175 réponses à ce sujet

[JerZey CJ]

Avejajed wrote...

My biggest gripe with locked chests was the locked chest at the very beginning of DA2, that you couldn't get to unless you were playing a rogue. Now, I generally do my "canon" playthrough as a "completionist" playthrough, and so I'm forced into making my "canon" playthrough character a rogue because not opening that chest really, really annoys me.

So I don't actually mind locked chests, but I don't like chests I can't open before I even gain companions.

Wasn't that chest just a bow for the Rogue though?

[Allan Schumacher]

@Avejajed

It's a difficult balancing act, because on the one hand I can see an advantage of allowing such a thing (a small reward of slightly unique content for picking a rogue).

Note that Mike sounds like he is MUCH more open to the idea of having mutually exclusive content for DAI (and certainly with the idea that some player decisions will open/close other areas), so a full on 100% completionist playthrough on a first pass may not be possible (of course we'll see how well we deliver come release).

Just a heads up in case you need 365 days or so to prep for that state of mind

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 septembre 2013 - 04:50 .

[Trafalgar-Law]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

@Avejajed

It's a difficult balancing act, because on the one hand I can see an advantage of allowing such a thing (a small reward of slightly unique content for picking a rogue).

Note that Mike sounds like he is MUCH more open to the idea of having mutually exclusive content for DAI (and certainly with the idea that some player decisions will open/close other areas), so a full on 100% completionist playthrough on a first pass may not be possible (of course we'll see how well we deliver come release).

Just a heads up in case you need 365 days or so to prep for that state of mind

It's a waste of time though. If people are too lazy or just don't care to bring a rogue alone, fine. Not getting extra loot is the consequence. I've made that sacrifice from time to time myself. Besides, it's not like they can't just bring a Rogue back to the area later. I sincerely hope you don't even consider this idea. May as well bypass so many other class-specific game mechanics. There've been many times where I've made the decision not to bring a mage along and the consquence was having no designated healer during battle. Should we just forget that too and make it to where Rogues and warriors can heal (just not as well as mages)?

Modifié par Trafalgar-Law, 14 septembre 2013 - 04:57 .

[Trafalgar-Law]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

Avejajed wrote...

My biggest gripe with locked chests was the locked chest at the very beginning of DA2, that you couldn't get to unless you were playing a rogue. Now, I generally do my "canon" playthrough as a "completionist" playthrough, and so I'm forced into making my "canon" playthrough character a rogue because not opening that chest really, really annoys me.

So I don't actually mind locked chests, but I don't like chests I can't open before I even gain companions.

Wasn't that chest just a bow for the Rogue though?

The first chest contained a bow. The second chest contained some health poltucies IIRC. Was only useful though if you were playing on Nightmare.

[d4eaming]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

Avejajed wrote...

My biggest gripe with locked chests was the locked chest at the very beginning of DA2, that you couldn't get to unless you were playing a rogue. Now, I generally do my "canon" playthrough as a "completionist" playthrough, and so I'm forced into making my "canon" playthrough character a rogue because not opening that chest really, really annoys me.

So I don't actually mind locked chests, but I don't like chests I can't open before I even gain companions.

Wasn't that chest just a bow for the Rogue though?

The chest at the start of DA2 before you can recruit a rogue always mocks me. I've played through with a rogue already, and I don't even remember what is in that chest, I doubt I even used it, but it's still vendor trash all the same that non-rogues don't get to take advantage of. That's all well and good in the game proper when I can decide that hey, I don't want to bring a rogue, but when it's not even an option, that does irk me just ever so slightly. Sure it's only some copper/silver, but still. It calls my name and whispers sweet nothings in my ear, but I still can't get my grimey hands on it!

[JerZey CJ]

Avejajed wrote...

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

Avejajed wrote...

My biggest gripe with locked chests was the locked chest at the very beginning of DA2, that you couldn't get to unless you were playing a rogue. Now, I generally do my "canon" playthrough as a "completionist" playthrough, and so I'm forced into making my "canon" playthrough character a rogue because not opening that chest really, really annoys me.

So I don't actually mind locked chests, but I don't like chests I can't open before I even gain companions.

Wasn't that chest just a bow for the Rogue though?

