18 réponses à ce sujet

[OdanUrr]

I was playing SWTOR the other night and it occurred to me that, despite people are aware of who I am and what I've done, they readily embrace their deaths when they decide to fight me. I shrugged and dismissed it as the game not being reactive enough and then my musings took me somewhere else, how do they recognize me? After all, I've been wearing a mask throughout the game. Then another thought hit me, "I've also been wearing the same armour throughout the game."

Being the BSN, this has probably occurred to someone before and, if so, my apologies for repeating the question. Here it goes, what if clothing could serve a more reactive purpose? What if wearing a mask could truly hide your identity and grant you access to areas or quests you otherwise wouldn't be able to? Or imagine if you had a particular set of armour you've used in any number of quests that people now associate with you. Perhaps by entering a city with a different set of clothes you'll draw less attention from enemies out to get you? Or if you travel with this unique armour you'll encounter more enemies along the way whereas a more conservative attire can get you through unscathed? Who knows, maybe you want to use your unique armour to draw attention unto yourself; maybe in so doing you gain something similar to reputation points whereas using some sort of disguise can award you cunning points?

Think of the possibilities, one region could be well-versed on the exploits of the Dragon Knight and completely ignore who the Inquisitor is. Maybe the Thieves Guild have no idea that the agent they know as Shadow is actually the Inquisitor himself! Just saying, there's a lot that could be done if such a mechanic were incorporated into the game. And while I very much doubt we'll see something like it in DAI, maybe we could work it into DA4?

[David7204]

I hated that in New Vegas, the best armor (best-looking and most effective) was associated with a faction. I often forgot I was wearing it, which meant running into people and getting shot on sight.

Sounds nice in theory, but in practice, I don't think lugging around four sets of armor is all that fun. Neither is not being able to use the armor you really like because it has some penalty.

Modifié par David7204, 23 septembre 2013 - 12:53 .

[OdanUrr]

David7204 wrote...

I hated that in New Vegas, the best armor (best-looking and most effective) was associated with a faction. I often forgot I was wearing it, which meant running into people and getting shot on sight.

Sounds nice in theory, but in practice, I don't think lugging around four sets of armor is all that fun. Neither is not being able to use the armor you really like because it has some penalty.

You could customize it so that it'd be possible for you to wear it. That'd give some purpose to dyes, mods, etc.

[BigEvil]

Personally I like the idea, and I liked it in New Vegas as well. Really, unless you were in the faction, the faction armour was a disguise, and should be used as such. When your disguise is the equipment of a faction that has enemies, don't use it unless you're trying to sneak around in areas controlled by said faction.

These ideas seem more about disguising the Inquisitor from his/her faction, which will naturally have enemies, not as much about disguising the Inquisitor as other factions. If I could stroll into contested territory wearing simple peasant garb to gather some information then return later armoured up as the Inquisitor with my troops and not be recognised, that would be great.

[Nefla]

Sounds difficult to implement, but awesome!

[OdanUrr]

BigEvil wrote...

If I could stroll into contested territory wearing simple peasant garb to gather some information then return later armoured up as the Inquisitor with my troops and not be recognised, that would be great.

It hadn't occurred to me but it is indeed a great idea. It definitely has potential as a gameplay mechanic.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Not bad in concept on the whole, but I think there'd be a problem with disguising your companions. I always figured people would recognize the PC in game largely based on the group they were hanging out with.

[OdanUrr]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Not bad in concept on the whole, but I think there'd be a problem with disguising your companions. I always figured people would recognize the PC in game largely based on the group they were hanging out with.

That did occur to me and it's true it could be problematic. It could also place certain restrictions on which party members you could take for specific quests what could irk some. Still, we could try and implement it at the PC level and see how it goes from there.

[MKDAWUSS]

I'd hope it works better than the disguises of Howe's estate.

[TsaiMeLemoni]

That's an interesting idea, but knowing me I would forget about it, or be unwilling to swap out of whatever is my favorite armor at the time!

[Nightwriter]

Hmm. I really like the idea of being able to customize the hero's "look." But that would probably be hell on the armor leveling. Unless they fell back on things like leveled armor underlays.

[draken-heart]

Hmm....No, thanks. Hate the idea in Fallout New Vegas (Still play it) and do not want it in Dragon Age games.

[VampireSoap]

David7204 wrote...

I hated that in New Vegas, the best armor (best-looking and most effective) was associated with a faction. I often forgot I was wearing it, which meant running into people and getting shot on sight.

Sounds nice in theory, but in practice, I don't think lugging around four sets of armor is all that fun. Neither is not being able to use the armor you really like because it has some penalty.

A simple mod can fix that...and why would you ever forget something so important?

[VampireSoap]

Warden: Quick! Put these on! We're going to disguise ourselves as Orlesians!!

Sten, Zevran, Oghren:...(Powerful collective stare:ph34r:)

[DooomCookie]

Gameplay/Story segregation. It's not fun worrying about what changing armour will do. Much more fun replacing small numbers with big numbers!

[OdanUrr]

DooomCookie wrote...

Gameplay/Story segregation. It's not fun worrying about what changing armour will do. Much more fun replacing small numbers with big numbers!

I've never seen that used as an argument for a game but rather against it. Some of the best stories result from gameplay and story being in sync with one another. Take The Walking Dead video game, why do you think your responses are timed at key moments? Would those moments carry the same weight if they didn't? This isn't a mechanic I particularly like but it works for that particular game. Or how about replacing oxygen canisters in Metro while on the surface? Is it annoying? Indeed, but it also adds to the feeling of your character being a survivor in post-apocalyptic Russia, where your survival is at stake at every opportunity.

