45 réponses à ce sujet

[ziloe]

As brought up in another thread, one of the major downfalls of games like Skyrim, was that there was little impact for our actions. If any of the Bioware developers here are familiar with how it played out, you'd know that one of the major selling points was the civil war questline. If it wasn't bad enough that the actual side quest was downgraded before release, what was worse was the lack of acknowledgement that the war was over, when we were victorious. 

Perhaps I'd entered a town I'd never been to before, and townsfolk would still complain about the war effort, in spite of the victory at the hands of the Empire or Stormcloaks. Sure a few townsfolk could be asked their thoughts, but overall, the A.I didn't acknowledge anything in the like, as though nothing changed.

The same was said for other quests, the main quest line for example. We travelled all the way into the home of their gods, killing a soul eating dragon, and no one blinked. The only ones to congratulate me? Some guards when I passed through townsquare, later on.

If Dragon Age: Inquisition is going to continue even after it's all over, please, please be sure that our actions aren't diminished by NPCs, because it would be terrible to have removed all of the Fade in Thedas' sky, only for people in various cities to still complain about what's above, etc.

((Discuss))

[The_Huntress]

Don't worry. There will be 2^4 totaly unique endings based on your choices where each path has an immediate effect to the game.

Do you kill the rogue Templar captain or accept his surrender?
Do you side with the Dalish and lose your trusted companion or do you side with the humans?
Can you save the Prince; can you save the King?
And finally, do you let your LI die to save the world?

It's a riveting, never before told tale of heroism, lust, mistrust and political maneuvering.

[ElitePinecone]

DA has generally been better at this than many other games, but I suppose it's a lot of work to record dialogue for random NPCs all over the world (as well as, I guess party members and other major characters) - especially if there are a range of ending states.

(Though, after lots of reviews brought up that guy in the Viscount's office in DA2 who waits for him in one spot for like seven years or something, Bioware might be keen to avoid that sort of situation.)

I definitely hope they include some level of post-ending content to reflect the Inquisition's impact on the world, but it's not a life-or-death feature.

[In Exile]

It's very, very difficult to do a truly "open" world game that's reactive. Look at TW2 - very reactive, but very dependent on its three set pieces. Lots of variation on those pieces, but the very nature of the design controlled the possible combinations.

[Clockwork_Wings]

I hope so. It would be fun if you could see some small changes, like doing a lot of shopping at a particular market causes a raise in item quality and standard of living for the NPCs. If one undermines local authority, one begins to see more shady characters hanging around. In a slow, gradual way, not the timeskip way Fable II did.

[ziloe]

In Exile wrote...

It's very, very difficult to do a truly "open" world game that's reactive. Look at TW2 - very reactive, but very dependent on its three set pieces. Lots of variation on those pieces, but the very nature of the design controlled the possible combinations.

I've seen it done in Kingdom's of Amalur, though, it was a lot more subtle for the most part. Like in one quest for instance, I could mention when being challenged, about certain accomplishements. However, the difference with the original Dragon Age or even the Witcher series is that each of those has a definitive ending, regardless of how it changes.

Leaving it open like Skyrim, rather than simply a new game plus, asks for far too much, because yeah, reactivity for all your actions in the end is going to take a hell of a lot of effort and time, and they've already been doing so much when it comes to reactivity for race and class.

[holdenagincourt]

Clockwork_Wings wrote...

I hope so. It would be fun if you could see some small changes, like doing a lot of shopping at a particular market causes a raise in item quality and standard of living for the NPCs. If one undermines local authority, one begins to see more shady characters hanging around. In a slow, gradual way, not the timeskip way Fable II did.

This would be really nice, actually. For me, it would really help immersion, since to me that stops at around the point when you create a mental map of all the permutations available in the game. If the world is changing and updating itself in ways that aren't tied to major plot points then there's less of a chance of me consciously managing that.

[ziloe]

holdenagincourt wrote...

Clockwork_Wings wrote...

I hope so. It would be fun if you could see some small changes, like doing a lot of shopping at a particular market causes a raise in item quality and standard of living for the NPCs. If one undermines local authority, one begins to see more shady characters hanging around. In a slow, gradual way, not the timeskip way Fable II did.

