239 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

@OP:

There are different kinds of "realism". Most of the things you list come under the category of things which could be simulated but aren't. Simulating things like the need to eat (as well as to defecate, while we're at it) would come across as tedious at least to many players.

 

The things I would criticize are a different category: if a decision is made to simulate certain things (like physical combat), it should be done using rules that can reasonably be expected to apply, such as the rules of everyday physics of things falling, flying swinging in certain ways. Where they are simulated in a different way, that difference needs to be explained.

 

In other words, I'm requesting a limit on artistic license in things which are simulated. Ultimately fantastic things like dragons or magic have their own rules, and there it is only important that they follow their in-world rules, but mundane things like physical weapons should behave and be designed realistically, because it is an implicit assumption that the physics of mundane objects work the same way as in the real world. If a sword design would be inefficient in combat in the real world (and was therefore never developed), it should make for inefficient combat on Thedas and consequently not exist. This also applies to magical weapons if they're used the same way. If a magical sword looks like you'd rather hurt yourself with it than the enemy, it should only be used in a non-sword-like way. 

 

Note that real-world weaponsmiths were occasionally fond of ornamentation. See some 17th century rapier designs. The point is, the ornamentation was only applied to areas where that wouldn't hurt their function. Blades were always simple.

 

Maybe an even shorter phrasing would be "Let form follow function". Just having a sharp point somewhere isn't enough to make a functional weapon.

[KaiserShep]

This is why I wish that swords in DA did not have such exaggerated aesthetics, or at least the swords that have the best stats. There's a rule-of-cool effect about them that I find unsatisfying. The swords I find the most beautiful to look at tend to be the simplest. I'd love to have something like Narcil be wielded by my Inquisitor. I have to admit, my heart sank a little in DA:O when the smith at Soldier's Peak presented the Warden with Starfang.

[ElitePinecone]

But I think that when many people talk about realism from an old-school RPG perspective, they aren't really talking about realism that tries to reconcile the existing gameplay with its own lore - they mean introducing new features and systems that make the game more like real life: eating, drinking, weight mechanics, serious injuries. 

 

The latter could be more accurately called verisimilitude, and I think it *must* bend pretty easily lest the game become unimaginably boring, horrific, or difficult. This is a commercial game, made for fun and adventure, not a simulation of medieval fantasy combat or whatever.

 

Like, asking for an eating mechanic is one thing - but do you also want characters going to the toilet? Should wounds actually be as horrific and debilitating as they are in real life, so that there's absolutely no way a single person could fight thousands of darkspawn? Why should players have to spend eight hours walking across a desert because someone wanted the game to simulate real distances? If companions could actually die at the drop of the hat, doesn't that make the thousands of hours of work on their dialogue, quests, player interactions, etc a waste of time?

 

The designers constantly have to ask themselves whether that verisimilitude will hurt the fun, and I think that it often does. 

[Rawgrim]

But I think that when many people talk about realism from an old-school RPG perspective, they aren't really talking about realism that tries to reconcile the existing gameplay with its own lore - they mean introducing new features and systems that make the game more like real life: eating, drinking, weight mechanics, serious injuries. 

 

The latter could be more accurately called verisimilitude, and I think it *must* bend pretty easily lest the game become unimaginably boring, horrific, or difficult. This is a commercial game, made for fun and adventure, not a simulation of medieval fantasy combat or whatever.

 

Like, asking for an eating mechanic is one thing - but do you also want characters going to the toilet? Should wounds actually be as horrific and debilitating as they are in real life, so that there's absolutely no way a single person could fight thousands of darkspawn? Why should players have to spend eight hours walking across a desert because someone wanted the game to simulate real distances? If companions could actually die at the drop of the hat, doesn't that make the thousands of hours of work on their dialogue, quests, player interactions, etc a waste of time?

 

The designers constantly have to ask themselves whether that verisimilitude will hurt the fun, and I think that it often does. 