Gameplay/story segregation can often lead us to start poking holes in a game, more so if it didn't live up to our expectations. If Elizabeth can create tears at will, why is it that she always conjures up the same tears every single time? Why is it that Shepard doesn't have heavy weapons in ME3 when he did in ME2? Surely we could have used those to take out a certain annoying gunship on Thessia. Gameplay/story segregation doesn't make a game bad per se, but it enhances the problems we might have with it.

At the end of the day it comes down to the rules you associate with playing a type of game; in this case a RPG or, in particular, a BioWare RPG. Those rules have evolved over time; we've lost some, we've incorporated others. Recently we have the examples of the transitions between DAO and DA2 or between ME1, ME2 and ME3. And I'm not even considering how much has changed since previous titles such as Baldur's Gate or NWN. For that matter, we're bound to face new rules even in Inquisition. Maybe they'll be fun, maybe they won't. But devs shouldn't hold back from implementing ideas simply because they might not be fun. After all, not every aspect of a game is intended to be fun. Some aspects might intend to challenge you, or to make you feel angry or sad; the best games usually cover the full range of human emotion.

And... I don't know how we got here.

Bottom line is that, to my mind, we've reached a point where, technologically, we can marry gameplay and story much more effectively and efficiently and we shouldn't be scared to do so.

[Wulfram]

It feels kind of cheesy if you can skip out the consequences of actions by just changing your clothes around. And seems like it could be incredibly difficult to write around.

Disguises have their place, but I don't really think it would be good as a regular mechanic, rather than something you do for specific quests.

[MiyoKit]

Well in a land absent of photography and the internet its not unusual for people to not recognise you. You'll be wearing armour similar to armour others wear and will be using weapons that aren't totally uncommon. I don't think we need a whole mechanic around disguises. Not everyone would have heard detailed descriptions of what you look like, and if you're killing most the 'baddies' you meet, well; dead men tell no tales, after all.

[OdanUrr]

Wulfram wrote...

It feels kind of cheesy if you can skip out the consequences of actions by just changing your clothes around. And seems like it could be incredibly difficult to write around.

Disguises have their place, but I don't really think it would be good as a regular mechanic, rather than something you do for specific quests.

Consequences of actions such as... ? If you travel a route that's known to be preyed upon by bandits, chances are the bandits would more likely attack a lightly armed convoy as opposed to a heavily armed one. Or, like it was mentioned earlier, if you were keen on playing the role of the spy you might disguise yourself as a peasant, or a soldier, or a noble, according to your specific context.

We could have it for specific quests, but then it wouldn't be reactive, it would simply be programmed for those quests. For instance, say the Inquisitor decides to attend a party being thrown by the lord of a distant land but under the guise of someone other than himself. If the quest says, "buy a noble attire to disguise yourself as a noble," it becomes simply another objective; there's no thinking involved, no strategy, you only have to buy story item X. You could, on the other hand, make it so that the Inquisitor has many clothes from which to choose from and he has to decide, according to the many guests in attendance, the venue, etc., which attire would help him better mingle and obtain the information he seeks (to make it even more interesting, different clothes may result in you being rewarded with different pieces of information that you'll have to figure out how best to use). This would also give more importance to your codex entries and encourage you to read them, at least during specific quests.

Yes, we can, and probably should, start small. But if it's going to be implemented at all, I think it should involve some careful thinking and planning from the player other than "go and buy this from that vendor" or "kill that guy and steal his uniform." Mind you, you can still do all those things, but you shouldn't do them because your quest book tells you to but because you figured it out for yourself. I think it's much more rewarding that way.

MiyoKit wrote...

Well in a land absent of photography and the internet its not unusual for people to not recognise you. You'll be wearing armour similar to armour others wear and will be using weapons that aren't totally uncommon. I don't think we need a whole mechanic around disguises. Not everyone would have heard detailed descriptions of what you look like, and if you're killing most the 'baddies' you meet, well; dead men tell no tales, after all.

There'll probably be wanted posters with depictions of yourself and your companions, or maybe paintings or busts/statues if you become important enough in a particular city. If you're popular enough, people will probably recognize you regardless of your clothing (unless, of course, you're wearing a mask). If you wear the "armour of the Inquisitor" people will likely assume you are the Inquisitor, the same way people assume a Seeker is such because he or she is wearing the armour of the Seeker. Unless, for instance, you're human and you make an elf wear it instead; people are bound to have heard of your race at least*. Sure, there are many people who won't live to tell on what you look like, but in some cases it might not be possible for you to go in a murdering rampage (social events for one).

Clothing can serve other purposes as well, though they could be harder (or not) to implement. We've been largely talking about using it to hide your identity but that comes down to projecting a certain image of yourself. Clothing is often associated with a person's status in society, so a noble would be more open to conversation with someone of his same station or higher while a serf might find a kinship in one of his fellows. The proper attire could open up lines of dialogue previously unavailable to you. Just a thought.

*As the Inquisitor, it occurs to me you could find it advantageous to seed rumors about yourself through a network of spies or the like. If you prefer to operate in secrecy, maybe you could find it useful for people to think you're a dwarf when in truth you're a qunari. Or perhaps you'd like to avoid the prejudices people associate with your race, gender, or class. Or maybe you want to set a trap for someone. The possibilities are endless but they're there.

Modifié par OdanUrr, 25 septembre 2013 - 11:57 .