432 réponses à ce sujet

[Oyclo]

Major fights yes, but those were spread out considerably.  DA requires you to constantly tell each character what to do, continually, using skills all the time, drinking pots, whatever.  You're constantly pausing, moving characters around, trying to flank, stopping enemies from flanking, etc...

It's an exercise in frustration, and it's not fun having to micro-manage to that level while still trying to maintain other levels of combat.

Ummm WHAT other levels of combat?  Visual?

There's no proof that people are playing on hard/nightmare.  I haven't seen any achievements for it yet, so until I do, I have a hard time believing ANYONE that claims it's "easy" on normal unless they're playing on the console (which is confirmed to be easier).  Gametrailers even said normal on the console is like easy on the PC.

At first I thought you were one of those types that thinks the game should be winnable as a charasmatic thief as easily as the battle mage, but now I know you really ARE a noob.  Seriously.  I restarted in nightmare and have so far only had one encounter I couldn't beat straight up, so I talked my way out of it.

[Ralsar]

You only need to control and command 1 character and occasionally micro your companions. If you set up your tactics appropiately your companions can be quite self sufficient. I think if you spent less time howling at the moon and more time understanding the combat system you wouldn't be stuck in your misinformed rut.

[thisisme8]

Everyone wants to talk tactics and no builds. Sometimes that's all it is.

[MrGOH]

OurSacrifice wrote...

*snip*

There's no proof that people are playing on hard/nightmare.  I haven't seen any achievements for it yet, so until I do, I have a hard time believing ANYONE that claims it's "easy" on normal unless they're playing on the console (which is confirmed to be easier).  Gametrailers even said normal on the console is like easy on the PC.

If you can point me to a good free alternative to fraps that lets me cut my own videos, I will post a battle fought on hard on YouTube and link it here. I will show you the difficulty setting and my characters' specs. I had toyed with doing this earlier, but i couldn't find decent software to record the battle. I just think folks need to be shown how even a non-tactical genius like myself can get by on hard without too many reloads.

[Gillian Kersonati]

Wow, the lack of maturity on display here makes me wonder how many of you who are playing this game actually meet the "18" requirement - or indeed the "M for Mature" certification of this game. The OP has an opinion and I, for one, think that some of what he says is valid. The combat system in this game IS somewhat lacking if you approach the game with a certain (fair) expectation although so far it has not negatively affected my own enjoyment of the game.



If the majority of the posters here are representative of Bioware’s future community, then I truly despair for it.



@ OP: I am not sure, however, that I would go so far as to call it broken. It has simply been implemented in a way that does not seem a natural progression from the systems employed by the BG and even the NWN games. Instead of a semi-competent party AI a player could reasonably expect at any difficulty, the onus has been pushed on the player to either mico-manage or invest time in establishing a robust set of tactics. A conscious decision, I’m sure, but in my opinion, the necessity to employ both should be prevalent only at the higher difficulty settings. “Normal” should be a middle ground, where micro-management or pre-configured tactics should make a difficult fight much easier, but not something you have to do in almost every encounter. Hard difficulty feels just right to me. Normal, however, did not.

[exerci]

Xalm Grey wrote...

Malecite00 wrote...

L2P noob, I would post something more constructive, but as the above poster said this is the billionth time a frustrated new player, who refuses to adapt to the games system, shows up and makes a rant post about it.

Yeah god forbid you'd take a moment to consider with this many complaints that maybe, just maybe there's something worth complaining about? Alot of people feel let down by this game. Who are you to say we should conform to any way of playing?

God... It's very understandable that some people feel let down by the game. But seriously. What you're complaining about is basically that some person saw a chessboard, thought "this looks like checkers, I like checkers" and then complained that what they got was, in fact, chess... and then when they try playing it, they find that the pieces are all weird compared to what they thought they were getting, and decide to complain that chess is a bad game. People feel let down, because they think they're buying Mass Effect 2, or Kotor 3.

[thrice00]

So because we don,t agree whit the Op we're under 18.... ?!?!?

You are? the guy tell us is a veteran of Infinity engine and can't play on Normal. It's almost a joke.

[Harlequin Shadowlands]

Rellucs wrote...

