83 réponses à ce sujet

[toto2300]

Vortex13 wrote...

Thibax wrote...

Single Player Mode: Story Game

Multiplayer Mode: Co-op Missions Maps

No, no, no. Sorry, but IMO multiplayer based campaigns, missions, ect. are the worst kind of co-op. I would much rather have single player story with option to bring co-op buddies along with you, and a DA style Horde mode.

No, they need to keep MP way away from the SP story. Having a co-op mode would seriously gimp what they could do and would fundamentally alter the way it's designed. It's not as as simple as just toggling one of the characters to be controlled by another person. Most co-op action games work because there is very little downtime; you are going from one level to the next with constant action. You only stop to sell and buy things. RPGs have a lot of downtime, just wandering around the towns and camp talking to people.

What they need to do is completelly seperate the MP mode from the actual game. I would prefer they just make a seperate MP game, but since that's not going to happen they should at least completelly segregate the modes. That way the RPG doesn't blend into a co-op action game.

[Navasha]

I would disagree whole-heartedly on Co-op modes. That DOES influence the single player game. If any portion of a game is balanced for two or more actual players to be involved, it changes the game, period.

I am not against a MP portion, but like ME3 it should be a complete and separate design. It should maybe even be a completely separate executable file, IMO.

Any code bloat necessary to have machines communicate with one another is going to affect a single player game performance. When the single-player portion is active, there shouldn't be a single processor cycle devoted to communicating with someone elses computer.

[Vortex13]

toto2300 wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...

Thibax wrote...

Single Player Mode: Story Game

Multiplayer Mode: Co-op Missions Maps

No, no, no. Sorry, but IMO multiplayer based campaigns, missions, ect. are the worst kind of co-op. I would much rather have single player story with option to bring co-op buddies along with you, and a DA style Horde mode.

No, they need to keep MP way away from the SP story. Having a co-op mode would seriously gimp what they could do and would fundamentally alter the way it's designed. It's not as as simple as just toggling one of the characters to be controlled by another person. Most co-op action games work because there is very little downtime; you are going from one level to the next with constant action. You only stop to sell and buy things. RPGs have a lot of downtime, just wandering around the towns and camp talking to people.

What they need to do is completelly seperate the MP mode from the actual game. I would prefer they just make a seperate MP game, but since that's not going to happen they should at least completelly segregate the modes. That way the RPG doesn't blend into a co-op action game.

It wouldn't have to alter the single player campaign or your companions in any way. Using the game Gladius as an example, the co-op players only ever had any input into the flow of the narrative; the only were able to play during the combat encounters and then only when there were appropriate spaces for such characters. If the story called to the hero and ONLY the hero to enter a dungeon to fight a boss the other players would have to sit and watch. When first player walked around the towns and spoke to merchants and quest givers the other players had no input no control over how the PC or NPCs (party members and quest givers) interacted.

I don't see why DA:I couldn't operate along the same lines; only allow multiplayer imput during combat sections of the game. Companions would only be controlled during fights, after which they revert back to their old AI controlled, rich backstory, chat-able self. I am not asking for the main campaign to be built soley around multiplayer/co-op all I am asking for is the OPTION to play with one another, to let a group of friends play the game and experience the rich story at the same time.

[Vortex13]

Navasha wrote...

I would disagree whole-heartedly on Co-op modes. That DOES influence the single player game. If any portion of a game is balanced for two or more actual players to be involved, it changes the game, period. 

I am not against a MP portion, but like ME3 it should be a complete and separate design. It should maybe even be a completely separate executable file, IMO. 

Any code bloat necessary to have machines communicate with one another is going to affect a single player game performance. When the single-player portion is active, there shouldn't be a single processor cycle devoted to communicating with someone elses computer.

I can see your point about the code of the game having to be altered to allow for multiplayer connectivity. Personally, I wouldn't see a problem with such a change to the code since we are going to have a multiplayer mode anyway and since DA:I isn't coming out until late 2013, I am fairly confident in Bioware's abilities to "trim the fat" off the code and make it more streamlined. 


Obviously I want the story/game to do well, and if during the production of the game the DA team ran into an issue with the drop-in/drop-out functionality breaking the easy flow of the gsme's code I would say remove it. I am all for having an engaging, rich storyline, and if the mechanics (code hindering the effectiveness of other code) of a co-op mode are detremental to the game's overall functionality I would see them removed. But if the code works fine and doesn't break the game (slow down, crashes, bugs) I really don't see any issues of giving players the OPTION to let others join in as party members during combat.