I would wade barefoot six hundred miles through dead nug infested swamp waters to open a chest that had torn trousers in it. Just to say I opened the damn chest.

lol. That's sig worthy.

[Redwolf Skydragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think this would be the answer. You could just make different kinds of locked chests that only a certain class can open(ie. a "reinforced chest" for warriors and a "Warded chest" for mages). You could keep rogues as the only class that can pick locks, but maybe warriors can bash open some doors that can't be picked and mages could find hidden doors and chests.

An interesting, and frankly creative, approach to the problem actually!  Thank you for sharing

nightcobra8928 wrote...

How do you like this idea for example:

have a chest with an intricate lock for rogues to unlock
a chest with a magic seal for mages to unlock
a
sturdy chest with "dwarven magic resistant chains, i don't know invent
something that stays in the lore but with a similar effect" for warriors
to bash open


any class could unlock any chest type but if a
class tries to unlock a chest not "made" to that archetype, there would
be a penalty.

example:

a warrior or rogue that unlocks a mage chest receives magic damage due to the seal
a warrior or mage that unlocks a rogue chest receives poison/gas/trap damage due to an intricate trap in the lock
a rogue or mage that unlocks a warrior chest receives a debuff on strength/constitution due to high physical exertion.


I
feel this approach works because of no Health regen in inquisition
making you think if you really want to open that chest at that moment or
try it later once you're better prepared.

I like how you praised JerZeyCJ2 for posting the same thing nightcobra8928 did, Mr. Allan. It greatly lowers my opinion of you. I would think someone would is a "Technical QA Analyst on the Dragon Age franchise" would read through all the posts and have a wish to understand what others are saying. It could also be called into question why you did not know about the loading screen that is in the Franchise that you work for. I apologize, but I can only make a judgement of someone online, by what they post. If you must ban me for saying this, so be it. I do not have much desire to continue posting here anyway. So many people are not fully grasping the concept that was presented. They are showing themselves as simple-minded for taking the words at face value and making judgements before understanding the true purpose. This is not true of everyone who has posted. But it is enough that I am depressed just reading them posting their ignorance. They are not being constructive at all, and merely criticising the words and making assumptions that I do not understand what I am saying. And my words are constantly being misheard or not even read. If these are the type of people that will be playing DA:I then I most say that the idea of DA:I having any type of multiplayer (which has been stated there will be some sort) is a negative I must take into consideration before purchasing. I have no wish to play with close-minded people. And none of my online friends have an interest in DA so I can't play with them. Anyway. I apologize if it upsets you that I think low of you, but it is the truth. Perhaps it was not needed to actually state it, but I feel it important to give Night Cobra the credit that he/she deserves. Farewell to those who were able to understand the purpose and meaning of my request. I thank you for being open-minded. Good riddance to those of you who live in your closed-off world, unable to think beyond basic function. Ignorance must be bliss; I envy you.

[Anzer]

Redwolf Skydragon wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think this would be the answer. You could just make different kinds of locked chests that only a certain class can open(ie. a "reinforced chest" for warriors and a "Warded chest" for mages). You could keep rogues as the only class that can pick locks, but maybe warriors can bash open some doors that can't be picked and mages could find hidden doors and chests.

An interesting, and frankly creative, approach to the problem actually!  Thank you for sharing

nightcobra8928 wrote...

How do you like this idea for example:

have a chest with an intricate lock for rogues to unlock
a chest with a magic seal for mages to unlock
a
sturdy chest with "dwarven magic resistant chains, i don't know invent
something that stays in the lore but with a similar effect" for warriors
to bash open


any class could unlock any chest type but if a
class tries to unlock a chest not "made" to that archetype, there would
be a penalty.

example:

a warrior or rogue that unlocks a mage chest receives magic damage due to the seal
a warrior or mage that unlocks a rogue chest receives poison/gas/trap damage due to an intricate trap in the lock
a rogue or mage that unlocks a warrior chest receives a debuff on strength/constitution due to high physical exertion.


I
feel this approach works because of no Health regen in inquisition
making you think if you really want to open that chest at that moment or
try it later once you're better prepared.