Maybe you just suck. Yeah, I think that's it.

Or perhaps if the people who take issue with the game out weight those that don't theres a real issue? Seems like a 2:1 ratio to me going by forum posts.

That aside seems the sheep are under the impression a lack of decent party AI equates to 'tactical' as you have to hand hold the party. As they won't even use their special abilities without being told to do so either manually or via the too limited tactical slots. In essence bioware took the cheap way out didn't put any real party AI and slapped the label 'well its tactical so we dont have to' and the fan boys bought it hook, line and sinker. Bioware got out of having to spend many zots on a typical RPG staple and then labled it as a 'feature'. Smart marketing and on that level I give them credit.

When I play fallout3 or nwn2 or bg2 did the AI either take decent care of itself or I only had to touch them from time to time in battle? Yes. Did I have to hand hold each one of them every 5 sec though every battle? No.

Thats at least my point of contention. I have no issue with a tactical approach where when you need to you can control your party members but this setup its artificial. By making the NPC AI dumb and then labing it as a 'feature of being tactical'. Then make a option to turn off party AI for those of you that wanted to do that and for those of us that want to manage it on a macro level, not a micro level we should beable to do that too. BG2 had a turn off party AI but that sems to mostly be forced on us now.

If you can not understand this point then a sheep you are. Sorry.

[BomimoDK]

Oyclo wrote...

There's no proof that people are playing on hard/nightmare.  I haven't seen any achievements for it yet, so until I do, I have a hard time believing ANYONE that claims it's "easy" on normal unless they're playing on the console (which is confirmed to be easier).  Gametrailers even said normal on the console is like easy on the PC.

At first I thought you were one of those types that thinks the game should be winnable as a charasmatic thief as easily as the battle mage, but now I know you really ARE a noob.  Seriously.  I restarted in nightmare and have so far only had one encounter I couldn't beat straight up, so I talked my way out of it.

stop being arrogant, you come across as a major ******.

as for the one you quoted. i'm playing on medium and it's fairly overcomeable so far. i'm 53 hours in and i can guarantee you that my next mage run will be on hard. but first i'd like to get aquainted with rogue and warrior on normal.

[Gillian Kersonati]

thrice00 wrote...

So because we don,t agree whit the Op we're under 18.... ?!?!?
You are? the guy tell us is a veteran of Infinity engine and can't play on Normal. It's almost a joke.

No, the inability to disagree with the OP in a mature way suggests that.

[artmonster1967]

Gillian Kersonati wrote...

Wow, the lack of maturity on display here makes me wonder how many of you who are playing this game actually meet the "18" requirement - or indeed the "M for Mature" certification of this game.

If the majority of the posters here are representative of Bioware’s future community, then I truly despair for it.

.

I lol'ed

then lol'ed again


good luck with your encounters with the human race...hehe....


*shakes his dwarven stinky butt at you

[Valmy]

OurSacrifice wrote...

This is supposed to be the spirtual successor to Baldur's Gate?  Really?  To me, it just seems like a game created to simply try and mesh a formula that works for a popular MMO with a single player game.  Having to manage aggro with 4 characters, having to deal with combat scenarios that aren't even properly balanced, having to deal with NPCs that are supposed to help, but instead opt to stand in FIRE they created only to die in 4 seconds without you being able to ask them to move away ... it's all just sloppy.

Wait those are the examples you used?  All those things happened in Baldur's Gate also...often to an even bigger degree than in DAO.

I can only conclude you never played Baldur's Gate.

Modifié par Valmy, 09 novembre 2009 - 04:20 .

[artmonster1967]

Gillian Kersonati wrote...

No, the inability to disagree with the OP in a mature way suggests that.

ooooo....there's a relative term for ya.


......relating to just what?

I guess that's up for interpretation.

[Osprey39]

OctopusRush wrote...

I bet most of you don't play Nightmare yet I don't go around shouting l2p. Just because the forum is currently not moderated does not means you have the right to insult other posters.

Why not?  They insult our intelligence by blatantly posting things we know to be untrue.

[Madanial]

Umm, i think i play RPG long enough to know whose're unbalance.



