53 réponses à ce sujet

[BouncyFrag]

I could see a 'defend the keep' line of side missions if you want to get more xp or experiment with different gear/skills/etc. One thing I've liked in bioware games is that I've never felt that I wasn't leveling up fast enough and needed areas of extra baddies to grind for xp. If the game design made grinding more of a necessity, I'd much rather they not be in the game at all.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Remember, the content isn't scaled to our level in DAI. So respawned creatures could well be much weaker than you, thus discouraging grinding.

And given that, I would support respawning. I hated respawing in Wizardy 8, for example, because the enemies were all scaled to your level, so every fight was challenging, and that just made travel really tedious.

But having low-level wildlife respawn (as it does in MMOs) would be fine.

Ideally, though, those low-level creatures wouldn't then attack me, so I wouldn't have to be fighting them all the time.

[Eurypterid]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Remember, the content isn't scaled to our level in DAI. So respawned creatures could well be much weaker than you, thus discouraging grinding.

And given that, I would support respawning. I hated respawing in Wizardy 8, for example, because the enemies were all scaled to your level, so every fight was challenging, and that just made travel really tedious.

But having low-level wildlife respawn (as it does in MMOs) would be fine.

Ideally, though, those low-level creatures wouldn't then attack me, so I wouldn't have to be fighting them all the time.

This is something I wouldn't mind, especially if creatures that are much lower level than your character would just flee instead of running suicide missions.

[Tinxa]

I hate respawning. There's nothing more annoying than having to leave an area to sell some loot or something and then finding all the annoying little critters back when you return.

There's absolutely no challenge in killing them AGAIN, it's just time consuming so you can't finish the quests you wanted. Sometimes I just want to run back through the forest to turn in a couple of quests and maybe start some new ones without wolves and tigers jumping at me from every bush along the way. In the end I try to avoid them, which only makes me loose more time by zigzagging everywhere I go.

[XX-Pyro]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Remember, the content isn't scaled to our level in DAI. So respawned creatures could well be much weaker than you, thus discouraging grinding.

And given that, I would support respawning. I hated respawing in Wizardy 8, for example, because the enemies were all scaled to your level, so every fight was challenging, and that just made travel really tedious.

But having low-level wildlife respawn (as it does in MMOs) would be fine.

Ideally, though, those low-level creatures wouldn't then attack me, so I wouldn't have to be fighting them all the time.

Agree with this, respawning mooks isn't really a problem now that there isn't level scaling. I'm hoping that this doesn't mean certain areas of the map are inaccessible until you progress further, and that with some amount of planning you can defeat certain stronger enemies (although certainly not anything way more powerful than you).

The low-level wildlife however should be agressive towards you regardless of your level, considering a bear wouldn't realistically be able to judge you're strength. 

[Jozape]

XX-Pyro wrote...

The low-level wildlife however should be agressive towards you regardless of your level, considering a bear wouldn't realistically be able to judge you're strength.

Most wildlife realistically would not attack you either, unless you did something to anger them, like walk near their nest or offspring.

[nightscrawl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I did like the Earthbound system. Enemies actually knew to stay the heck away if there was a 100% chance if them getting decimated.

Wow, this sounds great.

On the other hand, it depends on the type of mob. If it's just wolves and such, yeah sure I can see them respawning in such a manner. However, if it's darkspawn, I would have concern from an RP standpoint. Is there an opening to the Deep Roads somewhere nearby that we can seal up?

If, going along with this whole veil tear thing, there is an opening in a certain area and a way is found to seal them, perhaps mobs can continually respawn until the tear is closed? After that, then perhaps wolves and other normal wildlife can move into the area.

Dynamic and reactive content like that really helps worlds feel alive.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

But having low-level wildlife respawn (as it does in MMOs) would be fine.

Ideally, though, those low-level creatures wouldn't then attack me, so I wouldn't have to be fighting them all the time.

Yes, in WoW for instance your level determines your visibility to the mobs. If you are much lower than them they will be attracted to you from a great distance. It's actually amusing trying to take a low level friend into some higher dungeon because of this; they appear to come from miles away to one-shot your buddy. On the other hand, if you are much higher than the mobs you can be standing a few feet away without attracting their attention, sometimes practically on top of them.

I did notice that in The Witcher, which also had respawning mobs, it was still annoying even if I killed them easily, simply because of the various quests and things that require you to run all over the place and go to various locations repeatedly. So I would be running through the swamp with a huge train of creatures following me. Something that does help is the ability for the mobs to "leash" back to their spawn point if they are taken too far away, allowing you to run through an area taking minimal damage (if you are much higher level), but still attracting the respawning mobs.

[Zanallen]

I don't mind respawns if they make sense. Darkspawn in the Deep Roads? Sure. There is no way we are going to kill every darkspawn underground. It would make sense to encounter roving bands here and there. Maybe not the in the numbers they were they in our original push through, but some. Same thing with random animals in the forest or on the plains.

