

You know it, I know it, it's life.

No, I don't know it.  With DAO, BioWare made a conscious decision to favour tactical play over strategic play.  Strategic play was effectively removed.

We're asking for the addition of some strategic play.  That's all this is.

[Cimeas]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

You know it, I know it, it's life.

No, I don't know it.  With DAO, BioWare made a conscious decision to favour tactical play over strategic play.  Strategic play was effectively removed.

We're asking for the addition of some strategic play.  That's all this is.

Sure, but this idea is much farther than even DA:O.  Much farther. 

[Cimeas]

Provi-dance wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

This just isn't going to happen. They may bring back some elements from DA:O but such a painful pointless system for a few thousand hardcore RPG players is not something they will do.


You know it, I know it, it's life.

Yes, the huge DA2 fanbase would be quite disappointed.

Wasteland 2 ... over 3 million dollars from fans... few thousands hardcore RPG players..

Them rich hardcore people!!11 

Yeah, the Wasteland 2 game was funded by 61,290 people.   Dragon Age 2 was bought by over a million, thats more than 12 times that number.   Many of those 61,290 people probably did not even pre-purchase the game, but paid only $10-$12.

Finally a Bioware game, whether DA:O or DA2 costs around 10 times your $3 million to produce.



And really, you're seriously suggesting DA2 failed because it didn't have a ridiculously harsh death system?  By your logic that means Mass Effect 2, DA:O and oh wait EVERY OTHER RPG IN THE LAST 10 YEARS must have failed.    No, DA2 failed becuse it was rushed, boring and had repeated environments. 

[MichaelStuart]

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

[Cimeas]

MichaelStuart wrote...

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

Not sure if sarcasm....or crazy...

[MichaelStuart]

Cimeas wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

Not sure if sarcasm....or crazy...

I'm serious
Games are far to easy nowadays.

[Provi-dance]

Cimeas wrote...


Yeah, the Wasteland 2 game was funded by 61,290 people.   Dragon Age 2 was bought by over a million, thats more than 12 times that number.   Many of those 61,290 people probably did not even pre-purchase the game, but paid only $10-$12.

Finally a Bioware game, whether DA:O or DA2 costs around 10 times your $3 million to produce.



And really, you're seriously suggesting DA2 failed because it didn't have a ridiculously harsh death system?  By your logic that means Mass Effect 2, DA:O and oh wait EVERY OTHER RPG IN THE LAST 10 YEARS must have failed.    No, DA2 failed becuse it was rushed, boring and had repeated environments. 

There is a difference between funding in advance because you love a project/idea and buying a finished product. Therefore, you can't compare the numbers. Your "few thousands hardcore players" hyperbole obviously missed the entire galaxy and now you're hanging on straws.

How are you so sure how much DAO or DA2 costed to make?
People are buying fast-food games not because that's what they're starving for, it's because they don't have any other option, sadly. Developers dictate and create the "taste" and there's a saturation of idiotic action clones, because they think that's what people want. Some people do, but certainly not all.

And where have I suggested that DA2 failed because of that?

Please, stop with your ridiculous statements and comparisons.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No, I don't know it.  With DAO, BioWare made a conscious decision to favour tactical play over strategic play.  Strategic play was effectively removed.

We're asking for the addition of some strategic play.  That's all this is.

Sure, but this idea is much farther than even DA:O.  Much farther. 

Than "even DA:O"?  Well of course it is - DAO was the game that eliminated this aspect of gameplay.  Simply reverting to DAO wouldn't help at all.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MichaelStuart wrote...

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

No, no, no.  you don't need to mechanically force this play style.  If people want to game the system be resting constantly or manufacturing a ton of potions, I'd say let them.

The goal should never be to make everyone experience the game in the same way.

[Cimeas]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No, I don't know it.  With DAO, BioWare made a conscious decision to favour tactical play over strategic play.  Strategic play was effectively removed.

We're asking for the addition of some strategic play.  That's all this is.

Sure, but this idea is much farther than even DA:O.  Much farther. 

Than "even DA:O"?  Well of course it is - DAO was the game that eliminated this aspect of gameplay.  Simply reverting to DAO wouldn't help at all.

Wasn't DA:O that really well recieved game that everyone thought was a nice balance of modern games and RPGs of the past that sold over 4 million copies and was universally praised and everyone wants to go back to?

I might be imagining things though. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No, I don't know it.  With DAO, BioWare made a conscious decision to favour tactical play over strategic play.  Strategic play was effectively removed.

We're asking for the addition of some strategic play.  That's all this is.

Sure, but this idea is much farther than even DA:O.  Much farther. 