I like how you praised JerZeyCJ2 for posting the same thing nightcobra8928 did, Mr. Allan. It greatly lowers my opinion of you. I would think someone would is a "Technical QA Analyst on the Dragon Age franchise" would read through all the posts and have a wish to understand what others are saying. It could also be called into question why you did not know about the loading screen that is in the Franchise that you work for. I apologize, but I can only make a judgement of someone online, by what they post. If you must ban me for saying this, so be it. I do not have much desire to continue posting here anyway. So many people are not fully grasping the concept that was presented. They are showing themselves as simple-minded for taking the words at face value and making judgements before understanding the true purpose. This is not true of everyone who has posted. But it is enough that I am depressed just reading them posting their ignorance. They are not being constructive at all, and merely criticising the words and making assumptions that I do not understand what I am saying. And my words are constantly being misheard or not even read. If these are the type of people that will be playing DA:I then I most say that the idea of DA:I having any type of multiplayer (which has been stated there will be some sort) is a negative I must take into consideration before purchasing. I have no wish to play with close-minded people. And none of my online friends have an interest in DA so I can't play with them. Anyway. I apologize if it upsets you that I think low of you, but it is the truth. Perhaps it was not needed to actually state it, but I feel it important to give Night Cobra the credit that he/she deserves. Farewell to those who were able to understand the purpose and meaning of my request. I thank you for being open-minded. Good riddance to those of you who live in your closed-off world, unable to think beyond basic function. Ignorance must be bliss; I envy you.

Well Mr. Negative, there is actually a key difference in the two posts made that could have led to Mr. Schumacher quoting one over the other.

The post you quoted from nightcobra8928 states that all classes can open all chests, but with a negative effect to themselves. The post Allan quoted states that there would be exclusive chests for each class that could not be opened by the others. Of course, I don't know if that was the reason he quoted one post over the other, I can't read minds obviously. That was just how the reasoning played out in my head.

Anyway, enjoy that pity party you're throwing for yourself; I'll pass on the RSVP though.

[Hey]

if rogues were weaker than warriors in combat i would say "no, we need to keep class balance!" but they aren't so sure, why not. some of the new games have neat lock pick mechanisms.

[NRieh]

The chest at the start of DA2 before you can recruit a rogue always mocks me.

Come on, DAO opening had it much-much worse )) Tower was literally filled with chests.

While classics (eg NWN1, which I love) had 'bash' option, I can't say I love the way it was handled. I mean...destroying a hard trapped or locked chest with your arrows or bolts?..

Probably, that was one of the reasons DAO removed the 'bash' idea ( which was already created for the game, it's accessible via mods afaik). If you introduce it - you have to make it possible for each type of damage. Which does not make much sense - cold, electric, poison, ranged, light melee, even fire is not 100% plausible, imo. And if we cut that nonsense, we will still have restrictions for, let's say, archers or elemental-spirit mages.

Modifié par Nrieh, 14 septembre 2013 - 08:47 .

[Maria Caliban]

Redwolf Skydragon wrote...

I like how you praised JerZeyCJ2 for posting the same thing nightcobra8928 did, Mr. Allan. It greatly lowers my opinion of you. I would think someone would is a "Technical QA Analyst on the Dragon Age franchise" would read through all the posts and have a wish to understand what others are saying. It could also be called into question why you did not know about the loading screen that is in the Franchise that you work for. I apologize, but I can only make a judgement of someone online, by what they post. If you must ban me for saying this, so be it. I do not have much desire to continue posting here anyway. So many people are not fully grasping the concept that was presented. They are showing themselves as simple-minded for taking the words at face value and making judgements before understanding the true purpose. This is not true of everyone who has posted. But it is enough that I am depressed just reading them posting their ignorance. They are not being constructive at all, and merely criticising the words and making assumptions that I do not understand what I am saying. And my words are constantly being misheard or not even read. If these are the type of people that will be playing DA:I then I most say that the idea of DA:I having any type of multiplayer (which has been stated there will be some sort) is a negative I must take into consideration before purchasing. I have no wish to play with close-minded people. And none of my online friends have an interest in DA so I can't play with them. Anyway. I apologize if it upsets you that I think low of you, but it is the truth. Perhaps it was not needed to actually state it, but I feel it important to give Night Cobra the credit that he/she deserves. Farewell to those who were able to understand the purpose and meaning of my request. I thank you for being open-minded. Good riddance to those of you who live in your closed-off world, unable to think beyond basic function. Ignorance must be bliss; I envy you.

