1. Immersive story that has a lot of really meaningful, really hard choices. 2. Companions who are all incredibly unique, or unique in their mundane aspects. 3. One-up Planescape Torment. See if you can do it.
Also I'd like to see more dark quests, like the skinner murderer in BG2.
1. Immersive story that has a lot of really meaningful, really hard choices. 2. Companions who are all incredibly unique, or unique in their mundane aspects. 3. One-up Planescape Torment. See if you can do it.
Also I'd like to see more dark quests, like the skinner murderer in BG2.
I wouldn't actually impose that wish on any developer until I see how Numenera performs^^
Besides I think creating a game like Torment, generally requires them to focus all the effort on those aspects. Combat will then go on the backburner and I guess everyone won't like that.
Make the stronghold a central part of the game. The player should spend tens of hours there after the stronghold has been finished. It should feel like a home for the PC, not just a construction kit with a bunch of quests.
Let the player fail. Let the outcomes of some major quests depend both on player choices and on random factors that were determined when you started the game. Maybe the army you raised in DA:O wasn't strong enough to reach Denerim this time, and the entire Ferelden is lost to the Blight. You can still ambush the Archdemon later, knowing that there will be no survivors even if you win. Or maybe the future ruler of Ferelden or Alistair/Morrigan/Loghain dies in the final sequence, forcing you to reconsider who will kill the Archdemon.
Avoid overcomplicated companion quests. The traditional RPG party is a bunch of outcasts who band together to survive. Their pasts may catch up with them once in a while, but most of the time they're not trying to advance their own agendas completely irrelevant to everyone else.
Let outcome of actions depend on the character skills not on the player's. If a character hits or misses should depend on his/her combat skills not my ability to hit buttons. The same goes for skills and spells.
Make the stronghold a central part of the game. The player should spend tens of hours there after the stronghold has been finished. It should feel like a home for the PC, not just a construction kit with a bunch of quests.
Let the player fail. Let the outcomes of some major quests depend both on player choices and on random factors that were determined when you started the game. Maybe the army you raised in DA:O wasn't strong enough to reach Denerim this time, and the entire Ferelden is lost to the Blight. You can still ambush the Archdemon later, knowing that there will be no survivors even if you win. Or maybe the future ruler of Ferelden or Alistair/Morrigan/Loghain dies in the final sequence, forcing you to reconsider who will kill the Archdemon.
Avoid overcomplicated companion quests. The traditional RPG party is a bunch of outcasts who band together to survive. Their pasts may catch up with them once in a while, but most of the time they're not trying to advance their own agendas completely irrelevant to everyone else.
I very much disagree with 1. And 3. Strongholds are something I would prefer not to feature at all, if I wanted to play a managment sim I would buy one. And I would prefer companions to be as involved and complex as possible.
1. Dungeons 2. Dragons 3. The presence of 2 within 1.
Less snark answer
1. Strong worldbuilding. I want to be able to see how all the places I go to and people I meet fit into the world, and I want the scale of the world to feel appropriate. eg. in Dragon Age Arl Eamon is evidently politically powerful and wealthy, but Redcliffe is a tiny village no bigger than Lothering with no evident reason for it to be significant or the seat of a politically powerful individual. Redcliffe should have felt more like Amaranthine in Awakening, with some kind of obvious source of its growth and therefore its arling's political status and wealth. (Like sitting on the crux of a major trade route).
2. Strong throughline and momentum of the central conflict. In Pillars of Eternity I didn't really feel like I had beef with the villain, which is why I've petered out playing it twice when I left the city that I was quite interested in all its sideplots and went to Eir Glanfath where I wasn't. If I was still in the investigative phase (rather than knowing that he was up to no good with the precursor devices) then there would be more momentum.
3. The world should react to the player's decisions. Even if it's just having an opinion about it. If there are multiple ways to resolve a situation, and there should be, then people in the world should have opinions about which one you choose (and there should be a Fallout style epilogue that traces those outcomes into the future).
1. A multitude of realistic and diverse dialogue options (not just good/neutral/evil responses); They don't need to be voiced, and I'd rather know what my character is actually going to say. Make dialogue and your dialogue choices matter, and make the player think about what their character is going to say. Also, give players who choose peaceful solutions experience points and rewards - don't just reward killing everything and everyone.