Now, if given the choice of having a multiplayer specific campaign vs a survival horde mode, I would pick the horde mode every time. I am of the opinion of everything or nothing on story in multiplayer. Either allow us to have "full access" of the story with our friends or give us a full fledged co-operative multiplayer mode; trying to make a hybrid of the two never works.

[Vortex13]

Here is some more ideas I had specifically for Horde Mode and PvP which I have added to my OP:

CO-OP SURVIVAL (HORDE MODE)

Now I am all for a co-op story, don't get me wrong, but a Horde Mode offers somethings that the main game couldn't.

Before I go further on that point let me stop for a moment and tell you all about my stance on the DA and ME universes and the races/creatures that inhabit them. I am drawn to the non-human, alien characters in the two respective settings. Shale in DA:O, Legion in ME 2 hold more appeal to me than Alistar, or Miranda, not to say that I think the human characters are poorly done, just; I am a human in real life 24/7, so anything that is not human I find interesting.

I don't want to play only as a human, a human with pointy ears, or a short human with a beard, I want to play as the more exotic fantasy creatures; things such as Werevwolves, Golems, Malibari, Sylvans, Disciples, ect. And while it would be supremely awesome to play as such things in a co-op campaign, I wouldn't want the DA team have to write the story around why a Werewolf is in the Inquisitor's party. Horde mode allows me to play as these creatures alongside those people that like to play as human, dwarves, and elves.

Sure there would be (pretty much) no story involved with such a mode, but the ME 3 multiplayer is pretty successful at what it offers, and unlike the multiplayer based campaign mentioned above, this mode offers increased replayability and customization. Once you beat the five hour multiplayer story, what point is there in playing it again?

Okay, now that that is out of the way I can know get down to the specifics of what I would like to see in DA:I's Horde Mode. Most of these ideas are extentions of what is offered in ME3's game mode but I do have some notable improvements (IMO) that I would like to see added.

- GIVE US AN ACTUAL STORE -

The store in ME3's multiplayer is very fickle in how it treats the players, someone who sinks 5 million credits into the thing is given only ammo consumables and avengers; while another player would buy a PSP and recieve a Harrier, and Typhoon in the same pack.

Now I understand Bioware / EA's reasoning behind making the store a virtual slot machine; the drive and desire to keep playing and (according to them) hopfully spend real world money on the packs in an attempt to unlock something of value. I am not against such a business model; especially when it means that all multiplayer DLC is free; but I would like to ask for (some) control on how things are unlocked given to the player.

One idea I had was that the store would contain two seperate lists of purchasable items. One list would contain the random packs that we all love to hate from ME3, and the other list would contain specific items that could be purchased but at an increased cost (say 300 to 500% more expensive) then the random packs. Each of the two lists would be broken down into catagories: Weapons, Armor, Relics/Accesories, and Races/Characters and then further broken down by rareity (Common, Uncommon, Rare, Ultra Rare ect). The random packs would obviously only contain random elements of the given category; no more hoping and praying for a Dwarf and getting a shield; but only would give one item per pack. The specific packs would allow you to pick any one of the items within each catagory but at an increased cost to the player.

Another idea would be to incorporate previous save files into the unlock system. What I mean by this is that when you log into the multiplayer for the first time, and you have a save from one of the previous DA games you are presented with a choice of "first dibs" unlocks based on the choices you made with that save. Did you side with the Werewolves? Well then you get the Werewolf class unlocked from the start. Did you side with the Mages in Kirkwall? Then you have you pick of mage specializations to choose from. For balancing issues only the first import used would grant the bonus unlocks; subsequent imports would grant small XP or gold rewards to the player. Granted this particular idea would require a huge (non-bugged) flag import system, but if it could be done not only would it allow the players to have control over what they unlock but also would be an interesting way IMO to allow single player to affect multiplayer.

NO CHARACTER KITS

ME3 multiplayer suffers extensivly from this particual feature IMO, restricting players to only specific race and power combinations is not something I want to see for DA:I. The way I see it, classes and specializations should be unlocks, but not the available powers within each race and class; with the exception of the unique classes (Werewolves, Golems, Sylvans, ect).