Nobody are asking for a food\toilet feature. Injuries would be a nice feature, sure. Alot of the most popular rpgs of all time have injuries (severe ones too) as part of the game. Those games were still extremely popular, and not particulary harder than newer games. It adds an option for the player to actually plan an adventure or quest. You are going to the Dungeon of Doom. A place where nobody has ever returned, and at night people see undead roaming about near the enterance. Buying torches, stuff to fend off the undead, and whatever else would be wise to bring along to that place, no? It is little things like that that adds to the overal feeling. Pretty much every rpg out there has a weight feature too. Even the newer ones. Skyrim has it, I belive. Kotor, Dragon Age and Mass Effect don`t. The elder scrolls, the ultima series, might and magic, neverwinter, icewind dale, baldur`s Gate, Planescape Torment. Alot of these have a food system implemented as well. Didn`t hurt them.

 

Companions die in pretty much every rpg out there too, if you don`t equip them or manage them properly. People shouldn`t be immune to death just because they have something to say.

 

I see your point, though. By all means. But I think you are taking the level of realism requests abit far.

[Gwydden]

Nobody are asking for a food\toilet feature. Injuries would be a nice feature, sure. Alot of the most popular rpgs of all time have injuries (severe ones too) as part of the game. Those games were still extremely popular, and not particulary harder than newer games. It adds an option for the player to actually plan an adventure or quest. You are going to the Dungeon of Doom. A place where nobody has ever returned, and at night people see undead roaming about near the enterance. Buying torches, stuff to fend off the undead, and whatever else would be wise to bring along to that place, no? It is little things like that that adds to the overal feeling. Pretty much every rpg out there has a weight feature too. Even the newer ones. Skyrim has it, I belive. Kotor, Dragon Age and Mass Effect don`t. The elder scrolls, the ultima series, might and magic, neverwinter, icewind dale, baldur`s Gate, Planescape Torment. Alot of these have a food system implemented as well. Didn`t hurt them.

 

Companions die in pretty much every rpg out there too, if you don`t equip them or manage them properly. People shouldn`t be immune to death just because they have something to say.

 

I see your point, though. By all means. But I think you are taking the level of realism requests abit far.

I'm all for your other suggestions, but that seems extremely impractical from a storytelling standpoint. Having a companion die in some random battle would be very anticlimactic.

[Ieldra]

This is why I wish that swords in DA did not have such exaggerated aesthetics, or at least the swords that have the best stats. There's a rule-of-cool effect about them that I find unsatisfying. The swords I find the most beautiful to look at tend to be the simplest. I'd love to have something like Narcil be wielded by my Inquisitor. I have to admit, my heart sank a little in DA:O when the smith at Soldier's Peak presented the Warden with Starfang.

Apparently, people simply don't appreciate the elegance of simplicity. The artists who made DA2's weapons seem like the people who would prefer the house of a Russian media mogul to a Shinto shrine for aesthetic appeal. Completely incomprehensible.

[ElitePinecone]

 

Companions die in pretty much every rpg out there too, if you don`t equip them or manage them properly. People shouldn`t be immune to death just because they have something to say.

 

 

But practically nobody invests in companions as much as Bioware does. In their games, companions are immune to death in normal combat because they do have so much to say, and because in many cases they're vital to the storyline. When they build their games around character interaction, and that feature is practically the number one thing they're known for, why would they implement permanent character death just because every other RPG is doing it? That's... crazy.

 

I get your point about preparation and planning, and I'm hoping that this is something we'll see a lot more of in Inquisition. Mike already said in the PAX demo that the player has short-term and long-term goals to aim towards, and that things like taking a Keep require preparation and foresight. 

 

I'm certainly not against realism or verisimilitude by any means, but I think the designers are (correctly) more concerned with what works best for the player, what is the most fun, and what can be technically done with the tools they have - and a lot of the more extreme "realistic" features sound awfully tedious, boring or difficult.

[CybAnt1]

It's interesting. I normally just don't pay attention much to aesthetics. I've used dozens of mods, but nothing that ever modifies the appearance of things - people, weapons, spell animations, etc. 

 

I don't spend a lot of time in the character creator. Really don't care much how my char looks. After all, this is not a MP game where anybody else is going to be looking at him but me, and usually from behind. Plus it basically doesn't affect gameplay. 

 

People are different. I think this is a good thing. So we end up being bothered by different stuff. You know something odd? I swear I never noticed how bad the hands in DA2 looked until somebody mentioned it. Why? It's just not something I pay attention to. 

 

On the other hand, I was quite bothered by the dialogue wheel system, and I've said the reasons why. And I know from talking to others here this was not some kind of idiosyncratic distaste. Yet there are people here who apparently loved it -- maybe because they had already been using it in Mass Effect, or maybe just because what bothered me about it didn't bother them. (I had trouble at first getting why it didn't bother them, but then maybe they want some kind of passive "cinematic experience" I don't want.)

