208 réponses à ce sujet

[Zarathiel]

Cairodin wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

What do you mean "Sacrificed"?

What I was going for was this:

1.  If you have a certain amount of skill points that you acquire throughout the game,
2.  And the only reasonable way to allow XP from conversations is to have devoted persuasion skills,
3.  Then it follows that in order to put points into a persuasion skill, you aren't putting those points into a combat skill.  

Hence you sacrifice a certain amount of combat skill so that you can have persuasion skill.  I think that passing persuasion checks based on persuasion skill is a decent enough equivalent to progressing the game via combat; so in that scenario awarding XP to players that can avoid combat through conversation is justified.

Hope that makes more sense, now.

All that being said, I don't know that I see the devs adding conversation skills back into their games.  I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

The trend I see is that people have a problem with taking the easy way out of an enounter (non-violent solution) without having to sacrifice anything. But there is an inherent sacrifice to taking a non-violent solution, and that sacrifice is looting the corpses of your enemies.

[Senya]

I wonder how many people would instigate violence in a certain situation if it's the only way to get a certain rare type of loot. I think that'd be an interesting choice.

[Ziegrif]

almostinsane99 wrote...

I wonder how many people would instigate violence in a certain situation if it's the only way to get a certain rare type of loot. I think that'd be an interesting choice.

Wait loot?
RARE LOOT?
Who do I have to kill?

If it's for loot I will rip everything asunder!

Modifié par Ziegrif, 13 avril 2013 - 09:59 .

[Senya]

^^

I love gamers.

[SaidRael]

I'm from Buenos Aires and i say kill 'em all

But really, it's a good idea. And it's a good way to deepen new characters where each would take a different way to solve the problem, depending on who you have with you.

[Fast Jimmy]

almostinsane99 wrote...

I wonder how many people would instigate violence in a certain situation if it's the only way to get a certain rare type of loot. I think that'd be an interesting choice.

If if was pretty clearly outlined, especially. 


FFVI (3 US) had an interesting choice like this - you had the option of saving a cute Mog (who would wind up being a companion) or get a rare item, the Golden Hairpin. The hairpin was pretty baller... and even if you let Mog fall to his (apparent) death to grab the pin, he would still show up in the second game, albeit not quite as powerful, since be misses out on some unique dances and knows no spells. 

For whatever that's worth. 

[Senya]

Hmm, that sounds interesting. I'd probably choose a companion over loot, no matter how epic, but that's just me.

[darrylzero]

I see this in two ways:

1). I want to be able to play risk-averse characters who are willing to kill other human beings but not cavalier about doing so. Where violent solutions become interesting, to me, is where I can imagine/feel the necessity forcing a character to behave in a way s(he) outside his/her comfort zone. Therefore, one of the most important aspects of non-violent options, even something as simple as a coercion skill, can matter a great deal, even when it's not successful. I'd say the same of out-of-combat stealth.

2). The most exciting possibilities for non-violent solutions for me would be things that went beyond personal abilities/attributes. Smooth talking or intimidating you're way through situations is the kind of thing that should be extremely difficult and fail frequently. But what about things like forgery, blackmail, or disguise?

I'd also love for there to be done attention to political or social capital throughout the game. I know this would be tricky, but I keep coming back to Hawke's relationship with Aveline, and how much I would have enjoyed trying to manipulate that relationship in ways that frequently if not always test that relationship and increase our rivalry, in order to achieve Hawke's personal/political goals and solve delicate and/or intractable problems.

That's just one relationship, though. That politician who wanted you to save his child molesting/murdering kid is another place they could have made Hawke's ability to leverage the political authorities of Kirkwall easier or harder.  Your status with certain factions (templars, mages, the city council or whatever it was called, the coterie) could also be central to your ability to solve certain things non-violently.

Basically, I like Bioware's characters well enough that I can enjoy their games either way, but in order to find them genuinely satisfying, the way non-violent solutions are implemented is crucially important.  And the more they can be connected to role-playing options, the better.

Modifié par darrylzero, 14 avril 2013 - 08:17 .

[Senya]

Hmm... We are supposed to be able to go about our goals diplomatically or stealthily.