53 réponses à ce sujet

[ThirteenthJester13]

The thing is, it's possible in XCOM because your soldiers are just that, soldiers- random grunts completely undistinguishable from each other were it not from cosmetics and (in the expansion) voice. Sure you can headcanon a gripping backstory for them as much as you desire, but in the actual game they're completely nondescript.

 

Companions in Dragon Age have fully fleshed out backstories, personalities, skillset, appearance, voice acting, plot relevance, they are actual characters. It would take a truly ludicrous amount of ressources to have a vast number of possible companions that can replace dead ones, and this will inevitably come at the expense of the depth of each one.

 

The only RPGs I remember that had permadeath for companions are the Baldur's Gate games, Planescape: Torment and Divinity Original Sin. All of which were packed to the brim with ressurection spells which 1) weaken the game's lore by removing dramatic tension and 2) serve the exact same purpose as the knocked out mechanic in Dragon Age, just with extra annoyance and potential bugs. Seriously, my party in Original Sin has like 8 ressurection scrolls per character at this point, explain to me how this adds tension to battles. And, the characters barely even reacted to the deaths of their fellows (the thing was Jaheira leaving if her husband dies and Minsc going bersek if his witch dies).

 

Maybe you could count the Fallouts. But you know what the vast majority of people who had their party members die did? Reload. There was no way the majority of players lost Marcus or Boone to a stray critical hit and accepted it, that I can guarantee.

 

With that being said, a Dragon Age or Mass Effect side-game that uses some of XCOM's mechanics with Bioware writing could be good, but it's just not their forte. Then again, I say that, and a developper known for its large-scale RTSs (Creative Assembly) just released a great horror game (Alien: Isolation) so what do I know.

I keep hearing of this Divinity Original SIn. I have about 40 bucks on Playstation Points, and 50 gamestop credit plus a few games id ebe willing to trade in. seriously i got 12 ps4 games and 33 xbox 360 games (50 counting the ones online.) Anyways maybe you could PM me a quick one to two paragraph synopsis of story and gameplay (including whether or not you can dodge, and what you can do in terms of character "navigation" lke dodge roll, jump, vault, etc.) Thanks. I could watch some video on youtube but when i do that I tend to see either something really good or really bad and having it turn out to be something completely different oce im playing it. (Thief, Destiny, Bound by Flame although that game grew on me and i enjoyed its combat mechanics plus the customizing of weaposn and armor was better than DAI but lacked content.)

[shama]

Also would be tight to have melee characters "STAND FAST" like in Braveheart when the English are charging  the Scots hold and unleash their trap, but in DA it be cool to decide to meet the charging enemy or let them come to you and then have your mage and rogue jump out of the woodwork unleashing death and chaos as you dive out of the way (friendly fire should only apply to arrows and magic. Its to hard to keep warriors from hitting eachother especially wth greatswords. But they should still give the other warrior space maybe even a penalty for being to close to each other.

 

You used to be able to do that: in DA:O the stay/follow was a toggle and you could do exactly that thing. If there was a strategic position, such as a pinch-point, I'd often put the entire team on STAY and move a rogue to behind that point - maybe lay a trap too. Then my melee characters would switch to their secondary weapons (you remember that concept? Sigh), and we'd open up with ranged death on the enemies forcing their melee characters to come to me. Once they'd closed the distance then bam, back to free move and engage at will. Rogue stabby stabby back-stab. 

 

Now we don't have the ability to have warriors carry bows, or even have characters easily stay where they're told to.

[shama]

I keep hearing of this Divinity Original SIn.

...

maybe you could PM me a quick one to two paragraph synopsis of story and gameplay (including whether or not you can dodge, and what you can do in terms of character "navigation" lke dodge roll, jump, vault, etc.)

 

I don't think it's the game you're looking for, unless by "dodge" you include skill roll RPG dodging. IMHO those game-play elements you mentioned are not RPG elements, they are action game mechanics.