[Xilizhra]

Companions don't die in combat in DA, they just get knocked out and badly wounded.

[Rawgrim]

But practically nobody invests in companions as much as Bioware does. In their games, companions are immune to death in normal combat because they do have so much to say, and because in many cases they're vital to the storyline. When they build their games around character interaction, and that feature is practically the number one thing they're known for, why would they implement permanent character death just because every other RPG is doing it? That's... crazy.

 

I get your point about preparation and planning, and I'm hoping that this is something we'll see a lot more of in Inquisition. Mike already said in the PAX demo that the player has short-term and long-term goals to aim towards, and that things like taking a Keep require preparation and foresight. 

 

I'm certainly not against realism or verisimilitude by any means, but I think the designers are (correctly) more concerned with what works best for the player, what is the most fun, and what can be technically done with the tools they have - and a lot of the more extreme "realistic" features sound awfully tedious, boring or difficult.

 

 

I think it has to do with the Dragon Age, Mass Effect, and the Kotor series not having a ressurection spell and things like that. That is why companions can`t die in combat. This is probably the best way to do it, given the lack of "raise dead". Still. Adding a severe injury to people who get knocked out would be ok. DA:O had this, and it made injury kits important. I think DA2 had it too? But the injuries were alot less punishing. And I agree with you 100 percent that Bioware do invest alot more in their companions than other games do. Then again they did that in with the BG games too, and companions could die in those. But that brings us back to the "raie dead" feature.

 

Just for the record: I have never personaly had anything at all against how the DA games does this. Everyone dies if everyone is knocked down, is a very good way to do it. I`still like a broken arm or something as punishment for screwing up a fight, though

 

DA:I seems to be implementing alot more planning than the previous games had. Looks great. It also seems to add alot more exploration to the game as well, so things are looking very very good.

 

 

A realism toggle would be fun, I guess. Like Fallout NewVegas did it. Optional.

[The Hierophant]

I'm all for your other suggestions, but that seems extremely impractical from a storytelling standpoint. Having a companion die in some random battle would be very anticlimactic.

You have to admit that the potential "How did your companion die?" thread would be tragically hilarious...

"Well you see, Cass was killed by a rat while we were collecting shrooms in the Gum Drop Forest of all places." - unknown poster

[CybAnt1]

A realism toggle would be fun, I guess. Like Fallout NewVegas did it. Optional.

 

However, a survivalist mechanic also makes more sense in a post-apocalyptic world, where Mad Max-style, survival is really a pressing issue. 

 

After nuclear holocaust, food and water are going to be scarce. Makes sense to have an (optional) food and water mechanic. 

 

Anyway, when it comes to many of Realmz' things, I think they might work if they were either put on optional toggles, or tied to difficulty.

 

Doing the latter might still tick some people off (who want Nightmare-level challenge but NOT permadeath), and we know the problem with toggles. So, honestly, the final possibility is mods implementing them for those who want them. But we know what's going on as far as that, too. 

[KaiserShep]

It's interesting. I normally just don't pay attention much to aesthetics. I've used dozens of mods, but nothing that ever modifies the appearance of things - people, weapons, spell animations, etc. 

 

I don't spend a lot of time in the character creator. Really don't care much how my char looks. After all, this is not a MP game where anybody else is going to be looking at him but me, and usually from behind. Plus it basically doesn't affect gameplay. 

 

People are different. I think this is a good thing. So we end up being bothered by different stuff. You know something odd? I swear I never noticed how bad the hands in DA2 looked until somebody mentioned it. Why? It's just not something I pay attention to. 

 

I will admit that I am extremely hung up on aesthetic design, in just about everything from video games to movies. I find visual details to be such a huge part of what makes a fictional world interesting, and has some impact on how we perceive objects being used by the characters. Take the swords, for example. The daggers of Dragon Age have been some of the most problematic looking weapons to me, mainly because they all have little points and ends that look like they would be total murder for a person to use. One of the best daggers in Dragon Age 2, Finesse, looks like it would shred your fingers should you try to wield it quickly. Let's not forget the age old complaint of DA not having sheaths for their weapons.

