200 réponses à ce sujet

[CybAnt1]

I also like perma death. I find DA games to be more RPG-lite when it comes to the combat system and especially in regards to consequences ffrom decisions made.

There is no consequence in battle when you know the party member is going to get up right after battle with both health and mana fully restored.

Other than injuries, but their effects in DA2 were so slight and so easily remediable, it didn't matter much. In fact, as I recall, there was a "better" injury potion that could remove 8 injuries at once, if the character had 8. 

Perma death ... well, all the D & D based games say at 0 hit points (or sometimes -10, but usually 0), you are dead. Doesn't mean a raise dead spell can't be cast on you, and in some cases even in combat, but you are dead, and so even when the battle ends, you're not getting up without one. Don't have a cleric, or he doesn't yet know raise dead? Your dead corpse is being dragged back to the city temple to be raised. Plus, usually all your equipment is now lying on a heap on the ground. Dead people don't carry. 

Some people mean by perma death, when the party falls, the game is over for good, and no going back to a previous save. Start over. Or some games will limit the number of saves or restrict you to fixed "savepoints" so the backtracking for failure could be significant. Not my cup of tea - though the game could have a game mode for those who roll that way. 

DA has not only let you save every few seconds, but even handholds by autosaving fairly frequently, and maybe especially before something really bad is about to happen. That might be the exact opposite. It didnt bug me, but challenge-cravers might want that system to at least have a harder mode. 

P..S. Some games with nonregenerating health - and whose healing potion/spell options can be highly limited - feature "health shrines" in dungeons. You have to find them and activate them, and then they will heal you. Sometimes they work only once, sometimes you can keep coming back to them once found. Generally, of course, it is considered a cheese mechanic. WTH is a "health shrine" anyway. (Of course, in a more advanced-tech genre, it's usually a floaty first aid kit, or something like that.)

Modifié par CybAnt1, 25 janvier 2014 - 01:56 .

[Raven489]

 Honestly the more I think about it, the more I think I'm cool with no health regeneration and limited health potions. I thought about it pretty much all night while my insomnia was acting up. My only problem with this is the planning part. How am I supposed to plan when I have no idea what I'm going to be facing? I have trouble planning what I'm gonna do the next day, there's no way I can plan my battles out in a video game. 

[CybAnt1]

I guess some would answer here to always plan for the worst, and hope for the best.

Frankly, I really think what it really means, given human nature, is increased sales for the Prima guide, so people will study the layout of every dungeon, then notice the worst encounter is on the 2nd level towards the back. Then figure out they should save about x or so health potions for that encounter and whatever other limited resources they need.

In my more cynical days, I think perhaps the Prima guys asked them to do this. 

P.S. if you play on PC, there is a console code that heals everybody - unless it gets taken out (or console codes do). Yes, that's "cheating". Some will resort to it in the direst of straits. And as we always say, "It's your game." Human nature tells me some will avail themselves of it.

Modifié par CybAnt1, 25 janvier 2014 - 02:17 .

[Raven489]

I don't play DA on PC, but I don't like cheating. The only game I cheat on is The Sims, and that's to give them lots of money so I can build them a big house. Other than that though, I'll just keep dying until I get it, but even that gets old real quick. 

[Tarek]

there should be a "rest" function after battles ... maybe with some nice animations like party members patching each other up and maybe mages drinking stuff (not necessarily a potion u have) and some party banter to make things not that boring

I dont know....loads of solutions all need varying degrees of effort I guess

[durasteel]

Realmzmaster wrote...
I prefer non-regenerating health and mana, friendly fire, eating, drinking, sleep and weather effects. I also like perma death. I find DA games to be more RPG-lite when it comes to the combat system and especially in regards to consequences ffrom decisions made.

I don't have time for that mess.

90% of combat in DAO and DA2 was meaningless, and largely unrelated to the story--combat took place because the generic bad guys were there. I don't want to have to waste time with strategy and advanced tactics on these fights, I would actually rather "space-bar" through it to get to the good stuff on the other side, the stuff that advances the story or shows me something new.

I think random combat perma-death is possibly the worst idea ever for an RPG. Death from a plot decision is great, death in a boss fight might be interesting, but permanent death from some random Genlock mob is about as much fun as jock itch.

[Maria Caliban]

Volus Warlord wrote...

I think you guys can ease up on the whole health regen thing until we get a better idea of what it actually is.

You know the BSN better than that.



^ After every announcement or new bit of information.

[Realmzmaster]

durasteel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...
I prefer non-regenerating health and mana, friendly fire, eating, drinking, sleep and weather effects. I also like perma death. I find DA games to be more RPG-lite when it comes to the combat system and especially in regards to consequences ffrom decisions made.

I don't have time for that mess.

90% of combat in DAO and DA2 was meaningless, and largely unrelated to the story--combat took place because the generic bad guys were there. I don't want to have to waste time with strategy and advanced tactics on these fights, I would actually rather "space-bar" through it to get to the good stuff on the other side, the stuff that advances the story or shows me something new.

I think random combat perma-death is possibly the worst idea ever for an RPG. Death from a plot decision is great, death in a boss fight might be interesting, but permanent death from some random Genlock mob is about as much fun as jock itch.

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? Survival is the meaning behind any combat. If the party is traveling across country or down a dark alley I expect there will be a possibility that the party will be attacked. The meaning behind that combat (aside for helping to level up and improve the party) is survival.

A death due to an attack  means that the gamer cannot get complacent  no matter how high a level the party. The consequence of losing the party member is that party member's quests and storyline are no longer accessible.

I have no problem with that kind of design. I know other gamers may find that unacceptable.

[durasteel]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? ...

Yes.