Maybe TC just gotta learn more to get his characters out of bad situation.

[Shplane]

OurSacrifice wrote...

Shplane wrote...

OurSacrifice wrote...

SamoanX wrote...

nuh uh

Go back to your PS3 - you don't know what you're talking about.

I am mildly confused as to how what console he is playing on is relevant beyond technical issues.

Console difficulty levels aren't the same as PC.

Really now? And who said that? I certainly haven't seen a Bioware rep say anything of the sort, and it was certainly rapetastical enough for me on Nightmare that I had to crank it down.

Of course, if your problem is the DIFFICULTY, and it's NOT SO DIFFICULT on the CONSOLE, then why the **** do you have the PC version?

[BigAnorak]

From my own experience I would suggest that on normal mode from levels 1-5, I was behind the learning curve - constantly needing pots and and pausing to survive even mundane fights against wolves and bears. By the time I got to the Boss in Warden's Keep I switched to Easy mode and didn't use pots or pause again to the point where the game got boring and I felt I had to go back to normal mode. By the time I was level 8-9 and had more skills and tactics slots my "pot and pause" usage is minimal in mundane fights and maybe pausing more often for boss fights to ensure that the specific skills and consumables needed for the specific boss are used at the right time.



I think it is worth investing the time and effort to refine the tactics and behaviours options to get your allies/cohorts to do what you want them to do in non-boss, using very simple logic like: #1 How is my health? How low can I afford for it go before I need to take a pot? #2 what is the best buff I can apply to myself or an ally? #3-#x which of my attacks do the most damage.



It took me a while to get Alistair's tanking logic to take the aggro when I most needed him to as well as Leiliana's (sp?) archery to stop her using her weapons and charging in. I don't think you have to be a computer programmer to work out "if x happens, do Y" for the role you want each character to take in a battle.



In fact I am reaching the point where I feel ready to move up to hard mode and I never managed to get to hard mode in any of the BG games.



I really don't think the actual mechanics of the combat are "terrible" as the OP suggests, but rather the management of combat and the behaviour of 3 AI characters who need strong leadership can be a terrifying experience and so may well feel that the effort needed to overcome this to get the game to flow at a pace they enjoy is more than they can bear. I for one feel the efforts I have made to tune the tactics and behaviour have made the game more enjoyable for me after a very sticky start.



I am sure there are many clever people working on Tactics and Behaviour FAQs and that they will be in the public domain shortly.

[addiction21]

Harlequin Shadowlands wrote...

Rellucs wrote...

Maybe you just suck. Yeah, I think that's it.

Or perhaps if the people who take issue with the game out weight those that don't theres a real issue? Seems like a 2:1 ratio to me going by forum posts.

That aside seems the sheep are under the impression a lack of decent party AI equates to 'tactical' as you have to hand hold the party. As they won't even use their special abilities without being told to do so either manually or via the too limited tactical slots. In essence bioware took the cheap way out didn't put any real party AI and slapped the label 'well its tactical so we dont have to' and the fan boys bought it hook, line and sinker. Bioware got out of having to spend many zots on a typical RPG staple and then labled it as a 'feature'. Smart marketing and on that level I give them credit.

When I play fallout3 or nwn2 or bg2 did the AI either take decent care of itself or I only had to touch them from time to time in battle? Yes. Did I have to hand hold each one of them every 5 sec though every battle? No.

Thats at least my point of contention. I have no issue with a tactical approach where when you need to you can control your party members but this setup its artificial. By making the NPC AI dumb and then labing it as a 'feature of being tactical'. Then make a option to turn off party AI for those of you that wanted to do that and for those of us that want to manage it on a macro level, not a micro level we should beable to do that too. BG2 had a turn off party AI but that sems to mostly be forced on us now.

If you can not understand this point then a sheep you are. Sorry.

Is not a good way to measure. Guess what the people that like the game are doing? Playing the game. Now what do you think the people who have a problem with the game are doing?  Yup posting on the forum.  Hell most any big hyped up games forums are a was in rage and anger after the release.  A lot seems to always be those that saw the cinematic trailer or caught some of the hype and rushed out to get it because it was the cool new thing and then are disapointed.

