208 réponses à ce sujet

[jillabender]

Maria Caliban wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
I'd like more quests with the option to solve them in a non-violent manner. This might be through dialogue, but could also be through using character skills or performing certain actions either during the quest or previously.

Yes, this is actually something we're doing. The use varies-- we don't want the player to unwittingly miss out on a really interesting combat encounter, but so long as the alternative path also has interesting content (or, at least, the player had to do more legwork to get that alternative other than picking a 'skip combat' dialogue option) or the combat isn't important-- and the player is aware that what they're doing will have that result-- it should be possible in some cases. Not everyone considers combat itself a reward, after all.

David's answer makes me happy.

Me too!

[Fast Jimmy]

I don't really like any of these options, though. They are either based on the companion you have or are options that basically used to scare away your potential enemies.

While kind of cool, I would think much more varied options would be better. Options that can be used to avoid combat in MOST fights, not specific dialogue lines that avoid one rather easy fight. Finding ways to sneak past enemies, using a speech option to clear out an entire section of a dungeon, a trap skill that can be used to take out or weaken a rather powerful enemy, a magical scrying skill that let's you avoid enemies altogether... these are what I am thinking when I say non-combat options.

Having a few conversations that either result in a fight or don't aren't really my idea of a game with options other than fighting your way through enemy hordes.

[Fast Jimmy]

I didn't play MotA, but I do know of what you speak. Although, in that case, if you were caught, it simply was a "failure" screen and you had to do it over again. That's not really a non-combat option, per se, but rather a non-combat segment of gameplay.

I hope they do a lot more with the concept of not always fighting, as it was really a problem in DA2, if you ask me.

[ObserverStatus]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I'd like more quests with the option to solve them in a non-violent manner. This might be through dialogue, but could also be through using character skills or performing certain actions either during the quest or previously.
While I understand that combat is part of BioWare games and there will never be a BioWare game like Deus Ex where you can avoid killing everyone but the boss,* I enjoy using alternate game paths, particular those which don't include turning other people into a chunky red paste.
Thank you.

While I agree that the DA III should have more ways to solve problems, if anything, Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age II were too restrictive in the use of violence. I have recently completed Fallout 1 by refusing to speak to any NPC who was not essential to the main quest, and killing every enemy in the game with a rock. It allowed my character to pay the granite price in place of the bottlecap price in the acquistion of essential provisions such as stim packs, and it was one of the most positive gaming experiences I have ever had. I believe that DAIII should include a similar degree of flexibility in the use of violence to solve problems. Obtaining supplies by attacking vendors is a fun alernative to buying equipment with money earned through fetch quests.

Modifié par bobobo878, 26 mars 2013 - 10:47 .

[caradoc2000]

Like Mirror's Edge, that game even had an achievement for completing the game without killing anyone.

[Sjpelke]

jillabender wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
I'd like more quests with the option to solve them in a non-violent manner. This might be through dialogue, but could also be through using character skills or performing certain actions either during the quest or previously.

Yes, this is actually something we're doing. The use varies-- we don't want the player to unwittingly miss out on a really interesting combat encounter, but so long as the alternative path also has interesting content (or, at least, the player had to do more legwork to get that alternative other than picking a 'skip combat' dialogue option) or the combat isn't important-- and the player is aware that what they're doing will have that result-- it should be possible in some cases. Not everyone considers combat itself a reward, after all.

David's answer makes me happy.

Me too!

Thirded !

Choice in how to go about a quest is part of roleplaying for me and I most welcome that ingame. I have no problem in how the award is to be archieved; in contruary will most welcome diversity because I like doing more then one playthrough of a game, and if quests are different depending on doing it 'violent' or 'non violent' I'm game!

[Sjpelke]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I didn't play MotA, but I do know of what you speak. Although, in that case, if you were caught, it simply was a "failure" screen and you had to do it over again. That's not really a non-combat option, per se, but rather a non-combat segment of gameplay.

I hope they do a lot more with the concept of not always fighting, as it was really a problem in DA2, if you ask me.

Agree with you on that Jimmy...

Taking the non violent road should have more concequences. Not saying this to make things more complicated for all quests, but most of the time taking the non violent path needs more 'investment' so to speak. And I for one like doing things not the easiest possible way to archieve a goal .

Modifié par TsadeeHekate, 26 mars 2013 - 11:39 .

[Chiramu]

If they have the Jedi resolution they should have the flip side resolution that is absolutely bat-**** crazy.

It would be fun to play as a character that is completely unhinged lol.

[Dasher1010]

I miss persuades. In fact, I miss skills in general.

[Mark of the Dragon]

I would be happy with more quests that arent combat based at all. I loved the landsmeet in DAO and the nobility gathering in Awakenings. If we do get to have our own castle as the rumors suggest I hope we get more moments like this.