 

As for the hands, that was something neither DA:O or DA2 got quite right. In Origins, they looked like disproportionately large doll hands that seemed to have no dexterity at all.

[Realmzmaster]

Companions don't die in combat in DA, they just get knocked out and badly wounded.

 

That have no real effect once the injury kit is applied. The injury kit heals the injury no matter what its severity. What enemy do you know is going to leave an opponent breathing if the enemy is unconscious? Primary combat lesson in the words of Mortal Combat: Finish Him!

[Xilizhra]

That have no real effect once the injury kit is applied. The injury kit heals the injury no matter what its severity. What enemy do you know is going to leave an opponent breathing if the enemy is unconscious? Primary combat lesson in the words of Mortal Combat: Finish Him!

The injury kit is probably magical; I can't see why it would be less magical than the potions (and it seems to be drunk like one in DA2). As for why they're not finished off... well, the enemy is likely being attacked at that moment by a standing foe.

[Realmzmaster]

@OP:

There are different kinds of "realism". Most of the things you list come under the category of things which could be simulated but aren't. Simulating things like the need to eat (as well as to defecate, while we're at it) would come across as tedious at least to many players.

 

The things I would criticize are a different category: if a decision is made to simulate certain things (like physical combat), it should be done using rules that can reasonably be expected to apply, such as the rules of everyday physics of things falling, flying swinging in certain ways. Where they are simulated in a different way, that difference needs to be explained.

 

In other words, I'm requesting a limit on artistic license in things which are simulated. Ultimately fantastic things like dragons or magic have their own rules, and there it is only important that they follow their in-world rules, but mundane things like physical weapons should behave and be designed realistically, because it is an implicit assumption that the physics of mundane objects work the same way as in the real world. If a sword design would be inefficient in combat in the real world (and was therefore never developed), it should make for inefficient combat on Thedas and consequently not exist. This also applies to magical weapons if they're used the same way. If a magical sword looks like you'd rather hurt yourself with it than the enemy, it should only be used in a non-sword-like way. 

 

Note that real-world weaponsmiths were occasionally fond of ornamentation. See some 17th century rapier designs. The point is, the ornamentation was only applied to areas where that wouldn't hurt their function. Blades were always simple.

 

Maybe an even shorter phrasing would be "Let form follow function". Just having a sharp point somewhere isn't enough to make a functional weapon.

 

I assume that if a person is using an exotic weapon or as you put it a weapon that looks like it would hurt the wielder that the person trains with that weapon to master it. 

[Realmzmaster]

The injury kit is probably magical; I can't see why it would be less magical than the potions (and it seems to be drunk like one in DA2). As for why they're not finished off... well, the enemy is likely being attacked at that moment by a standing foe.

Which explains why the unconscious body can survive a fireball thrown in the same area? The more likely explanation is that plot armor came and save the companion.

[CybAnt1]

Let's not forget the age old complaint of DA not having sheaths for their weapons.

 

 

Yeah. The other big issue is that besides having different tastes/likes, and different things that do - or don't - bother us, we have different priorities.

 

Like if you asked me, should Dragon Age have sheaths and scabbards, I would say - sure? Why not? I can't think of a counterargument. Is there a good reason for weapons to be floating in midair an inch behind peoples' backs? Can't think of any. Same thing for bowstrings, too. 

 

But then if we get down into the nitty gritty of what I'd want them to do first, it would be something gameplay related (jumping/flying/swimming, adding a fourth class, changing dialogue or combat mechanics), before I'd have them focus on something aesthetic like scabbards and sheaths. 

 

I also would recognize some people would prioritize that over the things I would want prioritized, too. I just wouldn't. 

[Realmzmaster]

I will admit that I am extremely hung up on aesthetic design, in just about everything from video games to movies. I find visual details to be such a huge part of what makes a fictional world interesting, and has some impact on how we perceive objects being used by the characters. Take the swords, for example. The daggers of Dragon Age have been some of the most problematic looking weapons to me, mainly because they all have little points and ends that look like they would be total murder for a person to use. One of the best daggers in Dragon Age 2, Finesse, looks like it would shred your fingers should you try to wield it quickly. Let's not forget the age old complaint of DA not having sheaths for their weapons.

 

As for the hands, that was something neither DA:O or DA2 got quite right. In Origins, they looked like disproportionately large doll hands that seemed to have no dexterity at all.