I've found in my playing that the AI is relavent to how you setup the tactics for them. If you do ****** poor work then they will be ****** poor in combat.  As I remember in Baluders gate you did not ignore your party members. They did not have great ai either and you needed to hold there hands thru out the game to be sure you and they survived. As for Fallout 3 and NWN they were never marketed as a group games and they are not group orienated games.

Witht that last line pull your head out of your ass please. Not everyone agrees, likes the same things, or sees everything in the same light. If they did that would make them sheep not based soley on having a differing opnion then yours.

[Oyclo]

[quote]BomimoDK wrote...

[quote]Oyclo wrote...

At first I thought you were one of those types that thinks the game should be winnable as a charasmatic thief as easily as the battle mage, but now I know you really ARE a noob.  Seriously.  I restarted in nightmare and have so far only had one encounter I couldn't beat straight up, so I talked my way out of it. [/quote]
[quote]
stop being arrogant, you come across as a major ******.

[/quote]

When some whiner states that no one is playing on nightmare and they are all lying because he can't figure out how to play, all niceness goes out the window.

At first I thought the OP was complaining about the STYLE of combat, but instead its a complaint only that its too hard for him and therefore, obviously, to hard for everyone.

Modifié par Oyclo, 09 novembre 2009 - 05:19 .

[hannahb]

Ok 2 things...



1. I disagree with the OP. The combat is actually fun and engaging with an understanding AND proper use of the tactics slots. Not to mention they used great AI .. the NPC path finding is friggin sweet as well as the enemies ability to home in on a critical target that is currently a serious threat to them.



2. I'm ashamed of all the people who disagree with the OP yet didn't really provide anything more substantive than ridicule.

[thrice00]

2. I'm ashamed of all the people who disagree with the OP yet didn't really provide anything more substantive than ridicule.

He's saying there's too much micro and the game is too hard. What do you want to tell apart what we have said.
There has much micro in DA than the old games.
He can't play on normal and whine about it..... what the hell do you want us to tell him.

Modifié par thrice00, 09 novembre 2009 - 04:52 .

[ronnann]

Sorry for not agreeing, but I'm not seeing the problem.



My party is a Rogue (main character), my Dog, Claudia Black and Alister.

Playing at Normal.



Sure the fights are difficult, but press pause , think and then do.

If what you're doing leads to running in circles while the mages/archers do their thing, well then your not fighting with a winning plan. Try something different.



As for the old baldur gate games not being difficult - well that's just nonsense

[OurSacrifice]

Shplane wrote...

Really now? And who said that? I certainly haven't seen a Bioware rep say anything of the sort, and it was certainly rapetastical enough for me on Nightmare that I had to crank it down.

Of course, if your problem is the DIFFICULTY, and it's NOT SO DIFFICULT on the CONSOLE, then why the **** do you have the PC version?

Go watch the video reviews of the game.  They actually discuss the differences between the PC/console versions.  Since they've played BOTH for the reviews, they know about it.

Did it dawn on you at anytime in your post that the reason I have the PC version is because I'm not a console gamer?  Just curious.

[OurSacrifice]

Valmy wrote...

OurSacrifice wrote...

This is supposed to be the spirtual successor to Baldur's Gate?  Really?  To me, it just seems like a game created to simply try and mesh a formula that works for a popular MMO with a single player game.  Having to manage aggro with 4 characters, having to deal with combat scenarios that aren't even properly balanced, having to deal with NPCs that are supposed to help, but instead opt to stand in FIRE they created only to die in 4 seconds without you being able to ask them to move away ... it's all just sloppy.

Wait those are the examples you used?  All those things happened in Baldur's Gate also...often to an even bigger degree than in DAO.

I can only conclude you never played Baldur's Gate.

The examples I listed are not problems in the IE games.  *You* obviously never played them.

[thisisme8]

thisisme8 wrote...

Everyone wants to talk tactics and no builds. Sometimes that's all it is.

I stand by my own statement, sometimes it can make a difference.  Having a tank with no CON or DEX and maxed out STR won't work.  Spreading your skills or talents out to cover everything with one character won't work either.  I'm just saying it might be worth looking into.