My best guess is he quit smoking three days ago or seriously needs to switch to decaffeinated.

[Ziggeh]

Redwolf Skydragon wrote...

Farewell to those who were able to understand the purpose and meaning of my request. I thank you for being open-minded. Good riddance to those of you who live in your closed-off world, unable to think beyond basic function. Ignorance must be bliss; I envy you.

It's bound to be everyone elses fault.

Have you tried using less words? Or like, paragraphs?

[HSomCokeSniper]

fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb wrote...

All I know is, there's nothing cassandra can't open.

And not a single piece of literature she can't stab through.
Let that be her specialty, Biower pls.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

If all classes have the ability to unlock locked items, is there much value in even having locked chests?

No, but then let me pose a question in return:

Besides their utility in combat, what is the value of having a warrior or mage in the party? Besides variation in the difficulty of combat, what would you lose having an all-rogue team?

Neither warrior nor mage currently offers anything particularly special outside of a fight. Rogues can pick locks, detect traps and disarm traps (and in DA:O at least, do stealth reconnaissance). For warriors...I can't say the lack of variety is too surprising, though it's not like something can't be done about it. Mages on the other hand, the class of magic, should have utility outside of combat.

[Trafalgar-Law]

Redwolf Skydragon wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think this would be the answer. You could just make different kinds of locked chests that only a certain class can open(ie. a "reinforced chest" for warriors and a "Warded chest" for mages). You could keep rogues as the only class that can pick locks, but maybe warriors can bash open some doors that can't be picked and mages could find hidden doors and chests.

An interesting, and frankly creative, approach to the problem actually!  Thank you for sharing

nightcobra8928 wrote...

How do you like this idea for example:

have a chest with an intricate lock for rogues to unlock
a chest with a magic seal for mages to unlock
a
sturdy chest with "dwarven magic resistant chains, i don't know invent
something that stays in the lore but with a similar effect" for warriors
to bash open


any class could unlock any chest type but if a
class tries to unlock a chest not "made" to that archetype, there would
be a penalty.

example:

a warrior or rogue that unlocks a mage chest receives magic damage due to the seal
a warrior or mage that unlocks a rogue chest receives poison/gas/trap damage due to an intricate trap in the lock
a rogue or mage that unlocks a warrior chest receives a debuff on strength/constitution due to high physical exertion.


I
feel this approach works because of no Health regen in inquisition
making you think if you really want to open that chest at that moment or
try it later once you're better prepared.

I like how you praised JerZeyCJ2 for posting the same thing nightcobra8928 did, Mr. Allan. It greatly lowers my opinion of you. I would think someone would is a "Technical QA Analyst on the Dragon Age franchise" would read through all the posts and have a wish to understand what others are saying. It could also be called into question why you did not know about the loading screen that is in the Franchise that you work for. I apologize, but I can only make a judgement of someone online, by what they post. If you must ban me for saying this, so be it. I do not have much desire to continue posting here anyway. So many people are not fully grasping the concept that was presented. They are showing themselves as simple-minded for taking the words at face value and making judgements before understanding the true purpose. This is not true of everyone who has posted. But it is enough that I am depressed just reading them posting their ignorance. They are not being constructive at all, and merely criticising the words and making assumptions that I do not understand what I am saying. And my words are constantly being misheard or not even read. If these are the type of people that will be playing DA:I then I most say that the idea of DA:I having any type of multiplayer (which has been stated there will be some sort) is a negative I must take into consideration before purchasing. I have no wish to play with close-minded people. And none of my online friends have an interest in DA so I can't play with them. Anyway. I apologize if it upsets you that I think low of you, but it is the truth. Perhaps it was not needed to actually state it, but I feel it important to give Night Cobra the credit that he/she deserves. Farewell to those who were able to understand the purpose and meaning of my request. I thank you for being open-minded. Good riddance to those of you who live in your closed-off world, unable to think beyond basic function. Ignorance must be bliss; I envy you.