For example, if I unlock the Templar specialization for my warrior class, then that specialization should be fully available to all other warriors regardless of the race you are playing as. If the Templar spec was unlocked while I was playing as a human, but I decide to roll up a dwarf warrior, I want the Templar specialization available to pick. Don't limit the game down to ulocking seperate classes for each race: Human Templar, Dwarf Templar, and Elf Templar, and please do NOT limit the available powers of a specialization based on race either. When I unlock a specialization I don't want Holy Smite to ONLY be accesable by the Human Templars; I want any race that become a Templar to be able to use Holy Smite.

Secondly, I would like to be able to customize what powers I bring into battle, and were on the face buttons (Xbox 360 player here) I want the powers to go. ME3 is maddening on certain characters with this issue; I want to have Hunter Mode for my Geth Infiltrator to be on the LEFT BUMMPER DANGIT, the limited powers available to each KIT is a hinderance especially if you have a group with all of the same class. I picture the multiplayer giving us six slots for powers (based off of DA's X, Y, B and RT X, Y, B layout) so I would like to determine were my six powers go, and I would like the ability to "swap out" powers in between games for some other power. I don't like Holy Smite so I will remove that and subsitute Mana Burn for example.

But if we are able to have a complete list of abilities to chose from (Warrior/Templar trees) then we could customize our classes to suit individual playstyles and have variety between same classes. If I put all of my points into magic resistance and debuffing, but hardly any into basic warrior talents then I would be awesome at combating mages and demons but suck against phyisical attacks. Likewise another Templar on my team could evenly divide his points into both warrior and templar powers and is a more balanced fighter.

Essentially, I am asking for Bioware to allow us to make mistakes. Give us the freedom to customize our class in how we see fit; my full on Templar would rock against any magicial enemies but get destroyed by anything else; but it would be something that I as a player choose to do, not because of some artificial limitation placed on my class so that we could have more unlocks for the store.

* I'm going to stop here for now, getting late, but I will be adding to this in the future. Please let me know what you all think.

VERSUS MODE

I would be fine with a PvP game mode, but not if it was the only multiplayer option available (I preffer co-op over vs) and not if this was the only way to play as the more exotic/ non-human characters. I don't want such a mode to be the only way to play as an awakened Darkspawn, or a Sylvan, espcially when there are precidents set by lore that say that such creatures can work with the player (Warden, Hawke, Inquisitor) for a common goal. As long as I can play as these fantatasy creatures in a co-operative setting then I am perfectly fine with any PvP modes that Bioware includes.

One small caveat I would like to squeze in here is; I would love to see a meta RISK-like strategy game overlaying the PvP (and maybe even the CO-OP mode as well). This strategy game would consist of the continent of theadas broken into territories, and depending on which side was winning in the "war" the ownership of the sections would go towards the respective side. Owning a territory would conffer bonuses to the side that has control of it; bonuses like increased mana/stamina regeneration in combat, more XP earned, ect. If a side wins all territories they are declared the winner and the map would reset (Think Chromehounds for what I am driving at here).


What does everybody think?

[Vortex13]

I am brainstorming on some more ideas about the Horde mode, namely areas about how weapons, armor, and accessories could have varied stats, without unbalancing the game and without destroying the drive to unlock other items once they are unlocked.

Any input on this or any other area would be most appriciated.

[Rorschachinstein]

Customizable faces on our multiplayer characters is the one thing I really want. That and PVP dueling, co-op dungeon crawling, horde modes, and boss modes.

[Vortex13]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Customizable faces on our multiplayer characters is the one thing I really want. That and PVP dueling, co-op dungeon crawling, horde modes, and boss modes.

Hmm... Good idea about the face customization never thought out that. I imagine that such a feature would only really apply to the human, dwarf, and elf classes.

[Vortex13]

Another thing I would like to see is for truly unique non-human classes. Yes I know I have mentioned this many times before in my thread, but what I am getting at here is that I want completely different playstyles, walking/attacking animations, completely seperate and unique powers/abilities.

ME3's multiplayer is a great foundation for DA:I's mp, but please buff up the diversity and variatiy of the classes. I always hated in ME3 how my Geth Engineer was the same as a Krogen Battlemaster in terms of movement and general playstyle (run around shooting your gun).

I want to see completely melee based classes operate differently from one another; the human/elf/dwarf warrior should have powers/abilities, and movement and attack animations that are different from the werewolf classes, which should be different from the Golems, which should be different from the Sylvans, which should be different from the Malibari Warhounds, ect.