2. Deep tactical combat challenges in a pause + play system. Don't throw the same enemies at the player over and over again. Give us unique encounters where we have to use different skills, spells and tactics to succeed (especially on higher difficulty levels). I'd rather have fewer, more memorable battles instead of lots of generic battles.
3. A detailled implementation of D&D lore without tons of obvious exposition. I know that's hard to do, but it's certainly possible.
And if a sequel is planned make sure our previous decisions matter and affect the story of the sequel... maybe even plan for decisions that seem to have no consequences in the first game and we only realize what the consequences were in the sequel(s).
I really like that @mlnevese - stuff you think that doesn't matter so much having consequences down the line makes the world feel more real and like it's evolving to the actions taken, the butterfly effect if you will...
EG I just arrive at a new village and I decide to go round and rob everything from any and all containers - including the tithe they would normally pay to the local lord. None of the villagers say anything because they are too scared, but at least I can buy my shiny new sword. YAY!
But in the sequel the same villagers are massacred by some monsters because they didn't pay the lord for the protection, I'm frozen out of some quests because those people are now dead and a vengeful cousin causes me grief because I got her family killed...
I really like that @mlnevese - stuff you think that doesn't matter so much having consequences down the line makes the world feel more real and like it's evolving to the actions taken, the butterfly effect if you will...
EG I just arrive at a new village and I decide to go round and rob everything from any and all containers - including the tithe they would normally pay to the local lord. None of the villagers say anything because they are too scared, but at least I can buy my shiny new sword. YAY!
But in the sequel the same villagers are massacred by some monsters because they didn't pay the lord for the protection, I'm frozen out of some quests because those people are now dead and a vengeful cousin causes me grief because I got her family killed...
Or when you return to that region you discover that the Baron pardoned that village (he's a Lawful Good Paladin, after all) but the villagers gave him a good description of your group and you're all wanted criminals in his land described as armed with magic and weapons and to be considered extremely dangerous. All villages in his territory, and his allies' territories as well, have your description and are instructed to call for the guard if they see any of you... Watch as your overall reputation plummets while you try to amend for that mistake
@Mr2150 I've been a DM since before AD&D was released. Being mean comes natural after all this time. Notice that you're not only a criminal but a criminal in good aligned territories some of which you haven't even visited yet
Make the stronghold a central part of the game. The player should spend tens of hours there after the stronghold has been finished. It should feel like a home for the PC, not just a construction kit with a bunch of quests.
Let the player fail. Let the outcomes of some major quests depend both on player choices and on random factors that were determined when you started the game. Maybe the army you raised in DA:O wasn't strong enough to reach Denerim this time, and the entire Ferelden is lost to the Blight. You can still ambush the Archdemon later, knowing that there will be no survivors even if you win. Or maybe the future ruler of Ferelden or Alistair/Morrigan/Loghain dies in the final sequence, forcing you to reconsider who will kill the Archdemon.
Avoid overcomplicated companion quests. The traditional RPG party is a bunch of outcasts who band together to survive. Their pasts may catch up with them once in a while, but most of the time they're not trying to advance their own agendas completely irrelevant to everyone else.
I very much agree with 1. I also want a construction kit (and decorating kit!) with a bunch of quests though, I just think the more important factor is that it be central to the game in some way so that it doesn't feel throw-away. It'd be nice if it was different depending on what class you are like in SoA but at the same time a barebones stronghold you can make class-based upgrade choices would be really cool too!
But I'm not big on 3. I really want overcomplicated companion quests, I want the companions you can't romance to have friendship quests that are at least as thorough as the romanceable companion's quests, and branching conversations over time at least as well considered and complete as the romanceable companion's conversations throughout the game.
I'm not sure if it would be possible, but a large open world game. Let's see the entirety of an area, with a few added areas. For example, I would love to see the Moonshae Isles used in a D&D game; however, the Nelanther Isles, and Tethyr are rather close to Moonshae, so to is Amn and the Sword Coast, why not add areas from those places as well? I would also love to see a game set in Nathlekh, and the Dragon Coast.
