53 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

I'm not really a fan of respawning. If I clear an area, I want that area to be clear.

It depends on the type of respawn.

If you go through a forest and kill some wild wolves, what would prevent a bear coming in and taking their spot? If you wiped out some bandits, maybe some maleficar see an abandoned area where they can summon demons in private and attack anyone on sight.

I have become ultra bored with the classic JRPG mechanic of random encounters that you can't see. But it also would help with the fleshing out of the world if the areas reacted to wiping out the former residents. But I'd not like it to be totally nonsensical. Bandits and guards are more numerous than any other profession in RPGs and they both get killed in massively large volumes. For bandits to get killed and then have brand new bandits of the same exact type spawn back in their place just a brew days later stretches the imagination.

However, if we go to the Deep Roads and wipe out some Darkspawn, there should be little reason why we wouldn't expect to see more Darkspawn there later. Or some darkstalkers or giant spiders who have moved in to feast on the leftover corpses.


When acting as a DM back in the Long Ago, one of the best lessons a more experienced DM taught me was the idea of dungeon ecosystems. What would happen if you really out a beholder and a chimera within the same zip code? What would be the repercussions if you wiped out a huge tribe of goblins? Who would be affected if you killed a slew of tree spirits?

So, in that light, I'd like the areas to feel more organic. However, in the very likely outcome of the game just respawning the same exact enemies in the same spots after X amount of game time had lapsed, I'd say it might be less tedious to side in the "once they're dead, they're dead" side of the equation.

[Kaldrin]

+1 

 

This is the type of innovative system I would appreciate. Intelligent respawning... the living world truly evolving according to your actions, even the subtle ones.

 

 

The subtle changes are what I tend to notice most. I tend to judge the games I play with at least 20% of the score being dedicate to attention to detail and the small and seemingly insignificant things that add to the value of the game as a whole.

[BubbleDncr]

I think it should be situational on if enemies re-spawn. I mean, it was great in DA:O to fight through a map once, and never have to do it again when you go back to search for loot you may have missed (I did this a lot fo companion gifts).

 

But at the same time...when that place is the Deep Roads, and most of the enemies were beasts/darkspawn, it doesn't make much sense for new ones to no ever come back.

 

So I would say, maybe in Wilderness areas, after you finish the dungeons, they should have a couple (no where near as many as were originally there) enemies spawn. If we want some realism.

 

If we don't care about realism, I would much rather have nothing respawn than have a ton of stuff respawn.

[Nuloen]

Mr.Gaider sayd that we can spend hours to max our character
So there surely must be something that will increase our level
And becouse in DA level increased mostly by killing things im sure there will be respawning

[Tinxa]

I hate respawning. It just adds tedium and annoyance.

 

Once I clear an area I want it to stay that way. I don't want to fight the same group of bandits everytime I walk across the same place to do a sidequest or explore a cave I left for later. There's no challenge in wiping out the same group again, it's just a waste of time you could spend progressing a quest or getting quickly to the keep to sell items and talk to questgivers.

You get to fight enough enemies while doing quests or progressing the main storyline without adding respawns of the same random mooks into it.

 

The only thing I'd like to see respawning is the wildlife (the neutral kind, if it's a group of wolves that will keep jumping at you out of the same bush then - no thanks).

[falconlord5]

Very much a member of the anti-respawning crowd.

[Brass_Buckles]

What if keeps and buildings/forts etc. do not respawn, but outside on the roads, things respawn only if you leave that area and return?

 

The developers have already said that enemies will not scale to level; you will find different level enemies depending where you go.  And while yes, most people only will go back if they forgot to do something, the sheer scope of the game means that there will be plenty of things to do, some of which you're likely to miss out on.

 

There may be reasons given to go back to an area, too.  For instance, you run across some enemy camp that you need to clear, for plot reasons, but the enemies are too high level for you right now.  If you can go back over there later on, even after the main campaign, you can finish that quest.

 

Or what if certain ingredients only grow in one part of the world, and that part of the world was one of the first places you went to?  (That's where the respawning plants would come in.)

 

Again, I'm pretty neutral toward enemy respawning, It just needs to make sense what respawns and when and where it does so.  As another poster said, if I clear a bear out of a cave, maybe something else shows up to take its place.  (Dragons?  Wyvern?)  I won't care one way or another if I can wipe out all of the enemies everywhere.

 

The only thing I feel definitely should respawn, in the open parts of the map, are the animals and plants.  It makes sense you can't wipe out everything in an entire nation, and it makes sense that plants would regrow.  I suspect this won't happen, though, because the developers have been very clear that we are going to need to be careful with our resources.  And yet, I feel that if I am willing to take the time and effort to go gather more resources myself, I feel I should reap the rewards of that.  It always bothered me that the plants never respawned in DA:O.  In this game, where we may be crafting most of our own gear, it may set us back to suddenly realize that we can't make our top-tier items because we used an essential crafting component somewhere else, and now it's just gone forever.  And sure, choice is important and your foolish decisions still belong to you--but that's basically punishing you for not knowing you'd need that item for something better later on because you haven't ever played the game before.