[Fuggyt]

Bioware announces major plot points for DA:I's new array of non-violent options:

Introduction: Protagonist Falcon, a refugee from Kirkwall, narrowly chats his way through a horde of bandits on his way to Orlais, and earns 200 experience points for disarming traps and opening chests.

Act 1: Falcon cleverly talks his way through a massive Templar ambush and earns 200 experience points.

Act 2: Falcon neatly cons his way around a den of rogue Blood Mages and earns 200 experience points.

Act 3: Falcon smoothly charms his way past a legion of Orlesian Chevaliers and earns 200 experience points.

Finale: Falcon confronts Empress Celine and bullspits her onto the chaise lounge, earning 200 experience points and conquering the game at Level 3.

Modifié par Fuggyt, 04 avril 2013 - 04:53 .

[Fuggyt]

Modifié par Fuggyt, 04 avril 2013 - 04:57 .

[greatcrusader44]

While I support this, I want them to only happen if you do everything right leading up yo it, and not because I the persuasion skill perks in the first two hours of the game.

[imbs]

Dasher1010 wrote...

I miss persuades. In fact, I miss skills in general.

I miss when Bioware RPGs had more complexity than pacman

[Tempest_]

I agree.

I loved the fact that you could Batman your way through Deus Ex, and anything which adds diversity to the experience in this way would be awesome.

[happy_daiz]

Quote the Raven wrote...

I agree.

I loved the fact that you could Batman your way through Deus Ex, and anything which adds diversity to the experience in this way would be awesome.

Indeed. this is one of the coolest features of the game to me (along with the well-designed dialogue wheel).

But the boss fights were a facepalm if you were playing stealthy. I know personally, I wasn't equipped for that kind of brutality.

Modifié par happy_daiz, 04 avril 2013 - 01:46 .

[KingsTiger]

I am 110% in favor of more diplomatic solutions, but I'd like to avoid seeing it tied to a "persuade" skill. I think it'd be better if you had to navigate your way through conversations, keeping in mind what you know about the other party and their circumstances, and convince them by picking the appropriate options. Deus Ex did this pretty well.

[Fast Jimmy]

KingsTiger wrote...

I am 110% in favor of more diplomatic solutions, but I'd like to avoid seeing it tied to a "persuade" skill. I think it'd be better if you had to navigate your way through conversations, keeping in mind what you know about the other party and their circumstances, and convince them by picking the appropriate options. Deus Ex did this pretty well.

I would agree with this, but am... cautious... as to how it would work. Would it just result in picking the diplomatic option (or its DA3 equivalent) every time? Would it take using an aggressive or sarcastic/humorous options instead? If a myriad of approaches is needed, will we have a more clear way of knowing what we will say?

Thinking the person we are talking to will be less likely to fight us if we crack a joke, but then our character says something that makes fun of the perosn's dead mother, will result in the complete opposite of what we had intended as the player. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 04 avril 2013 - 04:13 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Chiramu wrote...

If they have the Jedi resolution they should have the flip side resolution that is absolutely bat-**** crazy.

It would be fun to play as a character that is completely unhinged lol.

I would be all for being able to play as a character that fights all the time. Anyone, everyone, young, old, woman, man, adult, child... and killing all of those people should provide combat experience in proportion to its difficulty.

But then you should have serious problems with companions leaving the party or not wanting to join you at all because of your behavior. People should not want to follow and be friends with a sociopath, after all. 

[Fast Jimmy]

EntropicAngel wrote...

^ And while I argue for conversation "battles," the danger of that is of one losing the role-playing purely for manipulation.

I think the emphasis on tone is both DA2 and DE:HR was misleading. Applying the right knowledge, knowing what subjects will illicit a response from people are going to be way more important that if you say it nicely or not. 

Jillabender has an interesting thread in the DA2 forum right now where she talks about how the Landsmeet was a good example of this. Deciding which subjects to bring up to the Landsmeet depended on knowing who you had helped (and who would back up your claims), as well as knowing which offenses Loghain had committed that would garner the biggest response. 

Saying Loghain fled from battle and left the Grey Wardens for dead wont have much of an effect, because many could care less about the Wardens and would defer to Loghain when it comes to military strategy on when it was right to flee. On the other hand, bringing up the fact that Loghain had kidnapped a noble's son and tortured him or that Loghain was selling slaves to make money will bring up a much more effective response from the Landsmeet members.

None of those responses has anything to do with tone, but everything to do with content. 

[grumpymooselion]

When people bring up social solutions to problems I always think of the early portions of VtM: Bloodlines, prior to the sewers. That worked well, and in an enjoyable manner, until the sewers forced you to concentrate on combat abilities.