I sense some anger here.

[NRieh]

Mages on the other hand, the class of magic, should have utility outside of combat.

They enchant weapons, do buffs and curses, they may also do something about herbs-potions-poisons, but I don't see why should they get some sort of magical bash.

Giving classes some class-specific abilities is great, but people who ask for 'bash' are not looking for diverse class abilities, they seem to want some all-in-one classes, so they could lockpick with no rogue, heal with no healer-mage and tank with no heavy units.

I know there are all sorts of 'atypical' playstyles and builds, and that's good, I personally always loved dex-tanking vs const-tanking. But that 'I don't like X, gimme something to play without X, but with all the Xs benefits' logic is something I can not understand, at all.

[Cyanide Disaster]

Nrieh wrote...

Mages on the other hand, the class of magic, should have utility outside of combat.

They enchant weapons, do buffs and curses, they may also do something about herbs-potions-poisons, but I don't see why should they get some sort of magical bash.

Giving classes some class-specific abilities is great, but people who ask for 'bash' are not looking for diverse class abilities, they seem to want some all-in-one classes, so they could lockpick with no rogue, heal with no healer-mage and tank with no heavy units.

I know there are all sorts of 'atypical' playstyles and builds, and that's good, I personally always loved dex-tanking vs const-tanking. But that 'I don't like X, gimme something to play without X, but with all the Xs benefits' logic is something I can not understand, at all.

Thank you! That was exactly what I was trying to get across! It is perfectly acceptable to want your class to do something that's not generally their suit (A warrior archer, or a dex-tank like you mentioned).

[TEWR]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I can't really answer definitively (or even really speculatively) on what we'll be doing for DAI, as that is outside of my coverage, but it did lead me to a question.

If all classes have the ability to unlock locked items, is there much value in even having locked chests?

Skyrim.

Rogues could do it automatically for DA depending on stat level (as always, though better then DAII's please), while Warriors and Mages have to figure it out, break lockpicks, curse to the heavens, sob, go to the bar, sob some more, drink themselves into a stupor, and then pass out drunk on the chest again only to break it.

Damaged goods would also be nice, but it's totally up to you.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 septembre 2013 - 03:06 .

[Angrywolves]

I actually liked Schumacher's idea.
I can see him say it now " Don't ever do that again."
Oh excuse me.
Dozed off there for a minute.
Yes it's a very good idea. Would seem to me to be time consuming to implement though.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Nrieh wrote...

Mages on the other hand, the class of magic, should have utility outside of combat.

They enchant weapons, do buffs and curses, they may also do something about herbs-potions-poisons, but I don't see why should they get some sort of magical bash.

Believe me, I'm not advocating that mages and warriors should be granted the pseudo-same ability as a rogue for opening containers. That's boring and unimaginative.

But I suspect a portion of 'the crowd' doesn't want to feel compelled to bring along a particular class for fear of missing out on stuff...even if the stuff in question is torn trousers.

Edit: Buffs and curses are currently all relegated to combat. Potions, poisons and herbs are not restricted to mage classes by any means, and again are only useful in combat. Enchanting weapons, also a combat-centric class of spells. At best mages had Haste in DA:O which sped up travel time--not so in DA2, where Haste was restricted to (surprise)  combat.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 15 septembre 2013 - 01:53 .

[NRieh]

But I suspect a portion of 'the crowd' doesn't want to feel compelled to bring along a particular class for fear of missing out on stuff

You should be aware, that there are personality-related and party-related options in DA2, right? You don't HAVE to bring Varric with you all the time, yet if you don't have him - you miss all of his potential actions.

What I am trying to say - there are tons of potentially missed content in DAs. Which depends on player origin, particular characters, particular actions, party etc. It's literally everywhere.

I'd say, that knowing who constructed Bianka is much more vital, than picking a locked chest with 1 silver and pouch of pebbles in it. I mean, really....People are eager to replay the whole game just to see Bethany as a Warden, or to hear Amell-related comments from Cullen, yet someone considers missed chest a problem?! ))

[Fetunche]

It is really annoying having locked chests in areas where unless you play a rogue yourself they are inaccessible, Witch hunt was the worst case as none of the companions were rogues.