 

Oh, and rather than asking for a PM you could probably (easily) find out all that information on the interwebs.

[sim-ran]

Interesting idea, though I'm conflicted about it. The idea of loads of content that you can do at your leisure (even though it often doesn't make sense and there's much more important stuff you should doing) is very much an RPG staple. But then sometimes it's good to innovate and. Such an idea could make for a much more engaging story and meaningful decisions.

I wouldn't take it quite as far as some of the suggestions (e.g. permadeaths on regular battles). Not for Bioware. Great characters is what they do best and you can't do both.

They've certainly toyed with the idea before to, but never really seen it through. Remember this?

http://www.youtube.c...i39w?autoplay=1

It looks si f***ing epic!

[Vox Draco]

I actually hope and pray the "illusion" part in RPGs becomes greater (listen up Bethesda), and they stop trying to create a "living" breathing world. The illusion is the thing to go for. To give the playground for the player's mind to fill the world with live themselves as they play the game.

 

For me that means: Cities that seem to be alive. Not every house needs to be lootable with every cup and cake on the shelf. Not every NPC needs a name and a time-schedule. A smith should hammer away, a town-crier cry news, people should run around the market, "pretending" to buy stuff etc...The Witcher is my example here.

 

Urgency? Never with actual timers! Again, it's the illusion of urgency. DAO is my example here...the horde of Darkspawn always seems to do nothing after Orlais. To create "urgency" there should have been smaller and larger missions/cutscenes showing the horde march on, burning cities and towns, overrunning a fortress abandoned by anyone but our Warden that tries to help as Loghain does nothing etc...that would have created a sense of urgency, or at least give the illusion that the horde is vast, powerful, the situation dire and shiate hitting the fan...

 

NPC-death? No ... not with the amount of Voice-work and background-writing gone into them. and as already pointed out: Reload is a permadeaths worst enemy anyway, and I would surey reload everyone and their mother to keep everyone alive. Instead much more should be at stake for the NPCs in personal quests that could change the personalities and moods and viewpoints of NPCs according to our decisions. Much more interesting than death.

[sim-ran]

NPC-death? No ... not with the amount of Voice-work and background-writing gone into them. and as already pointed out: Reload is a permadeaths worst enemy anyway, and I would surey reload everyone and their mother to keep everyone alive. Instead much more should be at stake for the NPCs in personal quests that could change the personalities and moods and viewpoints of NPCs according to our decisions. Much more interesting than death.

Confess - who did a reload to

Spoiler

save the random NPCs in Haven?

I sure did!

[Machina Obscura]

Bioware would never make the kind of game you want OP. It just doesnt play to any of their strengths.

I would like some other company to make a game like that though.

[In Exile]

Or, you know, they could just die and you have to fill your party with "scrubs" that get basic filler after you lose the main ones or no one else at all.

I much prefer games in which I can actually lose over games where you cannot. One of the reasons I really enjoyed the Diablo series: hardcore mode. To me, it makes the story completion so much more rewarding.

The perfect DA game for me would have been:

• XCOM tactical, turn-based combat
• Diablo hardcode mode
• Bioware story

However, the target market that game type is pretty low.

So you mean they could be disposable NPCs with no personality filling combat ruled as a punishment for having one die in combat? That's an absolutely terrible feature. I mean I suppose they could make a party of NPCs none of whom matter for the story being companions and let you have a hardcore mode where they can then die, but why should it reward you with faceless mooks that lets you keep having a party for combat purposes?

[In Exile]

What about a "living story". If i spend too much time picking elfroot, people die and demons swarm Thedas. Make the wrong decisions in a fight or at the war table, pss the wrong people off, then a I loose companions or get captured, return to haven finding everyones been slaugtered. Extreme examples but that's what i meant. The narrative can be a whole bunch of similarly themed plot points or all the parts of the narrative their in the game, then having you the player try to get thru the narrative. The narrative is you and your companions struggle. Its a narrative that could end 20 hours into the game or 120 hours and by end i mean game over restart and make better decisions. Think of it like a Madden Franchise or XCOM but with narrative to Choose from OR narrative that can get increasingly darker or brighter, with a sense of urgency making you prioritize quests and War table decisions. Failure to act quickly enough or bad prioritization could lead to quests that let you save influence that cold be lost (save face').