I know that the "reusing" of assets helps speed up production and saves space on the disk (hence why all ME3 multiplayer kits are based off of the same skeleton) but Bioware already has the basis of the mode laid out from ME3 and the game's is not do out until late 2013/2014 so they would have plenty of time to work on the polishing of the game.

[Vortex13]

Just had a thought, since the game is going to run on a version of the Frostbite 2 engine would destructible environments come into play?

Because if so I would like to see a defend the castle type level (Think Helms Deep) were the entire level is the inside and out side of the structure. A level were siege weapons and the larger enemy creatures (Ogres, dragons) as well as your allies (Golems, Sylvans) could damage/destroy sections of the fortification. Would be pretty awesome if that could be implemented.

[Vortex13]

Vortex13 wrote...

Just had a thought, since the game is going to run on a version of the Frostbite 2 engine would destructible environments come into play?

Because if so I would like to see a defend the castle type level (Think Helms Deep) were the entire level is the inside and out side of the structure. A level were siege weapons and the larger enemy creatures (Ogres, dragons) as well as your allies (Golems, Sylvans) could damage/destroy sections of the fortification. Would be pretty awesome if that could be implemented.

Just had another idea about this, what if the castle in question was the Inquisitor's fortress? The hosting player would import his/her version of the building into the mp mode. And if the host has yet to recieve the castle in game then a default structure would be used.

This would be pretty interesting especially if the castle's owner added defensive upgrades to the base. Or maybe, an increase in XP, and gold earned after the match if the player elected to go for passive monetary upgrades. Ect.

[BonFire5]

I want a Team Deathmatch style thing going on. Almost Battlefront 2 style. Just, every now and then, someone gets an Ogre or a Golem and rampages the hell out of the field.

[Vortex13]

BonFire5 wrote...

I want a Team Deathmatch style thing going on. Almost Battlefront 2 style. Just, every now and then, someone gets an Ogre or a Golem and rampages the hell out of the field.

Thst is an okay basis for a PvP mode (very little balanceing required if both sides are mirror images of each other minus the reskin) but too action oriented, and shallow for a (how I envision it anyway) DA:I co-operative experience.

Granted the terms "action oriented" and "shallow" are often what people attribute to multiplayer in general, but I don't want a vs mode to be the ONLY form of multiplayer the game has to offer. I would also like it to be more in depth and varied then then running around as a simplified warrior class with the more exotic fantasy creatures existing only as temporary "power ups".

[Vortex13]

Awakened Darkspawn would be an interesting and fun character to play as in the multiplayer mode. While not as exotic as the in-human classes it would still be interesting to see how the Darkspawn's abilities and powers would come into play.

I would picture this class to function as a "human" type class (warrior, rouge, mage) but with several unique; as in not the same animation/effect as other powers but with a different color; but act as more of a debuffer version of the respective class. Maybe something to do with the corrupting effects of the taint, or the "awakened" status of the Darkspawn itself.

[Zevais]

All I want is to have co-op where someone else in my own home can drop in and take over one of my companions. I don't NEED anything more than that multi-player wise. I would like to create a sibling/lifelong friend, and a co-op seperate campaign mode would be nice... but I think the resources that would be needed for those extras would take away from other things I like about the games.

I would just be satisfied with co-op drop in.

[Vortex13]

Zevais wrote...

All I want is to have co-op where someone else in my own home can drop in and take over one of my companions. I don't NEED anything more than that multi-player wise. I would like to create a sibling/lifelong friend, and a co-op seperate campaign mode would be nice... but I think the resources that would be needed for those extras would take away from other things I like about the games.

I would just be satisfied with co-op drop in.

Oh I agree whole heartily, local drop in/ drop out split screen gameplay would be the most ideal solution. But I have the feeling that even if Bioware could implement such a feature that EA wouldn't allow it; clashes too much with their business model of one game per player (how else do they think they will earn money?).

Believe me, if I could play the entire game with my two brothers sitting on the couch next to me, filling in as companions during combat I would take it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, EA doesn't swing that way; I mean when was the last time they released a non-sports game that included local multiplayer?

[Vortex13]

Just a couple brainstorming ideas I have been mulling over while on break at work.

- Would be cool to play as a summoner type class. Maybe make it a special unique "race" like werewolves or Golems; think Justice inhabiting the skeletal remains of a human with powers focused more on bringing other fade spirits to the battle then physical attacks (This is from replaying Gladius a few days ago and getting the Undead Summoner).