[TeamLexana]

EntropicAngel wrote...

The "problem" with that idea is that it allows grinding, and high levels, which someone like myself would abuse.

That said, with DA I's semi-open world, and the non-scaling enemy levels, it makes a lot more sense.

That sounds like a personal problem. An entire game shouldn't be built around some players lack of self control.

[Eurypterid]

XX-Pyro wrote...

The low-level wildlife however should be agressive towards you regardless of your level, considering a bear wouldn't realistically be able to judge you're strength. 

As noted, wildlife is generally shy and non-aggressive unless they perceive you're threatening their young or their personal space/territory. So no, the wildlife shouldn't be aggressive towards you unless they perceive a threat. Baldur's Gate is actually a pretty decent example of this with regards to bears: they weren't aggressive unless you basically wandered right up to them (invading their personal space).

[Absafraginlootly]

It depends on the situation I think. I for one can't stand in mmos when I clear a bunch of bandits out from the entrance to a building and when I come back out again THERE THEY ARE. It makes me feel like I have no effect on the world around me.

On the other hand there are some areas, like the Brecilian Forest, that you expect to be dangerous and walking through without encountering anything would be strange. I would NOT want respawns but different enemies at different locations on the map could work.

So yeah, in some places more enemies appearing is good, but in others those enemies are just an annoyance between me and the next quest.

[Usergnome]

katerinafm wrote...

I actually really like the option to be able to clear out areas in video games. Maybe it could be depending on the area. For areas where you go and place a Keep in, it'd make sense if you eventually cleared the area of enemies completely.

Also respawning enemies can be very frustrating. You learn to deal with it, but for example, in Dragon's Dogma, enemies respawned in the same place, and if you wanted to travel through an area multible times, you had to fight the same enemies over and over which was pretty tiring.

However, since enemies won't scale up to the player, the respawning enemies could end up being wiped out quicker and quicker the more you level up, so maybe it won't be really bad.

What's important is to make areas feel populated without just making enemies spawn every two minutes.

Not to mention there was no fast travel so you HAD to go through those areas everytime. Oh god, that Harpy Canyon as a warrior... I HATED IT.

Since the grinding could be abused, I would fix this (ideally) in one of these ways;
1) After killing a mob the first time, it will respawn later after you leave the zone, but will not grant experience for additional kills after the first. 

2) MMO style, where the creatures too far below your level no longer grant experience. Grinding would still technically be possible I suppose, but slowed down so much no one would really want to do it if the level cutoff point was at, say, -1 below the player's. And that would pose more issues. BAD IDEA.

Actually, I don't have a third idea. Sorry rule of threes. Of course, enemies would not respawn in a bandit camp after you kill them the first time; why would they return? Ghosts, demons, and other "haunting" things would also not return after you defeat them.
The only time things that would respawn would be wildlife such as wolves, bears, deer, etc. In the Deep Roads, there would always be more Darkspawn.

Also, while we're on topic, didn't the Brecilian Forest respawn? it does atleast once, if you return after finishing the Dalish Questline there are more Darkspawn, some bears, and a group of Dalish that either love you and give you a gift or attempt to kill you based on how you did the Dalish/Werewolf quest.

[Angrywolves]

logically since monsters travel enemies should respawn.

[TeamLexana]

Usergnome wrote...





Since the grinding could be abused, I would fix this (ideally) in one of these ways;
1) After killing a mob the first time, it will respawn later after you leave the zone, but will not grant experience for additional kills after the first. 

That's HORRIBLE. Why would they seek to punish everyone with xp gathering and make peeps burn health potions and time just because some peeps have no self control with leveling up naturally and then have the audicity to cry about it later when they top out if xp was "farmable". That's a personal problem. 

I'd rather there be no respawning then respawning with no xp.

Modifié par TeamLexana, 03 décembre 2013 - 05:51 .

[TEWR]

EntropicAngel wrote...

The "problem" with that idea is that it allows grinding, and high levels, which someone like myself would abuse.

True. Even games with diminishing XP gained aren't flawless, though that's always been my preferred method. But I don't see a problem with this either. If people wanna grind, they can grind. All it does is make the game less challenging for them, but it doesn't take away from the story or the world.

The lack of respawning enemies takes away from the world. The inclusion of it, where it makes sense (Deep Roads) only takes away from a small segment of a person's playthrough of a game. One they probably didn't care much for anyway.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 03 décembre 2013 - 05:57 .

[Wulfram]

I don't like it when you just have the same enemy turn up again, which is what I associate with respawns. It takes away from the sense that you're actually doing anything in the world, as well as being practically the definition of boredom - it's the same fight again, but probably with less challenge and no sense of being connected to the plot!

Some sort of random encounter stuff for wilderness areas to keep them from getting totally empty, would be OK. And some places might get reoccupied by a different group of enemies, though I'd like there to be at least some sort of story associated with that.