 

I really wish the devs would tell us something...

[MrMrPendragon]

I've always thought that the DA series' main draw is the story, so I'm fine no-respawn or with respawn.

[Aoba]

I'm fine with enemies respawning, but if it's handled anything like Dragon's Dogma, cheese will be lit and torches will be thrown.

[Chiramu]

If they respawn the game will feel like Swtor. You clear the dungeon to the quest area, you complete that section of the quest, clear the dungeon to exit the area. 

 

Boring. Seriously, this would not be a good idea for the game.

 

Plus, what if there are some people out there that wonder where on Thedas all these guys are coming from? "HOW DID YOU GET HERE?! I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE!" 

[Brass_Buckles]

If they respawn the game will feel like Swtor. You clear the dungeon to the quest area, you complete that section of the quest, clear the dungeon to exit the area. 

 

Boring. Seriously, this would not be a good idea for the game.

 

Plus, what if there are some people out there that wonder where on Thedas all these guys are coming from? "HOW DID YOU GET HERE?! I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE!" 

 

Enemies aren't/weren't always people.  In DA:O you also fought a lot of the wild predators, and of course the darkspawn who can come from just about anywhere there's a hole in the ground.

 

As for "where these people came from," once you leave the area for a few days, other people may travel through.  It's not that unbelievable.

 

Again I'm fairly neutral on it, but I think some people are assuming that by respawning we're talking about "everything reappears within ten minutes if you don't get out of the area by then."  I'm thinking more along the lines of, "a few things may come back once you leave the area and come back."  And maybe add to that, it's affected by what you've done since you were last in the area.  So if you chose to do something that angered the local banns or the teyrn, expect them to raise armies against you.

 

Things like keeps and the like, if you don't secure them for yourself, it'd be strange if they didn't get repopulated.  If there's an intact ruin, someone somewhere is likely to think it will make good shelter.  Just look at Ostagar.

[Lvl20DM]

I think the plan is for the wilderness to repopulate, and for that "re-population" to be impacted by the actions we've taken. Ideally, that would mean that if we build a military stronghold and increase patrols, we don't see any bandits (but a rampaging troll/giant might show up).

[Wulfram]

If you're going to do respawnig, then the Brecilian forest did it right, I think.  The new encounters there were fairly interesting.

[ReadingRambo220]

If we go to Kal-Sharok it might be cool to have some Provings you can do indefinitely.

[Realmzmaster]

I favor intelligent re-spawning. If the party clears out an area or keep of wolves and foxes I want to see an explosion in the rat population. If the party clears out an abandoned mine near a village. I want to see prospectors or miners from the village trying to eke out ore from the mine. 

 

I do not wish to see the same enemy re-spawn in the same place. Re=spawning should occur over time. The party should not just leave the keep or mine turn back around and go back in the mine or keep and everything has re-spawned.

 

If the party kills bandits in a cave I want to see creatures coming in to feast on the bodies drawn by the smell of blood. The creatures should also fight among the different species. If the party goes back to the cave maybe it will see a bear and giant spider in a death lock.

 

Since there are plants that can be harvested those plants should gradually grow back. Intelligent re-spawning is fine.

 

For example in Fallout: New Vegas if the character gets on the wrong side of the Legion it sends death squads after the character. The death squads stop if the protagonist kills Caesar.  

[Mockingword]

They damn well should, if Bioware is going to hold up its promise of dumping difficult fights in areas that I can access early on.

 

I want to be in control of where I go and when I go there. If it's possible to fight a high dragon in the first act, then it should be possible to win, even if doing so requires grinding trash mobs for exp.

[Realmzmaster]

They damn well should, if Bioware is going to hold up its promise of dumping difficult fights in areas that I can access early on.

 

I want to be in control of where I go and when I go there. If it's possible to fight a high dragon in the first act, then it should be possible to win, even if doing so requires grinding trash mobs for exp.

 

Why should it be possible to win? If party chooses to fight a creature that is significantly more powerful then there should be a party wipe. The best leader knows when to fight, when not to fight and when to withdraw. If the dragon is not attacking your party why would the party disturb it?

 

 Bioware is not stopping the party from going to those areas. Bioware is simply saying if the party goes there it should be prepared to die or flee. The player gets to test the power of the group against the unknown with no hand holding.

 

The idea is to explore the land find the areas that the party can handle. Level up and come back to the difficult area. Rather than have a bunch of trash mobs and re-pawning the same creatures have more quests in the "easier" areas that give more experience to level up the party.