 

 

I agree with CyvAnt1 it is more about what people want and do not want to see in the game according to his/her personal tastes.

I  am not hung up on the aesthetic design.  The only consideration I have is what damage the weapon does. 

 

But then I also continue to play the original Wizardry and NetHack which consists of Black and white line drawings or ASCII graphics. It is the depth and gameplay that draws me in, not the graphics.

 

If it came down to refining the graphics or adding more quests I want the latter.

[CybAnt1]

Which explains why the unconscious body can survive a fireball thrown in the same area? The more likely explanation is that plot armor came and save the companion.

 

Like AC9 talked about, they used to do it explicitly. Imoen is actually wearing an invisible belt (that you can't see) at the beginning of BG2 that prevents her from dying (locked to her char). I mean, literally. It has the effect of making her unable to die. Whenever she hits 0 HP or lower, her HP goes to 1 and remains frozen there. That's, of course, because of plot. That's literal plot armor. 

[Xilizhra]

Which explains why the unconscious body can survive a fireball thrown in the same area? The more likely explanation is that plot armor came and save the companion.

AOE effects don't target the fallen, which is why you can't burn dead or unconscious enemy bodies with fireballs either.

 

If anything in this game is unrealistic and bugs me to death, it's the inventory system. I would very much like it if the number of items in the game was considerably streamlined, because there's no possible way you can be carrying all of that around. This is why I enjoyed the ME2 and 3 take on it.

[CybAnt1]

I personally prefer games with inventory where everything has a use. Like, either:

 

a) it's treasure - like gems - that can be sold for gold. (Now the DA games call that stuff "Junk," other games call it "vendor trash"... but valuable gems & jewelry are not Junk.  )

b.) it's a companion gift. 

c) it's weapons or armor. 

d) crafting materials (and products)

e) potions

f) ammo (if ammo exists)

g) runes

h) it's a usable magic item. Now see, here's the rub. DA doesn't have a lot of usable items - I mean, other than, you wear them and they have properties. 

i) plot items (like a key to open a door. Etc.) 

 

A lot of other games have items you can really use. Like, again, taking D & D - scrolls you can read for protection, rods/staves/wands that can heal people, turn them to stone, or turn a spell on its caster, artifacts like orbs or bardic musical instruments that create effects, drums of stunning, etc. 

 

DA lacks any kind of items for use, other than potions (OK also: poisons and grenades/bombs, mostly for rogues). I know it's supposed to be a low-magic setting, but still, Enchantment obviously exists, and thus magic can be imbued in items, I'd love to see magic items with usable properties (more). 

 

At the end of the day, it's like any other CRPG, a lot of loot you're ultimately picking up to sell for gold, and with a limited inventory, you just can't both pick up everything you want and carry everything you need. The simplest way to create an inventory limit is to have an inventory limit  : the party can only carry 70 items, and no more (until you find more backpacks). And that's how DA does it. Of course, yes, it does not take weight or bulk/size into account, and lets you carry a nearly infinite amount of gold. Plus, now, at least, some runes stack, so 5 fire protection runes are still 1 item.

[Rawgrim]

AOE effects don't target the fallen, which is why you can't burn dead or unconscious enemy bodies with fireballs either.

 

If anything in this game is unrealistic and bugs me to death, it's the inventory system. I would very much like it if the number of items in the game was considerably streamlined, because there's no possible way you can be carrying all of that around. This is why I enjoyed the ME2 and 3 take on it.

 

 

All fallen enemies ae dead, though. The companions arn`t dead.

 

The inventory system is very broken, really. I noticed in DA:O, when the warden gets captured. You can send 2 companions in to free him\her ann all that. Those two can use stuff the warden found just before getting captured...Makes NO sense.

[Realmzmaster]

AOE effects don't target the fallen, which is why you can't burn dead or unconscious enemy bodies with fireballs either.

 

If anything in this game is unrealistic and bugs me to death, it's the inventory system. I would very much like it if the number of items in the game was considerably streamlined, because there's no possible way you can be carrying all of that around. This is why I enjoyed the ME2 and 3 take on it.

 

AOE targets an area which means that anything in that area is affected. Sorry the body burns. I suggested a combination of weight and grid restrictions to handle the inventory problem. 

[CybAnt1]

Having a party-wide inventory will obviously run into logical problems once you introduce game situations that split the party.