I'd like to have different origin stories, and see new classes and races that actually affect those stories. So Tieflings, sub races of elves like the Drow, maybe new sub races like half-demons/ half-Tieflings.
List of Things For the Next D&D Game:
- Lots of lore - A large new area - Quests that tie into each other, and have consequences for you and your companions.
If subraces such as tiefling or drow were to be allowed, these races should affect the reactions of common people. It really breaks immersion when a drow or genasi is seen as a normal person (ahem...NWN2... Cough cough)
If subraces such as tiefling or drow were to be allowed, these races should affect the reactions of common people. It really breaks immersion when a drow or genasi is seen as a normal person (ahem...NWN2... Cough cough)
Not just the races, but jobs and classes as well. For example swords for hire, like mercenaries and bounty hunters, should have a bad reputation. Paladins should be treated as defenders of the good, and clerics should be considered as holy, or as representatives of certain deities.
Not every comunity would be expected to like or trust paladins, those fascist enforcers of conformity. Anyway, 5th edition removes the lawful good requirement.
Clerics are as likely to cut off your hands for steeling tuppence or sacrifice you to thier dark god, as go round healing the sick and feeding the poor.
Whatever, people don't go around with a sign around their neck indicating what class they are, frequently an npc would have no way of knowing. It's much easier to conceal your class than your species.
1. Compelling story with plenty of meaningful choices. 2. Deep characters with good friendship AND romance paths. 3. Good and interesting usage of D&D lore.
Bonus points for if you avoid "cutting off the branches" as with BG2 and it's infamous "good party" beginning. I don't necessarily want to import choices from the original BG (though carryover is always nice), but not being told the REAL Charname was a Chaotic Dumb Fighter named Abdel Adrian would be appreciated.
Complexity in the setting Complexity in the story Complexity in the ruleset Complexity in the opponents Complexity in the companions Complexity in societies Complexity in the handling Complexity in my character Complexity in the visuals
Not because I like complexity, but because complexity allows to feel in control if you master the challenges and keep coming back.
Oh, and make it isometric and pseudo turn based, because all that complexity you will add need very good overview. And localize! English is a minority when compared to the rest of languages.
1. Psionics 2. Greatly expanded magic system (e.g. in depth necromancy, artifact creation, etc.) 3. Greatly expanded deity/ divine magic system with a wide variety of deities and domains.
1) I would like a game that constantly reacts to what my character is or did (race, class, choices, etc).
2) A twisted, mindblowing plot.
3) The illusion of being free to do what I want and go where I want.
4) Last, but not least, I want to be able to grow feelings for the npcs I meet. Sadness, hate, admiration, love, surprise, happiness and so on. The deeper the better. Jon Irenicus, Mordin Solus, Morrigan, Sephiroth, etc are great examples.
1) I would like a game that constantly reacts to what my character is or did (race, class, choices, etc).
To me, this is a two-edged sword ... it's cool and realistic and deep and all.
But each time i play a game that does adjust too much to my race x gender x class x alignment x ..., i'm having the feeling to miss some content, and i don't know what exactly and how much. Sooner or later i want to have seen "all of the content", and if there are too many dimensions, my impression is i'll never be able to achieve this as i can't play through (or even know) all the factors involved.
Lets say some NPC reacts and adjust to me being a female elven neutral thief, but has something else to say or have me do if i'm female dwarven neutral thief, or female elven evil thief, or male elven evil bard ... there are hunderds of combinations then thay *may* influence the game and prevent me from seeing it all. That's cool gameplay and immersion wise, but it contradicts my wish for completeness
So keeping the balance and more important the overview would be something to think about when going that route. It also depends of course if these are minor details, or influencing side quests or even the main quest.
1) I would like a game that constantly reacts to what my character is or did (race, class, choices, etc).
To me, this is a two-edged sword ... it's cool and realistic and deep and all.
But each time i play a game that does adjust too much to my race x gender x class x alignment x ..., i'm having the feeling to miss some content, and i don't know what exactly and how much. Sooner or later i want to have seen "all of the content", and if there are too many dimensions, my impression is i'll never be able to achieve this as i can't play through (or even know) all the factors involved.