- Co-op sync-kills/death blows - Just like it sounds, having unique "tag team" animations on the killing blow would be pretty awesome. Such a thing could reward bonus XP/gold when accomplished; a reward for working as a team. Variety would be key here, I wouldn't want it to be only between the three base classes.

- I would like to see animations occur based on several factors; class choice being the most obvious, but a co-op takedown of an ogre between a Human mage and a Dwarf warrior should be different then a Human warrior and an Elf mage for example. Also the non-human classes should have a co-op attack with the human races as well. For example a golem player would pick up a Darkspawn emmisary and pound on it for a little bit before the Human mage fries it with electricity (or fire or ice depending on your specialization). Or a werewolf pounces on an ogre crawling around on its back clawing and biting while a Dwarf rouge shoots the monster in the mouth with a crossbow as it yells in pain.

- If the Dragon Age team decides to put in challenges like ME's multiplayer it would be cool if you actually unlocked something in-game apart from a banner. Nothing like a weapon/armor mind you; too much of a unbalancing/grindfest if that were the case; but something like a unique character cusomization/skin. This could range from tribal markings on your awakened Darkspawn all the way to being character skins of Dragon Age characters; look like the Airoshok while playing as a Qunari, appear as Shale with your Golem, ect. No changes stat-wise just a simple skin swap.

Well that's all I have for now, what do you think?

[Vortex13]

Man, rereading my posts feels like a one sided conversation with myself.

Modifié par Vortex13, 18 décembre 2012 - 08:42 .

[74 Wrex]

No Multiplayer for DA 3 4 Life

[Zevais]

Vortex13 wrote...

Zevais wrote...

All I want is to have co-op where someone else in my own home can drop in and take over one of my companions. I don't NEED anything more than that multi-player wise. I would like to create a sibling/lifelong friend, and a co-op seperate campaign mode would be nice... but I think the resources that would be needed for those extras would take away from other things I like about the games.

I would just be satisfied with co-op drop in.

Oh I agree whole heartily, local drop in/ drop out split screen gameplay would be the most ideal solution. But I have the feeling that even if Bioware could implement such a feature that EA wouldn't allow it; clashes too much with their business model of one game per player (how else do they think they will earn money?).

Believe me, if I could play the entire game with my two brothers sitting on the couch next to me, filling in as companions during combat I would take it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, EA doesn't swing that way; I mean when was the last time they released a non-sports game that included local multiplayer?

I don't even need split screen. I played Marvel Ultimate Alliance with my fiance, and one screen didn't bother us at all. Actually, split screens can be annoying to me... especially passed half and half... it just gets smaller and more annoying.

[Vortex13]

74 Wrex wrote...

No Multiplayer for DA 3 4 Life

Any particular reason why; I don't see how a multiplayer like I described wouldn't work.

[74 Wrex]

Vortex13 wrote...

74 Wrex wrote...

No Multiplayer for DA 3 4 Life

Any particular reason why; I don't see how a multiplayer like I described wouldn't work.

Dragon Age is all about how you control an entire party with strategy and of course the choices and story and putting multiplayer in a game that is not meant for multiplayer is BS









4 LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!

Modifié par 74 Wrex, 19 décembre 2012 - 12:32 .

[Dysjong]

Baldur's gate Series, icewind dale, NWN had Multiplayer, that could be played in the campaign. I did play nwn with some friends and we had a blast with playing the campaign.

[Vortex13]

Dysjong wrote...

Baldur's gate Series, icewind dale, NWN had Multiplayer, that could be played in the campaign. I did play nwn with some friends and we had a blast with playing the campaign.

Same for me on icewind dale; I don't know why people see the word multiplayer and instantly think "Runis the Single Player". Yes we can debate the semantics of how more money could be moved to this area or this area, but the point is multiplayer is coming. I am trying to envision (And hopefully give ideas to) what the multiplayer should be. 

We already know multiplayer is coming (I for one am a fan of the decision); now is the time to make our wants/ideas known. Tell the DA team what we want to see (for me fully implemented main campaign co-op or a revamp DA styled ME 3 horde mode) and what we don't want to see (multiplayer based campaigns - Spartan Ops).

[Vortex13]

I'm trying to brainstorm some of the racial passives for the non-human classes, any ideas BSN?