[Sylvius the Mad]

If it's possible to fight a high dragon in the first act, then it should be possible to win,

I completely disagree.  Not every fight needs to be winnable at all, let alone in the first act.

 

It perhaps should be possible to survive (though I'm not sure that's required either), but that might involve running away.

[Scott Sion]

^ This. Maybe have it work like the Tresher Maw in Dragon Age:2. Either last long enough to survive and escape or take your chances and try to kill it then and there.

 

Side Note: Anyone know why it isn't letting me quote other posts? It'll start loading like it's going to let me, but it doesn't add it.  

[smoke and mirrors]

^ This. Maybe have it work like the Tresher Maw in Dragon Age:2. Either last long enough to survive and escape or take your chances and try to kill it then and there.

 

Side Note: Anyone know why it isn't letting me quote other posts? It'll start loading like it's going to let me, but it doesn't add it.  

 

It`s ok now .

[Mockingword]

Why should it be possible to win? If party chooses to fight a creature that is significantly more powerful then there should be a party wipe. The best leader knows when to fight, when not to fight and when to withdraw. If the dragon is not attacking your party why would the party disturb it?

 

 Bioware is not stopping the party from going to those areas. Bioware is simply saying if the party goes there it should be prepared to die or flee. The player gets to test the power of the group against the unknown with no hand holding.

 

The idea is to explore the land find the areas that the party can handle. Level up and come back to the difficult area. Rather than have a bunch of trash mobs and re-pawning the same creatures have more quests in the "easier" areas that give more experience to level up the party.

"Why should it be possible to win?"

 

Because 'unwinnable' fights are a cheap cop-out method of gating content.

 

"Bioware is simply saying if the party goes there it should be prepared to die or flee."

 

Bioware has not said anything of the kind.

 

"The idea is to explore the land find the areas that the party can handle."

 

If sections of the land are deliberately barred to me, then in what sense is exploration being encouraged at all?

 

"Level up and come back to the difficult area."

 

That's exactly what I intend to do. In the first act.

 

"Rather than have a bunch of trash mobs and re-pawning the same creatures have more quests in the "easier" areas that give more experience to level up the party."

 

Fine, as long as those quests can be repeated.

 

And why shouldn't mobs re-spawn? When your band of heroes sweeps through an area, do they torch the place and salt the earth so that no one can inhabit it ever again?

[shonawarrior]

I just hope they give us appropriate exp for the amounts of fodder we kill. I remember in DA2 fighting hordes and getting nearly the same exp as the codex discoveries. Felt meaningless to grind

[Realmzmaster]

"Why should it be possible to win?"

 

Because 'unwinnable' fights are a cheap cop-out method of gating content.

 

"Bioware is simply saying if the party goes there it should be prepared to die or flee."

 

Bioware has not said anything of the kind.

 

"The idea is to explore the land find the areas that the party can handle."

 

If sections of the land are deliberately barred to me, then in what sense is exploration being encouraged at all?

 

"Level up and come back to the difficult area."

 

That's exactly what I intend to do. In the first act.

 

"Rather than have a bunch of trash mobs and re-pawning the same creatures have more quests in the "easier" areas that give more experience to level up the party."

 

Fine, as long as those quests can be repeated.

 

And why shouldn't mobs re-spawn? When your band of heroes sweeps through an area, do they torch the place and salt the earth so that no one can inhabit it ever again?

 

Trash mobs are a cheap boring way of trying to gain experience. Grinding is about as much fun as watching paint dry. Maybe the idea is not to defeat or attack the high dragon in the first act but to sneak past it, go around it and not disturb it. Bioware is not stopping you nor the party from going to that area.

 

One complaint with DA2 was the trash mobs.  I want quests that include tough varied enemies that deliver enough experience so that the party levels up to handle those difficult areas.

 

If gamers want a semi-open world where they can go to any area then there may be consequences to that decision. Nowhere does it say that Bioware has to make it easy for the player to level up the party by grinding.

 

Bioware has already said the enemies do not level with the party nor did Bioware say that every enemy in an area could be defeated in the same act. The party may have to wait until later in the game to take on the dragon or dragons in an area. Instead of having trash mobs for grinding I am all for more non-repeatable quests that deliver experience.

[Killdren88]

The only enemies that it makes sense for respawing are Demons and Darkspawn. Consider the Veil never runs out of demons as far as we know. And Broodmothers are always popping out new Darkspawn. While I think Bandits and such could respawn but only if done right.

[JeffZero]

One thing I want to say is that I think certain enemy types respawning in a given area (spiders, wolves, darkspawn, et al) and certain others being permanently cleared apropos to plot engagement (Red Templars, Gaspard's soldiers, particularly nasty demons, et al) would be a good method. Link resource-gathering mainly to the former of course.