Than "even DA:O"?  Well of course it is - DAO was the game that eliminated this aspect of gameplay.  Simply reverting to DAO wouldn't help at all.

Wasn't DA:O that really well recieved game that everyone thought was a nice balance of modern games and RPGs of the past that sold over 4 million copies and was universally praised and everyone wants to go back to?

I might be imagining things though.

We're talking about one specific aspect of the game.  Just because the game overall was terrific doesn't mean there's no aspect of it that cannot be improved upon.

I agree DAO was terrific.  I would like to change nearly everything from DA2 that was different back to how it was in DAO.  But even DAO got some things wrong, and this is one of them.

[Provi-dance]

MichaelStuart wrote...

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

I agree with everything but saving.

Why shouldn't there be a hardcore mode for DA3? So players can experience the game how they wish to.

[Wulfram]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No, no, no.  you don't need to mechanically force this play style.  If people want to game the system be resting constantly or manufacturing a ton of potions, I'd say let them.

The goal should never be to make everyone experience the game in the same way.

Adding a bunch of tedium for the majority of players so that a minority can do the equivalent of playing the game with one tied behind their back isn't good game design.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wulfram wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No, no, no.  you don't need to mechanically force this play style.  If people want to game the system be resting constantly or manufacturing a ton of potions, I'd say let them.

The goal should never be to make everyone experience the game in the same way.

Adding a bunch of tedium for the majority of players so that a minority can do the equivalent of playing the game with one tied behind their back isn't good game design.

I'm not saying we should make people trek back through the dungeon to find a spot to rest, or wait for health and mana to regen.  We don't need to force tedium.  But nor should we trivialise encounters by having everyone pop up unharmed at the end.

[MagmaSaiyan]

MichaelStuart wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

For survival gameplay to work, you have limit all forms of healing.
Potions need to be rare.
magic needs to be limited.
Resting needs to only be allowed at home bases
Homes bases than self need be difficult to get to. In both Dragon Age games the home base was only a few minutes away, It should ideally take a few hours real time to get to a home base.

May I also suggest limiting the ability to save, be only available at home bases. Theirs nothing better to make people play more cautiously with health than the possibly of losing a few hours of hard worked gameplay.

Not sure if sarcasm....or crazy...

I'm serious
Games are far to easy nowadays.

sounds to me like your explaining more of a survival horror game than a RPG, as far as the potions go while the potions themselves were pretty rare, more so than Origins, you could buy injury/health potions and full restoration potions, plus the cooldown. on the magic part dont increase willpower i think that pretty much sums that up. now unless and highly unlikely they use some sort of system like resting i actually approve of it(assuming they dont put inns in)<--  i never usually use inns anyway its usually for restoring mana anyway

edit: forgot you can buy potions as well but that can be optional, much like the other suggestions

Modifié par MagmaSaiyan, 13 juillet 2012 - 11:38 .

[wowpwnslol]

How about a compromise?

No instant ressing/full healing on nightmare difficulty. I think it makes perfect sense.

Let casuals have their softcore RPG experience with zero frustration, effort and instant gratification, but allow real fans of RPG games to be frustrated and ultimately rewarded for their efforts.

I think in this case everybody wins.

[Realmzmaster]

I think a system like what Basalisk games did with Eschalon II. It allows the game to set certain parameters for gameplay. The gamer can check a box at the start of the game to select or un-select certain options like

1. Weapons and player item degradation
2. Weather effects that are both visual and effect gameplay.
3. Food and water consumption for survival

Such a method could be used for DA. The gamer could customize the gaming experience on any level.

[Sylvius the Mad]

wowpwnslol wrote...

How about a compromise?

No instant ressing/full healing on nightmare difficulty. I think it makes perfect sense.

Let casuals have their softcore RPG experience with zero frustration, effort and instant gratification, but allow real fans of RPG games to be frustrated and ultimately rewarded for their efforts.

I think in this case everybody wins.

Except people who don't like difficulty for difficulty's sake, and instead just want a more coherent setting in which to play.

I never play on Nightmare, because games tend to cheat on Nightmare (note DA2's arbitrary elemental immunities), but I'd love to have a game where health and mana didn't regerenate at different rates in and out of combat.

Like friendly fire, if these features are going to be in the game but optional, then they should not be tied to difficulty - they should be available at any difficulty level.

[Zanallen]

I'm used to playing JRPGs where, if your party member died, you either had to use an item to revive them or they autorevive, but at 1 hp and you need to use items or magic to heal them. So this probably wouldn't be an issue, but on the other hand I play video games to relax and unwind. I don't particularly crave a challenge with my hobbies.