Lets say some NPC reacts and adjust to me being a female elven neutral thief, but has something else to say or have me do if i'm female dwarven neutral thief, or female elven evil thief, or male elven evil bard ... there are hunderds of combinations then thay *may* influence the game and prevent me from seeing it all. That's cool gameplay and immersion wise, but it contradicts my wish for completeness
So keeping the balance and more important the overview would be something to think about when going that route. It also depends of course if these are minor details, or influencing side quests or even the main quest.
That's, imo, not how something based on Dungeons & Dragons should work. This is not just a videogame with achievements, it should be a transposition of a roleplay game with literally infinite paths of choice.
And you are absolutely right about that – this is how it should be.
Yet people tend to try to do "all quests" and get all the rewards – it's not "roleplaying the game" anymore, but it's "master the game". When i play BG which i know in and out and i have meta detailed knowledge, i'm still roleplaying, like not doing things that don't fit my alignment, but i "know" what i'm leaving out or letting go by that decision, and in BG / BG2 it's somewhat on a level where consequences are there, but not changing the game significantly. When playing PoE which i don't know well, this was one of the first things that somewhat fascinated – i realized the NPCs were adjusting to me, but the consequences were not very transparent, and i caught myself to try out different replies, different characters etc., just to test the system that may be hiding things from me i'd like to see (not because i'm greedy, but because i want to see all of a good game and be sure i've somewhen seen it all). That's meta thinking and non-immersive, but it's an urge, and from what i read here and elsewhere i'm not the only one doing that.
Just an opinion though, and i don't say things should not adjust at all – just keep it somewhat in on a level where, when one knows the game in and out, one actually can do that kind of "complete run" if he wants.
Comments
2. Companions who are all incredibly unique, or unique in their mundane aspects.
3. One-up Planescape Torment. See if you can do it.
Also I'd like to see more dark quests, like the skinner murderer in BG2.
Besides I think creating a game like Torment, generally requires them to focus all the effort on those aspects. Combat will then go on the backburner and I guess everyone won't like that.
1. Dungeons
2. Dragons
3. The presence of 2 within 1.
Less snark answer
1. Strong worldbuilding. I want to be able to see how all the places I go to and people I meet fit into the world, and I want the scale of the world to feel appropriate. eg. in Dragon Age Arl Eamon is evidently politically powerful and wealthy, but Redcliffe is a tiny village no bigger than Lothering with no evident reason for it to be significant or the seat of a politically powerful individual. Redcliffe should have felt more like Amaranthine in Awakening, with some kind of obvious source of its growth and therefore its arling's political status and wealth. (Like sitting on the crux of a major trade route).
2. Strong throughline and momentum of the central conflict. In Pillars of Eternity I didn't really feel like I had beef with the villain, which is why I've petered out playing it twice when I left the city that I was quite interested in all its sideplots and went to Eir Glanfath where I wasn't. If I was still in the investigative phase (rather than knowing that he was up to no good with the precursor devices) then there would be more momentum.
3. The world should react to the player's decisions. Even if it's just having an opinion about it. If there are multiple ways to resolve a situation, and there should be, then people in the world should have opinions about which one you choose (and there should be a Fallout style epilogue that traces those outcomes into the future).
2. Deep tactical combat challenges in a pause + play system. Don't throw the same enemies at the player over and over again. Give us unique encounters where we have to use different skills, spells and tactics to succeed (especially on higher difficulty levels). I'd rather have fewer, more memorable battles instead of lots of generic battles.
3. A detailled implementation of D&D lore without tons of obvious exposition. I know that's hard to do, but it's certainly possible.
EG I just arrive at a new village and I decide to go round and rob everything from any and all containers - including the tithe they would normally pay to the local lord. None of the villagers say anything because they are too scared, but at least I can buy my shiny new sword. YAY!
But in the sequel the same villagers are massacred by some monsters because they didn't pay the lord for the protection, I'm frozen out of some quests because those people are now dead and a vengeful cousin causes me grief because I got her family killed...
At least I just lost a few quests and had an angry relative to deal with - you made me a wanted criminal.
2. A robust, non-linear exploration element.
3. Mystery!
But I'm not big on 3. I really want overcomplicated companion quests, I want the companions you can't romance to have friendship quests that are at least as thorough as the romanceable companion's quests, and branching conversations over time at least as well considered and complete as the romanceable companion's conversations throughout the game.