Ever seen Momento or 21 grams. A narrative, when written well enough can be told in any order. Of course in the case of a video game we don't want the narrative to be told backwards (or maybe we do but for the sake of traditional narrative structure..) or have the scenes mixed up and a non linear order with act one scens in the end and act two scens in act 1 and yadda yadda yadda. Take that kind of structuring, create a solid narrative foundation and write a story where each scene has moving parts or multiple outcomes that connect to other scenes with multiple outcomes, only the story progress' forward in time where completing quests in a different order will actually matter while still having "crossroad" decisions that have even greater effects on the world state, A world state that, so far has ben the product of YOUR ability to make decisions, successfully complete quests in time, and prioritization. Finding a farmers wife's ring or getting the refugees supplies and weapns? Closing another rift or traveling a different direction to get the medicine for a dying refugee, closing the rift on the way back. Also Rifts should grow stronger and it would be cool if some rifts didn't grow stronger but then their would be other rifts that are only wndows or glass doors until you approach them. The demons on the other side since you because of your mark and then it breaks open.


What If i leave the hinterlands before completing a certain sidequest, then the nature of that quest should be affected based on time passed. Maybe if i don't close the rifts or put up towers, take out the Hidng Apostates and Camped Templars i might return to find the crossroads a battlefield once again only this time something may indicate to me that acertain number of refugees died and the guy needing medicine tries to kill you cuz he put his hope in your efforts and you told him youd help (You don't get a choice to say wether or not you will help). Or if you dilly dally to much while in the hinterlands, the more days that pass the more refugees starve or perhaps even die from infection or disease. FIRST THINGS FIRST. Its should be up to you to prioritize these quests (also with the option to sometimes send forces of your own out to complete and assignment risking a loss of soldiers)

These would grow the longer you let then fester spitting out dtonger class demons or just spitting the same class out in larger numbers literally spreading across the wilderness. What if you were at the blacksmith and an inquisition officer runs up to you with a report saying that you've lost ground in the hinterlands, meanng campsites have been over run (why can we upgrade these camp sites much like we built watch towers around the farm.Maybe it would costpower and money plus resource but you could have campsite that upgrades to Upgraded Camp, to Outpost, to upgraded outpost and finally a small fort. Maybe if two camps are close enough you could upgrade them into a major fort, with trenches, those tree log fences and even a gate.

With unlimited freedom added to everything above, with enough influence and friends in your inner circle perhaps you could decide to sack Val Royeau now that the Templars no longer protect it or raid villages for supplies and force recruiting. Of course your companion would have to be different morally. Right now every companion seems like they are morally positive or atleast people who wouldn't approve of an Inquisition that takes advantage of its power. Leliana, however seems to be vindictive while Cullen the more "do what must be done" type, but everyone else seem to be the good guys with now characters in he darker gray area. Not even Varric or Sera.

Quests shouldn't merely be TO DO LISTS no matter how interesting or varied they are. I find myself doing some of them just for the exp, influence and power even thugh i have 70 power right now and am wondering if ill need much more to beat the game.

So basically the game should have a timer and a lot of exclusive content?

[outlaw1109]

Bioware would never make the kind of game you want OP. It just doesnt play to any of their strengths.

I would like some other company to make a game like that though.

I didn't make it through the entire OP, BUT.  I will say that it was something that rolled through my head as I played XCOM.  (Hey, this might be cool as an RPG).
Sure, the soldiers were shallow, but I felt closer to them than I did the followers of skyrim (I would reload if they killed certain people I had grown attached to).

