91 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr Fixit]

franciscoamell wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...

franciscoamell wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...

As I recall, on several occasions devs said that they hadn't been prepared to make a ton of extra content for mage Hawke, something game's story in all honesty required. Although I don't agree with their decision, it is understandable. They weren't willing to create a significant asymmetry by leaving the other two classes with less content.

By having a classless system with a magical subsytem in DA2, each Hawke could have been at least partly a 'mage', providing BioWare with an opportunity to truly tailor the 'Kirkwall experience' to the PC.

I wouldn't like it if they made being a mage canon, it would kill some of the replayability.

Again, not sure if you understood.

You'd still play whatever "class" you want.

I meant story-wise and not gameplay-wise. Being a mage or not is supposed to make a big difference. If you're always a mage in the story, the story will change less, making each file less different from each other and killing a part of the replayability. Also, dwarves can't be mages and I'd love to play as a dwarf again.

Yeah, but in DA2 you could only be a human, so there's that, and I was talking solely about that game. Frankly, having the story of DA2 in mind, and how it woefully integrated story with gameplay, I thought it would help both devs and player immersion if Bioware created the game with every Hawke being 'magic-born'. It needn't in any way influence your specific character build, but it would make the whole Kirkwall situation more relevant to the PC.

As for less variation in story, I think exactly the opposite. DA2 showed that there's NO difference in gameplay or story whether you're mage or not (except for Bethany/Carver). With 'magic-born' Hawke, devs would (one can hope) have no choice but to better integrate the two.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 28 septembre 2012 - 11:05 .

[daffl5]

set is the way to go!

[Mr Fixit]

franciscoamell wrote...
I disagree, Hawke's relationship with Fenris, Anders, Gamlen and Meredith changed a lot. I wish the story changed more, but there was some change and I liked it.

But that's just it. The story didn't significantly change precisely because Bioware wasn't prepared to craft all this exclusive content for each of the three classes.

[megamacka]

I would love to be a hybrid mage/ warrior

[cindercatz]

Dintonta wrote...

My favorite system would be :
Origin (as a given set of skills) + complete customization afterward.
By 'origin' I mean a setting which would actually replace the three DA:O categories of set classes, races, and origin.
But that wouldn't force the player into any subsequent path.
In addition, I would prefer if the character's evolution didn't rely on 'set levels' of experience, but rather on specific improvements (a bit like the way to unlock specializations by asking to be taught by a companion, or the achievement system which take into account how much ennemies you killed such way, or which quest you fullfilled, etc...)
Fully developped, it would permit to customize our characters accordingly with how we played them without giving to some players the headaches of complicated builds.

To me, it would be the best of all worlds : The origin system (which gives us the possibility to replay along different specific stories) and a world which would react to our choices and gameplay styles.

Agreed with this. I want origins, and I like tying class (or sets of selectable classes ala DA:O) to them, but once I start developing my character within that class, I want full freedom to build any role I want to play within the class, and I like using spec paths at different points in the story to both enhance my ability to play in my style and provide more branching story.

[nightscrawl]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

By set classes I mean what DA:O, DA2 or games like World of Warcraft have. You pick your class, Warrior, Mage, Rogue, etc and then what armour and weapons you use and what abilities you have available are determined by that class. Rogues can't use heavy armour, only mages can cast fireball etc.

By custom classes I mean somthing like Elder Scrolls or the MMO The Secret World. You load in as a blank slate and then customise yourself as you play the game with no restrictions on how you do it.

I've never played a game like that, but it sounds interesting.

However, with the importance of mages and what being a mage means in the lore, it's not really that simple. You either are a mage, with mage abilities, or you aren't. It's mages vs everyone else. While an interesting way to do things, I just don't think it would work within the context of Thedas.

Mr Fixit wrote...

Which shouldn't be a priority in a single-player game anyway. With DA3, due to EA Prime Directive, likely to have a multiplayer component, things would be more difficult, I agree.

They did a bunch of balance "fixes" in either DA2 patch 1.02 or 1.03, so it's something the devs think about and revisit, regardless of whether the game is single vs multi.

While it's true that there will always be the best way to do something (build a character for high damage or soaking, certain party makeups that have the best times or highest output, etc) they don't want it to so far exceed the rest of the possible combinations as to be the only way of doing something. Often, they will only see what those are after the game has been in the wild for a time and crazy/awesome players like AreleX have had a chance to dig into it.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 29 septembre 2012 - 11:43 .

[Sejborg]

Rawgrim wrote...

Set, but customizable classes. Like in DA:O where I could have my rogues use 2 axes or whatever.

I feel the same way.

[MichaelStuart]

I would prefer custom classes

[TMZuk]

The argument about mage/not mage and how that impacts the story is easily solved, even with complete ability to customize. During character creation you decide wether your character has any ability to learn magic or not. If he/she does, the character counts as a mage, plot-wise.

I'm very confused why anyone is against custom-classes. If you want to play a highly specialized character, why, then make one. Why does that preference mean that I, who despise playing specialized characters, has to?