This would be really nice, actually. For me, it would really help immersion, since to me that stops at around the point when you create a mental map of all the permutations available in the game. If the world is changing and updating itself in ways that aren't tied to major plot points then there's less of a chance of me consciously managing that.

Yeah, it would definitely be nice to see the progress in towns. Like, if I saved the town in that demo, it would be nice to have them remember that, as opposed to forgetting it the next time I entered that world space.

[Clockwork_Wings]

At the same time, I don't want to micromanage for a desired result. But I would like to see more quests that have different outcomes. DA2 didn't have enough. For instance, do enough quests in a town that benefit the town, it starts to show in the ways I described above. Do enough that damage the town, the town's quality begins to drop.

[ziloe]

Clockwork_Wings wrote...

At the same time, I don't want to micromanage for a desired result. But I would like to see more quests that have different outcomes. DA2 didn't have enough. For instance, do enough quests in a town that benefit the town, it starts to show in the ways I described above. Do enough that damage the town, the town's quality begins to drop.

I think DA2's major issue outside of too many of the repeated caves, was that it just felt so... inert. Despite seven years passing, outside of your companions, life didn't really seem to change at all. As mentioned earlier, even seven years later there was still the dude with the same repeated line, waiting to be seen by someone. And this went for many of the other people as well, alongside the world itself.

[KC_Prototype]

I second this. This is what make repeatability in play. I hope there is a lot of this.

[Clockwork_Wings]

I felt like DAO had more divergence in ways to solve quests. Take the business with Tahrone. I felt like if it was a DAO quest there'd have been a way to side with Tahrone. Not that I would.

[MKDAWUSS]

If it had a 10 year development cycle, I'd give it a maybe. Variables and consequences cost resources.

[ziloe]

MKDAWUSS wrote...

If it had a 10 year development cycle, I'd give it a maybe. Variables and consequences cost resources.

And yet they got an entire extra year just to do those types of things, so let's hope it goes beyond just race and class.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Fallout 1/2 were pretty good at this. Arcanum also had it's newspaper and the like.

I think the way New Vegas handles the little touches with ambient comments in and around the Strip (Freeside, etc) are among the best I've seen in a game. It's not necessarily divergent content of any significance, but it displays a level of forethought and emphasis that what you do does impact the gameworld.

One specific example I like is when you find performers for Talent Quest, they actually do perform on stage every evening on the Strip.

[Fortlowe]

I know I'm gonna get roasted for saying it, but so far as a reactive open world game, I think Fable II, not TW or Skyrim, is or at least should be the guiding light for DA:I. I think the game is brilliant and a great proof of concept.

[Sentinel358]

Fortlowe wrote...

I know I'm gonna get roasted for saying it, but so far as a reactive open world game, I think Fable II, not TW or Skyrim, is or at least should be the guiding light for DA:I. I think the game is brilliant and a great proof of concept.

Completely agree, during the demo when they showed the fate of Crestwood, i really think thats a microcosm of what can occur to the rest of thedas, as in major changes will happen depending on your inquisitors decisions

[rlwelch4646]

Clockwork_Wings wrote...

At the same time, I don't want to micromanage for a desired result. But I would like to see more quests that have different outcomes. DA2 didn't have enough. For instance, do enough quests in a town that benefit the town, it starts to show in the ways I described above. Do enough that damage the town, the town's quality begins to drop.

As I mentioned in other threads I totally love something like this. I think this is the next step in gaming. I know it's probably a b*&^h to program but I think this is what makes a good RPG... the variables. Even if you look at Auction Houses in MMORPGs there is that appeal of variation and fluctuation that people gravitate towards... more importantly, you have a part in it and it directly effects you. You know there are constants but its fun trying to discover what works and doesn't in an ever-changing environment.

I think slowly we're getting there but I'm hoping to see some progress towards this type of world-state. One that truly fluctuates based on actions and your NPC's/inputs are feeding into that process.

[ziloe]

rlwelch4646 wrote...

Clockwork_Wings wrote...

At the same time, I don't want to micromanage for a desired result. But I would like to see more quests that have different outcomes. DA2 didn't have enough. For instance, do enough quests in a town that benefit the town, it starts to show in the ways I described above. Do enough that damage the town, the town's quality begins to drop.

