This is a big change from how DA:O (and NWN) handled NPC equipment, isn't it? Is this a Frostbite thing?
Even assuming the loot waits for you indefinitely, making repeated trips of that sort would be tedious. I think that alone would dissuade me from bothering.If you've got the ability to return to the area, you have the means to collect it all.
Yes. Imagine you're a guard, on patrol. You're wearing a swordbelt, with a sheathed sword hanging from it. If a thief then took that sword and scabbard off your belt, I think you'd be likely to notice the change in weight off the side of your belt.Would you consider a sheathed weapon still equipped?
It's up to the player to decide which bits are important.Games should behave more like stories and not allow irrelevant details to bog down the important bits.
That's unfortunate. Here's why:No, I think "random Guard enemy" just has set armor and attack stats, like a wild nug would. They told natural armor (like a dragon's scales) under the same concept as "this guard would typically have X armor equipped."
This would also allow attacks against armour, including magical attacks. Some non-combat spells might now gain combat utility.What could be cool is an armor damage system, whereby it would be quite likely that he course of fighting (and especially the "killing" blow) would do huge harm to the armor or weapons. In fact, you could take this one step further and have it also apply to PC and companions, whereby falling in combat could do seriously, irreparable damage to their equipment. That way, you'd likely have mostly salvageable bits of broken armor/weapons, with very few truly intact pieces left to loot. That would be a better abstraction than it randomly being flagged.
It's up to the player to decide which bits are important.
That's impossible. Firstly because the developers can't include everyone of the infinity of little details that make up real life. They have to make choices. It's good that they make choices, because those choices are why games are worth playing, and books worth reading - because the authors pan through the miscellany to select something worthwhile.
Secondly, including a detail, one of the scant few that makes the cut, tends to make itself important even if it's utterly tedious to the player. Unless everything is a wholly discreet, it all tangles together. The loot system is part of the money system which is part of the equipment system which is part of the combat, which is hopefully part of the story.
That's no reason to keep nonsensical loot. You could limit carrying capacity, limit vendor availability, limit vendor demand for loot, add competition for loot.Secondly, including a detail, one of the scant few that makes the cut, tends to make itself important even if it's utterly tedious to the player. Unless everything is a wholly discreet, it all tangles together. The loot system is part of the money system which is part of the equipment system which is part of the combat, which is hopefully part of the story.
That's no reason to keep nonsensical loot. You could limit carrying capacity, limit vendor availability, limit vendor demand for loot, add competition for loot.
I'm not arguing for nonsensical loot. I'm arguing against useless loot. And pointless and tedious little subsystems being added just to waste people's time.
That's no reason to keep nonsensical loot. You could limit carrying capacity, limit vendor availability, limit vendor demand for loot, add competition for loot.
I wrote a post a while back on why 'realistic' prices in video games are a really terrible idea and why.
Basically, it boils down to the idea that very expensive items in games, such as property, need to affordable within a span of dozens of hours, not decades as is the case in real life. Which inherently means the player is able to earn relative income very, very quickly. Which in turn inherently means reletively petty items, such as food and weapons, need to be priced far above any 'realistic' price to avoid becoming essentially free and thus make the whole mechanic pointless.
And thus we have claw machine games that cost 500 bucks to play. As it should be.
I am all for sensible loot. Animals should drop crafting items, gold, gems, jewelry and other small items depending on the size of the animal. If the animal is capable of shallowing a humanoid whole then I could see full suits of armor and weapons. The condition of the item recovered could vary.
If the item is in bad shape it does not function as well. Armor that is in bad shape does not protect as well. Weapons in degraded condition do less damage and are prone to break.
Armor that is taken off of a enemy should be in degraded condition depending on how long it took to defeat the enemy. If the protagonist or companion can do a stealth kill or quick kill then armor and weapons should be relatively intact
I want all weapons and armor to degrade with use unless maintenance repairs are done.
I don't think there's going to be a lack of demand for military equipment given what's going on in the world. And even if the local demand is limited, they can sell it on, unless it's a siege situation.
But why are we worrying about supply and demand in a Dark Heroic Fantasy Adventure? What are we adding to the experience here?
Eh. Who says the player has to buy property? The adventurer is only looking to buy weapons, armor and supplies.I wrote a post a while back on why 'realistic' prices in video games are a really terrible idea and why.
Basically, it boils down to the idea that very expensive items in games, such as property, need to affordable within a span of dozens of hours, not decades as is the case in real life. Which inherently means the player is able to earn relative income very, very quickly. Which in turn inherently means reletively petty items, such as food and weapons, need to be priced far above any 'realistic' price to avoid becoming essentially free and thus make the whole mechanic pointless.
