34 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

I partially agree.

I hate the idea of having to choose to kill those I have vanquished. I mean really I'm beating people to death with a swords or burning them with fireballs. I'm clearly not trying to be subtle here.

What bugs me is that every fight is a fight to the death. I mean total annihilation. Random backstreet bandits fight to the last like they're the Japanese defenders on Iwo Jima. I'd love to see more of a morale system where some foes will break and run after a % of their members get killed (JA2 did this for example).

[MichaelStuart]

I support being able to incapacitate enemies

[Navasha]

I will both agree and disagree. Yes, I wouldn't mind seeing opponents act realistically. If your group of 4 is jumped by 20 people and you kill 16 of them, its pretty realistic for the remaining four to realize they would be toast and try to get out of there.

However, you are fighting with swords, fire, ice, etc. You don't subdue someone with a broadsword. Opening of large wounds means death. If the game wanted to include some non-lethal weapon types or magic that can be used to incapacitate then by all means go for it. I might even enjoy a character playthrough who tries not to kill anyone. Just DON'T make this into a disney cartoon where people attack each other with lethal weapons and simply knock people unconcious.

[Nonoru]

Waste of resource surely although i like the idea.

[PsychoBlonde]

Navasha wrote...
 You don't subdue someone with a broadsword.

Even on modern battlefields with guns and various other explosive weapons, the vast majority of the casualties are wounded, not killed outright.

Granted, without access to modern medicine, you're much more likely to bleed out or die from infection.  But it's unusual even for someone incapacitated badly enough by wounds to be incapable of further fighting to die instantly.

That being said, you'd also probably be *amazed* by how badly you have to injure someone to immediately incapacitate them.  And also by the seemingly trivial wounds that can prove fatal.  Human body is weird that way.

I'm not necessarily looking for implementation of this idea, more just as a thought experiment.  Something to keep in mind.  However, if I were to implement it, I'd probably do something very similar to Gothic.  For the vast majority of the game, you don't really have any reason to fight or kill people.  There are a couple of places where people will attack you (or you'll have to provoke a fight with them in order to continue on your way), but even then, you mostly don't have to kill them, and if you DO kill them, the results are usually pretty bad.  You knock them down to low health, take their stuff, and they stagger away.  They're much, much less belligerant once you take their weapon away from them.

So, I'd do something similar to that.  Fights with other people--particularly large groups--would be an extreme rarity involving plenty of dialog.  Enemies would break and flee when the fight turned against them, taking the wounded with them.

[thats1evildude]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Even on modern battlefields with guns and various other explosive weapons, the vast majority of the casualties are wounded, not killed outright.

That is true. It's actually difficult to outright kill someone with a swordblow or bullet.

Still, I don't really see any advantages to this feature, PsychoBlonde. It would probably just get in the way. Do you have any intention of sparing darkspawn or demons? I don't, and I would rather not have to go to an extra strep when I'm killing them.

[grregg]

Sidney wrote...

(...)

What bugs me is that every fight is a fight to the death. I mean total annihilation. Random backstreet bandits fight to the last like they're the Japanese defenders on Iwo Jima. I'd love to see more of a morale system where some foes will break and run after a % of their members get killed (JA2 did this for example).

This^

I think it would really add to the tactical aspect of combat if you could plan your strategy around making your enemies run instead of killing every each one of them.

Not to mention that indeed it doesn't make much sense that some random bandits display unwavering bravery that has rarely seen its equal even amongst most elite of military units.

[Todd23]

Sidney wrote...

I partially agree.

I hate the idea of having to choose to kill those I have vanquished. I mean really I'm beating people to death with a swords or burning them with fireballs. I'm clearly not trying to be subtle here.

What bugs me is that every fight is a fight to the death. I mean total annihilation. Random backstreet bandits fight to the last like they're the Japanese defenders on Iwo Jima. I'd love to see more of a morale system where some foes will break and run after a % of their members get killed (JA2 did this for example).

Or if you summon a giant inferno and start killing people with one swing of your massive sword... sigh I miss my warden.