That's not to say that it is worthless... it often helps to set the tone of the area, for example. The dark forest is dangerous, and nothing sells that danger like having beasties ambush you. The streets are safe during the day (merchants all over the place) but dangerous at night (gangs trying to rob/kidnap/murder you.) This kind of combat is atmospheric, it shouldn't require rapt attention, extensive preparation, or advanced tactics. If it does, it's getting in the way.

[CybAnt1]

BTW, I like weather effects, and day/night cycles, mostly for simple environmental/ambient reasons.

You can make weather affect things, such as in torrential rain, it's harder to hit the enemy, but it is rare to see that implemented.

As for a day/night cycle, I found the DA2 approach kind of interesting. In effect, there was no day/night cycle. You could go to a part of the city at Kirkwall during the day, or during the night, and each would be treated as separate areas. Night would never become day while you were playing, or vice versa.

[bEVEsthda]

I find it crazy that some people are really concerned about not having auto health.
In a way it's a kinda cute reminder about how much the community has changed. Time flies. Years go by.
But it's also a depressing reminder about how modern games tend to just fokus on endlessly killing spectacularly and ignoring all other playing elements. "Annoying" I saw someone calling such other things.  ...Please.

I get it that you're scared. But really, you don't have to be. - Relax! The game will not be balanced the same way as your usual staple food, and then with just auto health removed. Don't worry, it won't be like that at all.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 25 janvier 2014 - 11:17 .

[Fast Jimmy]

durasteel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? ...

Yes.

That's not to say that it is worthless... it often helps to set the tone of the area, for example. The dark forest is dangerous, and nothing sells that danger like having beasties ambush you. The streets are safe during the day (merchants all over the place) but dangerous at night (gangs trying to rob/kidnap/murder you.) This kind of combat is atmospheric, it shouldn't require rapt attention, extensive preparation, or advanced tactics. If it does, it's getting in the way.

Getting in the way is its purpose. If something is meant to be so dangerous that the party should be fearful, then it should be so hard to do as to warrant that fear.

Otherwise it is just trash mobs that bore and LESSEN the feel of a place being "scary." 

[metatheurgist]

bEVEsthda wrote...
I find it crazy that some people are really concerned about not having auto health.
In a way it's a kinda cute reminder about how much the community has changed. Time flies. Years go by.
But it's also a depressing reminder about how modern games tend to just fokus on endlessly killing spectacularly and ignoring all other playing elements. "Annoying" I saw someone calling such other things.  ...Please.

Yeah, that's the problem with fun hobbies becoming mainstream products, the masses aren't interested in details. Now there's a recent move that sees epic 80 hour games as being too long. The masses want 10 hour games so they can move on to the next set of achievements without being inconvenienced by annoying things like characterisation and story.

[Gold Dragon]

Without Story, Games like DA are boring shooters.

I hate that type.

[deuce985]

The Baconer wrote...

deuce985 wrote...

Also, I just want to mention that I don't like it when RPGs force my characters into specific roles. As others have mentioned in here, it's possible a mage can just heal it out of combat. I really do not like this design if it means I have to spec a mage into healing. All mages should have healing by default if this is the case. It will force me into spirit healer specs and I do not want that...

Well, in DA:O and DA2 Spirit Healers were a great convenience but were hardly mandatory. It does appear that we will be needing at least one mage with the basic healing spell, though.

That's fine as long as it feels optional. If it feels like something you absolutely MUST HAVE in the game then it means all my mages will be going down the healer role which limits their versatility for me and forces me into specific specs. I don't like it when RPGs do that.

[Realmzmaster]

durasteel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? ...

Yes.

That's not to say that it is worthless... it often helps to set the tone of the area, for example. The dark forest is dangerous, and nothing sells that danger like having beasties ambush you. The streets are safe during the day (merchants all over the place) but dangerous at night (gangs trying to rob/kidnap/murder you.) This kind of combat is atmospheric, it shouldn't require rapt attention, extensive preparation, or advanced tactics. If it does, it's getting in the way.

If the gamer is not having the party pay rapt attention to the environment and the party is not prepared to face a tough foe in the streets then the party should lose members or suffer a party wipe. The party should always prepare for the worst that way the party is rarely taken by surprise or overmatached.

[Sylvius the Mad]

durasteel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? ...

Yes.

Since combat involves decision-making, combat always advances the story.

The characters' decisions ARE the story.

[Star fury]

Maria Caliban wrote...

You know the BSN better than that.



^ After every announcement or new bit of information.

It's the same on every big videogame forum. You just didn't know about them.

[philippe willaume]

durasteel wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So unless the combat advances the story it is meaningless? ...

Yes.

That's not to say that it is worthless... it often helps to set the tone of the area, for example. The dark forest is dangerous, and nothing sells that danger like having beasties ambush you. The streets are safe during the day (merchants all over the place) but dangerous at night (gangs trying to rob/kidnap/murder you.) This kind of combat is atmospheric, it shouldn't require rapt attention, extensive preparation, or advanced tactics. If it does, it's getting in the way.

How much combat advance the strory/is atmospheric or not is a byzantine discussion second only to how many angels can dance on a needle head.

That being said unprepared combat  aint mutually exclusive with having combat that requires forward planing and preparation.
In a fact, it could be argued that  having a system where you can plan and prepare makes ambush (and all unprepared attack) the more effective.

phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 26 janvier 2014 - 12:53 .

[Rawgrim]

Allways plan for the worst. And don`t use potions and such needlessly. Better to have as many as possible left over for the next battle.

[Ravensword]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I'm not going to lie, if permadeath was a thing in DA:I, then I wouldn't have any party members by the end of the game. That's not really fun, in my opinion.

Then again, many people here don't want gamers like me playing their Dragon Age.

DA:I is gonna be roguelike?