2. Mystery.
3. Aimless searching.
Closely followed by...
4. Dwarf romance with full on beard on beard action.
5. Halfling foot barber.
6. A famous gastrognome selling kebabs and turnips at reasonable prices.
I'd like to have different origin stories, and see new classes and races that actually affect those stories. So Tieflings, sub races of elves like the Drow, maybe new sub races like half-demons/ half-Tieflings.
List of Things For the Next D&D Game:
- Lots of lore
- A large new area
- Quests that tie into each other, and have consequences for you and your companions.
Clerics are as likely to cut off your hands for steeling tuppence or sacrifice you to thier dark god, as go round healing the sick and feeding the poor.
Whatever, people don't go around with a sign around their neck indicating what class they are, frequently an npc would have no way of knowing. It's much easier to conceal your class than your species.
2. Deep characters with good friendship AND romance paths.
3. Good and interesting usage of D&D lore.
Bonus points for if you avoid "cutting off the branches" as with BG2 and it's infamous "good party" beginning. I don't necessarily want to import choices from the original BG (though carryover is always nice), but not being told the REAL Charname was a Chaotic Dumb Fighter named Abdel Adrian would be appreciated.
Complexity in the story
Complexity in the ruleset
Complexity in the opponents
Complexity in the companions
Complexity in societies
Complexity in the handling
Complexity in my character
Complexity in the visuals
Not because I like complexity, but because complexity allows to feel in control if you master the challenges and keep coming back.
Oh, and make it isometric and pseudo turn based, because all that complexity you will add need very good overview.
And localize! English is a minority when compared to the rest of languages.
2. Greatly expanded magic system (e.g. in depth necromancy, artifact creation, etc.)
3. Greatly expanded deity/ divine magic system with a wide variety of deities and domains.
They tend to be missing in modern rpgs
2) A twisted, mindblowing plot.
3) The illusion of being free to do what I want and go where I want.
4) Last, but not least, I want to be able to grow feelings for the npcs I meet.
Sadness, hate, admiration, love, surprise, happiness and so on. The deeper the better.
Jon Irenicus, Mordin Solus, Morrigan, Sephiroth, etc are great examples.
Best of luck
But each time i play a game that does adjust too much to my race x gender x class x alignment x ..., i'm having the feeling to miss some content, and i don't know what exactly and how much. Sooner or later i want to have seen "all of the content", and if there are too many dimensions, my impression is i'll never be able to achieve this as i can't play through (or even know) all the factors involved.
Lets say some NPC reacts and adjust to me being a female elven neutral thief, but has something else to say or have me do if i'm female dwarven neutral thief, or female elven evil thief, or male elven evil bard ... there are hunderds of combinations then thay *may* influence the game and prevent me from seeing it all.
That's cool gameplay and immersion wise, but it contradicts my wish for completeness
So keeping the balance and more important the overview would be something to think about when going that route. It also depends of course if these are minor details, or influencing side quests or even the main quest.
This is not just a videogame with achievements, it should be a transposition of a roleplay game with literally infinite paths of choice.
Yet people tend to try to do "all quests" and get all the rewards – it's not "roleplaying the game" anymore, but it's "master the game".
When i play BG which i know in and out and i have meta detailed knowledge, i'm still roleplaying, like not doing things that don't fit my alignment, but i "know" what i'm leaving out or letting go by that decision, and in BG / BG2 it's somewhat on a level where consequences are there, but not changing the game significantly.
When playing PoE which i don't know well, this was one of the first things that somewhat fascinated – i realized the NPCs were adjusting to me, but the consequences were not very transparent, and i caught myself to try out different replies, different characters etc., just to test the system that may be hiding things from me i'd like to see (not because i'm greedy, but because i want to see all of a good game and be sure i've somewhen seen it all). That's meta thinking and non-immersive, but it's an urge, and from what i read here and elsewhere i'm not the only one doing that.
Just an opinion though, and i don't say things should not adjust at all – just keep it somewhat in on a level where, when one knows the game in and out, one actually can do that kind of "complete run" if he wants.