Does traveling with companions make a huge world of difference?  TBH, IDK, because in DAI there is a bug in the banter (that I experience early in each playthrough) and, honestly, I could really care less if it's Vivienne or rando-mage person.  I like having my companions in Skyhold, but in the field it doesn't matter often enough for me to pay attention to what they're saying.

If they could make more characters like advisors (Cullen, Josy) and have companions replaced by soldiers or mercenaries, I don't think it'd be very different.

...IDK though...just my opinion...no need to go spreading it around...

Edit:  I will say, though, that I seem to prefer turn-based combat in RPG's over that of what we have with DA.  I just started playing D:OS and it's terribly frustrating, but for some reason, I can't stop reloading to try again...

 

[In Exile]

I didn't make it through the entire OP, BUT. I will say that it was something that rolled through my head as I played XCOM. (Hey, this might be cool as an RPG).
Sure, the soldiers were shallow, but I felt closer to them than I did the followers of skyrim (I would reload if they killed certain people I had grown attached to).

Does traveling with companions make a huge world of difference? TBH, IDK, because in DAI there is a bug in the banter (that I experience early in each playthrough) and, honestly, I could really care less if it's Vivienne or rando-mage person. I like having my companions in Skyhold, but in the field it doesn't matter often enough for me to pay attention to what they're saying.
If they could make more characters like advisors (Cullen, Josy) and have companions replaced by soldiers or mercenaries, I don't think it'd be very different.

...IDK though...just my opinion...no need to go spreading it around...

Edit: I will say, though, that I seem to prefer turn-based combat in RPG's over that of what we have with DA. I just started playing D:OS and it's terribly frustrating, but for some reason, I can't stop reloading to try again...

The only reason I cared about the XCOM mooks is how much equipment and XP I lost. If I got a fresh mook that didn't hit me in the wallet their existence would have been irrelevant.

So I suppose DA could do it that way, but IMO then it would just encourage power gaming solo builds + superfluous mooks that take up space.

[Realmzmaster]

No one remembers in Baldur's Gate 1 when the party accidentally or on purpose killed an npc who was still needed for the story Biff the Understudy would come in and deliver the lines.  He would have to join the party in some instances.

 

BG1 could get away with permadeath because there were resurrection spells. Game over only occurred if the main protagonist died. The other point about BG1 is that it had far more potential companions. Many of those companions had very shallow stories and very little to say. In fact there were no personal quests and not a great deal of interaction with the protagonist outside the party. It was better than Wizardry and other early crpgs in that regard, but then in those crpgs you headcanoned everything and basically the story was to defeat the big bad.

 

The other point with permadeath of a character who is basically a mindless mook is that they become cannon fodder in the battle. There basically is no attachment to the party members outside of the protagonist..

[Dio Demon]

Confess - who did a reload to

Spoiler

save the random NPCs in Haven?

I sure did!

I only did it when the inn bug screwed me over... >.> I PICKED HER UP GODDAMNIT DON'T KILL HER!!!

[Zu Long]

I'd like to see a modern day expanded/story driven take on the old SNES Romance of the Three Kingdom games. You have a number of unique followers who can die, but on the plus side you have to screw up pretty badly for that to happen, as they are quite tough, and the whole thing takes place within the overworld map. You have ":kingdom points" which you use to bolster your forces, train your army, etc, and personal points, which you use to train YOU, do quests in the area you're in, etc. You give orders to minions/companions who have their own actions they can take depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Everything takes time and if you waste too much of it, you can easily lose the game, or even die of old age.

 

It's all pretty high level and strategic though. I don't imagine you'd get much of the action crowd involved in games like that. Dynasty Warriors has tried a few times with the Empires games, but they've always dumbed down the strategy to much in favor of action for my taste. I'd love to see someone try to do this with an expanded storyline, where in addition to strategy gameplay there's an active storyline going on. At the end of the day, what you completed, how fast you took control of key areas, how you chose to rule would all impact the storyline and the end result you got. And there would be time for a little melee action too.