And thus we have claw machine games that cost 500 bucks to play. As it should be.
I don't think there's going to be a lack of demand for military equipment given what's going on in the world. And even if the local demand is limited, they can sell it on, unless it's a siege situation.
But why are we worrying about supply and demand in a Dark Heroic Fantasy Adventure? What are we adding to the experience here?
What are we adding by encouraging the player to pick up every worthless scrap they come across to barter off to merchants with bottomless pockets and nonsensical demand?
Also, bartering is a great system. Mr. Merchant may not have 1,000 gold pieces to give to you for your 500 leather gloves you found, but they might be willing to give you 200 gold and the nicest piece of leather armor in the game.
Why are we including these worthless scraps in the first place?
As for the other, I'd rather just buy the armour, thank you.
Why are we including these worthless scraps in the first place?
As for the other, I'd rather just buy the armour, thank you.
Having everything drop coins, rather than the things they visibly have, is nonsensical.I'm not arguing for nonsensical loot. I'm arguing against useless loot. And pointless and tedious little subsystems being added just to waste people's time.
Authenticity.But why are we worrying about supply and demand in a Dark Heroic Fantasy Adventure? What are we adding to the experience here?
We don't need to buy property. We barely need to buy anything. Equipment can be crafted or looted. Property can be won by force of arms.I wrote a post a while back on why 'realistic' prices in video games are a really terrible idea and why.
Basically, it boils down to the idea that very expensive items in games, such as property, need to affordable within a span of dozens of hours, not decades as is the case in real life. Which inherently means the player is able to earn relative income very, very quickly. Which in turn inherently means reletively petty items, such as food and weapons, need to be priced far above any 'realistic' price to avoid becoming essentially free and thus make the whole mechanic pointless.
And thus we have claw machine games that cost 500 bucks to play. As it should be.
Eh. Who says the player has to buy property? The adventurer is only looking to buy weapons, armor and supplies.
A lower tier house in America cost under $100K in many markets. Do you have any idea how many high end guns you could buy for $100K? Enough to arm you and a group of ten companions to the teeth.
It sounds like you're kind of proving my point...if prices are 'realistic' and the player can earn enough to buy a small house in a relatively short amount of time, they can earn enough to arm and armor everyone to the nines with the highest quality hardware in a short amount of time. And that's not good.
We don't need to buy property. We barely need to buy anything. Equipment can be crafted or looted. Property can be won by force of arms.
Also, there's a common assumption in fantasy settings that there exists large stockpiles of lost wealth, just waiting to be found. So anyone could have a great pile of fold if only he could kill thay dragon.
It's usually interesting when a fantasy setting either rejects that, or tries to explain it.
It sounds like you're kind of proving my point...if prices are 'realistic' and the player can earn enough to buy a small house in a relatively short amount of time, they can earn enough to arm and armor everyone to the nines with the highest quality hardware in a short amount of time. And that's not good.
No. I mean 'short amount of time.' Generally it does not take particularly long at all to earn enough to buy a small house in games that sell property. I'm rolling in enough cash to buy the first house in Skyrim just a few hours in. And that's from looking junk weapons and armor and with a very low mercantile skill.
Does having worthless scraps make much more sense than all of the wealth of Thedas being stuffed into the bellies of dragons? Money and loot needs to come from somewhere. And only having bosses or high level enemies drop items seems just as arbitrary as finding things of small value on your everyday targets.
Well, the best solution is not to track wealth at all. Or, in the case of Inquisition, to track it at an organisational level where the scraps you find on a bunch of bandits are just a rounding error.
But failing that, do it in the way that doesn't create a drag on the game. By simply treating trade goods as equivalent to money - if you want to keep a sense of authenticity, you can drop them as items and simply allow their conversion into money when they're picked up.
I mean, it might be different if we were supposed to be in a real survival situation, where every scrap might be valuable and traders are rare. But we're not. We're the boss of an organisation with it's own keeps and army and whatnot. Scribbles can take care of selling our crap, or rather one of her junior assistants can.
And it's only a waste of time if you don't enjoy it.
Well, I don't.
No. I mean 'short amount of time.' Generally it does not take particularly long at all to earn enough to buy a small house in games that sell property. I'm rolling in enough cash to buy the first house in Skyrim just a few hours in. And that's from looking junk weapons and armor and with a very low mercantile skill.
Retour en haut