It was one of my major griefs with DA2, and one of the main reasons I did not buy the game.

Modifié par TMZuk, 29 septembre 2012 - 03:41 .

[Biotic Sage]

Mixture.

Maybe have 3 set class skill trees starting out, but then we choose 3 more specialization skill trees along the way, and these specializations are universally accessible for every class. So if a mage wanted to pick up the "Shadow" specialization he could, and if a warrior wanted to pick up the "Spirit Healer" specialization he could.

[Windninja47]

If the game uses a blank slate approach wont that mean your character will always be a Mage (ie. somoeone with the ability to do magic), even if you choose never to use magic?

[Biotic Sage]

Windninja47 wrote...

If the game uses a blank slate approach wont that mean your character will always be a Mage (ie. somoeone with the ability to do magic), even if you choose never to use magic?

Yeah, but if you weave that into the narrative appropriately it could definitely work.

[TMZuk]

Windninja47 wrote...

If the game uses a blank slate approach wont that mean your character will always be a Mage (ie. somoeone with the ability to do magic), even if you choose never to use magic?

Yes, if you believe that there's no way to compromise between the two. You could have a blank slate with the exception that you have to choose wether the character has magical abilities or not.

It's not nuclear physics. In fact, it should be rather simple.

[I Like Cats And]

Set classes so they effect your story (like the devs have said), but with a huge amount of variety in possible builds.

[Windninja47]

@TMZuk- so it would be at the start of the game you can choose whether or not you are a mage? This seems less about making a blank slate and more fusing together rogue and warrior classes.

[TMZuk]

Windninja47 wrote...

@TMZuk- so it would be at the start of the game you can choose whether or not you are a mage? This seems less about making a blank slate and more fusing together rogue and warrior classes.

It is about having a character system, where you can do or make any sort of specialised or general character you wish. But, because wether you having magic abilities or not might play an important part, you will choose, during character creation or shortly after in game, wether you have magic abilities or not.

Once again, I do not understand why those who likes the specialized classes even care? You can make your character as specialized as you wish, and leave us who likes generalists to play that. Why do you wish to force everyone else to play the way ~you~ like?

If the ability to create a generalist would in some way deduct from your ability to play a specialist, then I could understand your reluctance. But it does not.

[BlackGrifon]

I liked playing as an Arcane warior most of all but it would have been perfect if it had a tree of 4 tallents per weild choice: sword and sheeld/ two-handed weapons/ dual weild to give the caracter some combat training. I'm ok with basic sheld defence a sheld bash and 2 pasive talents to improve them, basicaly one sustained tallent that complements the weelding stile choise a phisical attack, two if posible and a pasive tallent.
Same for warrior/ rogues some basic magic spells healing, a combat spell or two, a sustained
spell.............your thoughs???

[Kidd]

I prefer a classless system where you simply buy skills as you progress. Magic can be a talent that must be chosen at the first level, since it implies years of training (if it is possible to awaken your magic talent and make proper use of it without training for years first, we don't even need to limit magic - similar to how you can multiclass to the Sorcerer class at any time in third edition D&D).

But if I can't have classless, I prefer the exact opposites. Let me choose my class and let that choice have large consequences, where every class is very different. I could never tank with a thief in second edition D&D, nor could I ever sneak as a fighter, and this was absolutely fine. It gives your character a strong identity right away and keeps consistent with it.

No set roles, or very strong roles. The mismash found in many games have the weaknesses of both systems, to me.

[goofyomnivore]

I just want the options to use a sword in one hand and spell in another, if I'm a warrior the option to dual wield one handed axes or if I'm a rogue the option to use a staff and be a pseudo monk with my stuns and feint abilities.

I prefer freedom of thednd style, but if they do the set class route at least give some wiggle room on the weapon options if you're going to lock the abiltiies.

Modifié par strive, 14 octobre 2012 - 05:28 .

[deuce985]

Custom...

Things like battle mages in heavier armor doesn't do anything to go against DA lore. I see no reason to strip player agency when it's consistent with current lore...

If I want to make an Arcane Warrior, I should be able to do that. The more customization we get, the better. The most popular games out today give you a ton of customization in how you play.

Modifié par deuce985, 14 octobre 2012 - 05:41 .

[shirespartan]

Set all the way, 100%.

[Louschen]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

hawkens982 wrote...

Custom classes please. But if its only set classes, at least give us the option to use more weapon types for each class.

This.

[FedericoV]

I prefer what you call custom classes and I think that a pure classless systems would be a better fit for the kind of games Bioware is trying to make lately.

I mean, classes are perfect for party based and tactical gameplay. If action and cinematic are the focus and the party is restricted to 4 slots only, I think that classes are not a resource anymore.

Having said that: classes are at the very roots of Thedas setting in terms of charachterization. It would be very difficult to remove them now. In that sense, I think that DA:O presented a better system than DA2 and I hope that they will do something more on that line in the next game.