Modifié par Wulfram, 03 décembre 2013 - 11:16 .

[eroeru]

animedreamer wrote...
oops no one left to kil... in the entire world? kind of depressing to have to start a whole new game just to see some kill animations, or remember how certain spells looked/worked.

Well, I don't know what world you live in, but back here it's normal to "not have anyone to kill"...

Game needs to be immersive.

As to your gripes with seeing animations or trying out an end-game character - well, they're small ones. Many story-gamers, especially in the dragon age community don't particularly enjoy killings. They're tedious. The *need* to have to kill now and then, every time you go to an area, does NOT make sense, nor is it fun.

Though I do understand your gripe with DA2. Really empty game that was focused too much on flash of animations.

As to my suggestion - the idea with challenges of different kinds, with choices attached to them, is the best one I can think of at the moment. Traps. Ambushes a la DA:O. But you'd always have a skill or other to make it easier and not kill.

*Or' you could always try it like in vanilla Torchlight 2. Open peaceful areas don't have enemies, some dark places (e.g. dungeons) do respawn them though. Yet let them at least be enemies that behave believably. There's no bear population in the world that hangs around roads waiting to be killed. Nor do people "respawn". Only things which do that are oblivion gates. And we all know how people love to be caught up by an easily predicted wave of enemies.

Make the world more alive. Make things more random and/or *unpredictable*. But at the normal more peaceful and natural than otherwise.

Hardly predictable, creative yet believable fun is what really gets people's attention to a gameworld... The level of randomization need to be subtle and in accordance to how rigid is the framework of the game. The more rigid and simple, the more you'll need to put in random stuff in order for it to work. I guess that in the long run, throughout the *whole* game there needs to be noticable randomization. Yet in specifics, it shouldn't come off as unnatural. I think there should be only specific types of scenarios where things are more random than in others.

Modifié par eroeru, 03 décembre 2013 - 11:52 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I do think one concept that I've seen games do is for an area is that, once cleared of enemies, become "domesticated."

That is to say, once all the hostile enemies are cleared out, you start seeing normal wildlife and/or even NPCs going around the area. For instance, once you cleared out the Circle, various surviving mages and Templars can be seen around the Circle, picking up the pieces, making comments about the upcoming fight against the Darkspawn. Imagine this also happening in the Deep roads, where you see various dwarves starting to reclaim the area, maybe miners or Legion of the Dead members, or even some random critters who live in the Deep Roads who won't eat you on sight... like nugs or something.

Anyway, this could prevent endless swarms of enemies respawning left and right but, at the same time, give the area a little more character other than just a mass graveyard.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 03 décembre 2013 - 12:09 .

[Navasha]

Only if the respawning makes sense. Respawning creatures in the deep roads makes perfect sense.

Having a bandit village repopulate doesn't.

I could see having a "global population" number I suppose. Say a forest has a population of 100 wolves. You might only encounter 20-30 of them by clearing the whole map. The next time through you might encounter 10-20 and a third time 5-15. Diminishing returns until the whole 100 are exterminated. Then you should find nothing.

I don't want to see something like Borderlands 2, where if you accidentally cross a loading zone and go RIGHT back... the entire level is back as if you had done nothing to it. That's just dumb.

[Barrendall]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Remember, the content isn't scaled to our level in DAI. So respawned creatures could well be much weaker than you, thus discouraging grinding.

And given that, I would support respawning. I hated respawing in Wizardy 8, for example, because the enemies were all scaled to your level, so every fight was challenging, and that just made travel really tedious.

But having low-level wildlife respawn (as it does in MMOs) would be fine.

Ideally, though, those low-level creatures wouldn't then attack me, so I wouldn't have to be fighting them all the time.

I agree.  Respawns such as this keep life in areas in the world without the nuisance of having to slaughter everything in you path if you don't choose to.  Gives the game some ambience in my opinion.

[Sidney]

People keep saying wildlife respawns. Maybe rabbits or squirrels or something but in Skyrim the stupidity of having these massive apex predators keep respawning killed me - well not literally in game but it makes no sense. I've killed enough of those critters that they are gone, extinct. The respawning actually makes the game feel less alive and more like it is force feeding me foes.

The respawn in Borderlands is really just about grinding and all it really does is enforce grinding - for those saying it is optional. If foes respawn all across a map you have to re-traverse then guess what, you have to slaughter your way across the map and again it makes no sense. You wipe out a gang of bandits and so a day later - or just after you leave the map- there is a whole new gang that looks EXACTLY the same in the same spot. Sorry, again, really awful feel to the game.

[Plaintiff]

If enemy levels are going to be fixed, then I expect to be able to grind, so that I can enter areas when I want to. So respawning is pretty much a necessity as far as I'm concerned.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 03 décembre 2013 - 01:07 .