As I mentioned in other threads I totally love something like this. I think this is the next step in gaming. I know it's probably a b*&^h to program but I think this is what makes a good RPG... the variables. Even if you look at Auction Houses in MMORPGs there is that appeal of variation and fluctuation that people gravitate towards... more importantly, you have a part in it and it directly effects you. You know there are constants but its fun trying to discover what works and doesn't in an ever-changing environment.

I think slowly we're getting there but I'm hoping to see some progress towards this type of world-state. One that truly fluctuates based on actions and your NPC's/inputs are feeding into that process.

It's definitely possible, even in small doses. I mean I know I don't expect constant reactivity for my playing an Elf or Qunari, but that reactivity is what makes me feel like what I do or am, means something. I think that's what excites people when it comes to the concept of being caught as a blood mage, etc. But I'd like to see that beyond the characters who follow me, and see it in the actual worldspace, through the various characters who express varied states, dependent on circumstance.

I don't want to see another of the same, guy waiting to see the king, never gets in, time passes and he has the same dialogue. I mean, even as a running joke, at least make it vary every once in awhile.

[Chaos Hammer]

While I like these ideas, the thing is, places don't change quickly, (but im all for moving the GD NPCs around every once and a while!), Hawke really didn't do much that was all that extraordinary prior to the end of ACT 2, now that's where they had potential, burn down buildings, reformulate the street plan based on battle damage or something, but cities land towns progress slowly without major impetus.

Im not against reactivity, but it has to be done right

[ziloe]

Chaos Hammer wrote...

While I like these ideas, the thing is, places don't change quickly, (but im all for moving the GD NPCs around every once and a while!), Hawke really didn't do much that was all that extraordinary prior to the end of ACT 2, now that's where they had potential, burn down buildings, reformulate the street plan based on battle damage or something, but cities land towns progress slowly without major impetus.

Im not against reactivity, but it has to be done right

That's why it's Socio-Environmental, not Environmental. It's about how people react to the worldspace; not about the worldspace itself changing upon circumstance. Though, a little of what you mentioned, can't be a bad thing either. However, even then, that change would be made pointless if the NPCs weren't aware of said alterations.

Modifié par ziloe, 06 février 2014 - 04:04 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Strange thread subject, but I liked the ideas once I read them. From the rumors about agents and what kind of impact we'll supposedly be able to have over the regions we "capture" I wouldn't be surprised if there's plenty of play time available after the MQ is done, so I do hope the world recognizes our victories... with more than constant cheering.

Modifié par RinpocheSchnozberry, 06 février 2014 - 08:51 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I really dislike games where the end isn't the end. It always feels fake, plastic, hollow... like the curtain has been pulled back and you can see just how static and stale things are without the carefully crafted scenes and content you see.

I realize it's been confirmed that the game will move on after you are done, but I'm extremely leery of how that will look or play out.

[ziloe]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I really dislike games where the end isn't the end. It always feels fake, plastic, hollow... like the curtain has been pulled back and you can see just how static and stale things are without the carefully crafted scenes and content you see.

I realize it's been confirmed that the game will move on after you are done, but I'm extremely leery of how that will look or play out.

I feel the exact same way. I remember how Oblivion ended, I was fine with it. It felt satisfying. And I was okay with being able to travel around after. But then Skyrim happened. And I just felt cold. Funny enough, we were on a cold, dead mountain too.

Even Fallout 3 had a better ending in comparison to the latest installment. 

[ziloe]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Strange thread subject, but I liked the ideas once I read them. From the rumors about agents and what kind of impact we'll supposedly be able to have over the regions we "capture" I wouldn't be surprised if there's plenty of play time available after the MQ is done, so I do hope the world recognizes our victories... with more than constant cheering.

I imagine capturing a place will be similar to say, Farcry 3, where it opens up a fair bit of content we couldn't initially see. But that's just my guess. And yeah, cheering is alright, but I hope there is more than that too.

Like, imagine if finishing the main quest itself, opened up other opportunities and places we couldn't go, sort of like how Pokemon did it with the other regions.

Modifié par ziloe, 07 février 2014 - 03:45 .