[Han Shot First]

Navasha wrote...
You don't subdue someone with a broadsword.

You'd be suprised what people are capable of surviving.

Archaeologists digging up casualties that had fallen in some medieval battle (can't recall which), found one skeleton with a particularly gruesome looking wound to the lower jaw that had been delivered by an axe. They were suprised to find that the wound didn't kill him. It had been from a previous battle and had healed.

And then there is Cassius Scaeva, one of my favorite people from history. He was a career soldier in the ancient Roman Army who served with Julius Caesar in the invasion of Gaul (modern day France and Belgium), the expeditions into Germany and Britain, and during the Roman Civil War that followed. I'll let the website Bad@ss of the Week fill in the rest:

When Julius Caesar and Gnaius Pompey were slugging it out at the Battle of Dyrrhachium in 48 BCE, Cassius Scaeva's Cohort (roughly 480 men) was tasked with defending a small, rickety, makeshift gate positioned on a redoubt from an onslaught of enemy soldiers. The legionnaires did as they were ordered, but pretty much everyone sh-t a f--king brick when they saw an entire Legion of Pompeian soldiers (about 6,000 men) come marching up the hill towards them.

*snip*


The fighting was more brutal than a f--king free-for-all backstage at the Jerry Springer Show. Guys were hacking each other's colons out left and right, dudes were getting shot in the kidneys with arrows, and there was more blood than a sh-tty low-budget horror flick. During the battle, Scaeva killed so many guys that his sword became blunt, so he cut one guy's hand off with a single blow from his knife, and crushed another man's skull with a f--king giant rock. He was getting nailed from all sides during the fight – his helmet was destroyed, his shield was bristling with arrows, he was stabbed in the shoulder with a javelin, hit in the thigh by a sword, and f--king shot in the left eye socket with a godd@mned arrow.

Amazingly, this only made him more ripsh-t pissed off. He pulled the f0cking arrow out of his own eye, threw it down, and resumed with the @sskickings like a blood-lusted cyclops.

Finally, after over an hour of fierce fighting, the loss of blood started to get to Scaeva. He collapsed, fell to his knees, and struggled to stand. The enemy legions, seeing that the commander was down for the TKO, called for a break in the fighting. The two Pompeian commanders approached Scaeva, their hands outstretched to accept his surrender. They triumphantly asked him if he was ready to yield to them.

Scaeva responded by drawing his blunt-@ss sword, slashing one guy's throat with it, and cleaving the other guy in half from shoulder to groin.

The fighting resumed immediately, and at a time when the rest of Caesar's army was breaking apart under the relentless onslaught, Marcus Cassius Scaeva's men held the line. Pompey was denied total victory, and a few days later Caesar was able to utterly annihilate his adversary at the Battle of Pharsalus. Scaeva, who somehow miraculously survived his wounds, was promoted to the rank of Primus Pilus - the highest-ranking Centurion in the Legion, and given a gift of 200,000 sesterces (I have no idea what the dollars-to-sesterces conversion rate is these days, but I assume this is a lot of money). His brave Cohort – every single member of which was wounded during the fighting – was awarded double-pay for life.

Link

Modifié par Han Shot First, 19 novembre 2012 - 09:42 .

[PsychoBlonde]

thats1evildude wrote...

Still, I don't really see any advantages to this feature, PsychoBlonde. It would probably just get in the way. Do you have any intention of sparing darkspawn or demons? I don't, and I would rather not have to go to an extra strep when I'm killing them.

I'm not recommending it as a feature for DA3.  Or even necessarily for DA4, precisely.  It's more that I wanted to mention that there's something . . . not quite right about unthinkingly basing a cinematic, dialog-driven games around this "reduce everything to blood sprays" philosophy, and point out that there are and have been legitimate options that worked perfectly well and were really fun games.

I'm not looking for instantaneous change.  What I'd like is for maybe the devs to look at this idea, think, "huh, there's a point there", and as the opportunity presents itself to steer the future development of this series, to consider, "huh, more gibs isn't always the best way".