[outlaw1109]

The only reason I cared about the XCOM mooks is how much equipment and XP I lost. If I got a fresh mook that didn't hit me in the wallet their existence would have been irrelevant.

So I suppose DA could do it that way, but IMO then it would just encourage power gaming solo builds + superfluous mooks that take up space.

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about removing "companions".  Just changing their purpose.  Instead of following you around like children, for example, Varric stays at skyhold and you can send him off (like cullen) to do war table missions.  While Quizy roams around Thedas with Inquisition soldiers that can be killed.  

IN THIS game, it would, IMO, make me feel like I'm less of a figure head and more of an actual leader.  

Also, I have no expectations that this would actually occur, just a working theory.

[In Exile]

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about removing "companions". Just changing their purpose. Instead of following you around like children, for example, Varric stays at skyhold and you can send him off (like cullen) to do war table missions. While Quizy roams around Thedas with Inquisition soldiers that can be killed.

IN THIS game, it would, IMO, make me feel like I'm less of a figure head and more of an actual leader.

Also, I have no expectations that this would actually occur, just a working theory.

What I'm saying though is that the attachment you experienced in XCOM is because the characters dying is costly - you have to restart from lv. 1 and you lose all your loot. In a hypothetical DA game that just leaves you with a bunch of mooks who you'd either babysit or just abandon and create solo builds.

[outlaw1109]

What I'm saying though is that the attachment you experienced in XCOM is because the characters dying is costly - you have to restart from lv. 1 and you lose all your loot. In a hypothetical DA game that just leaves you with a bunch of mooks who you'd either babysit or just abandon and create solo builds.

Is that what happened in NWN?  I wasn't really around the forums much back then, but I feel like the mercenaries you could pick up made it basically have disconnected companions...

Anyway...sometimes I forget this is a party-based RPG.  

[AlanC9]

In the NWN OC neither the PC nor any hired merc could be killed until the endgame. Before that when you reach 0 HP you just get teleported back to a temple, get healed, and can then teleport back. I don't quite recall how SoU handled things, and by the time you got to HotU resurrection was cheap.

[Natureguy85]

What I'm saying though is that the attachment you experienced in XCOM is because the characters dying is costly - you have to restart from lv. 1 and you lose all your loot. In a hypothetical DA game that just leaves you with a bunch of mooks who you'd either babysit or just abandon and create solo builds.

 

I actually got into the game and cared about my soldiers if they'd been with me for awhile being badasses. However, you are still right because that was something I did as the player rather than something the game did.

[In Exile]

I actually got into the game and cared about my soldiers if they'd been with me for awhile being badasses. However, you are still right because that was something I did as the player rather than something the game did.

Fair enough. To me they were just measured in what they cost me to replace. I was way more likely to yell "No, not plasma sniper rifle!!" than I was "No, not ... Crusher...?"

[Natureguy85]

Fair enough. To me they were just measured in what they cost me to replace. I was way more likely to yell "No, not plasma sniper rifle!!" than I was "No, not ... Crusher...?"

 

Oh yeah that still happened to me too

Like I said, any extra connection was formed by me, not the game. it probably helped that I named the soldiers after myself and friends!

[In Exile]

Oh yeah that still happened to me too
Like I said, any extra connection was formed by me, not the game. it probably helped that I named the soldiers after myself and friends!

That's not a bad idea. I'll try that (except the naming it after me - then I'll just play favourites ).

[Natureguy85]

That's not a bad idea. I'll try that (except the naming it after me - then I'll just play favourites ).

 

Hey, John Kerry got medals by writing his own after action reports. Why can't "you" do the same?

[outlaw1109]

In the NWN OC neither the PC nor any hired merc could be killed until the endgame. Before that when you reach 0 HP you just get teleported back to a temple, get healed, and can then teleport back. I don't quite recall how SoU handled things, and by the time you got to HotU resurrection was cheap.

Yeah, but the only reason I brought up NWN though was because the companions were not significant and it was still a widely popular game...