1380 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Haexpane wrote...

Well mages healing and nuking is absurd, at least in terms of how a toon can be epic in both Healing and Nuking.

Ditto for warriors Soaking and DPSing.  You should have to choose and balance.  The fact is my DW Warrior in DOA can soak dmg, and DPS like a madman.

There is no balance, my DW warrior can do everything but open chests that contain worthless lewt.  

Can your warrior aoe nuke from range and heal? I'm fairly sure they can't, and you're using very narrow definition of "everything" that includes merely two things.

And yet you are arguing for game to be better this should be limited even furtther and have any given character to be capable of doing just one thing proper... But it should be noted that getting to this point essentially turns every character into literally one trick pony, and one trick ponies make for pretty dull gameplay.

It's no coincidence that when you get "classes" so much limited like you advocate here then classic games utilizing such model provide players with large number of such otherwise unremarkable pieces to play with, to still allow for actual variety and flexibility during the encounters. See chess for example of it.

[Cigne]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Morroian wrote...

TMZuk wrote...
It doesn't sound as Bioware are developing a roleplaying-game, but rather a war-game or a shooter. A fantasy-version of half-life or something. Animations, tactical choises, weapon-restrictions, narrow, restricted classes and so on. The mere idea of a RPG where a warrior cannot use a bow, or hold a dagger in the left hand is so off-putting, such a huge step back to the bad old days of AD&D. Even worse, in fact, because I don't recall a single AD&D class that did not have access to some sort of missile-weapon.

I don't remember half life or any other shooter having classes. D'nD has restrictive classes, just a lot of them. Look I agree warriors and rogues should be 1 fighter class, but for all intents and purposes a rogue is a warrior just a dex based warrior.

System Shock had classes and so did Hexen...they are both FPSes. Oh...and didn't the Cavalier from AD&D have a vow not to use missle weapons?

Some would classify System Shock as an RPG.

I love the endless customisation of Elder Scrolls, but that's not what I want from a Bioware game. Having to pick and choose talents ability  adds to the fun of replays. Plus, the party npcs become (more) necessary when classes don't overlap.

And Bioware's party npcs are arguably what they do best: giving the player a party of interesting characters to roleplay with, and never a griefer amongst them!

Still--no ranged ability for warriors? At all?<_<

[Lokanaiya]

Haexpane wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

Better distinction: static classes=not so great improvement
Smoother,faster combat system=its ok
Ability trees instead of linear progression= i can't say nothing..

But if those are the only features isn'still enough

Better ability tree is a 1000000x improvement over linear blocks in DAO. 

classes vs. no classes is an ongoing battle.  Oblivion has a true "hybrid" system you are describing. YOu can pick a "class" but it really does nothing and you can custom build your own class.

That always leads to over powered characters.  Just like the DW warrior or Legion Scout or Arcane Warrior are over powered.

The point of classes is to make each party member important instead of redundant.  And to be "grounded" in that you train in plate and swords, you should not be just as good at DWing as a rogue who has trained in light armor/ DW for years.

This may sound mean, but if you're having too easy a time and something seems "overpowered," there's a simple solution:

Turn up the difficulty, or maybe even don't make a DW warrior.

DA caters to a large variety of people, and I know I like it fairly easy my first playthrough. Just learn the mechanics, and, when you feel you're ready, turn up the difficulty. Maybe your second time around, make a 2H warrior instead of a DW one, or an archery rogue. There's no need to stick to a single spec, or even a single class. I know I liked the DW when I tried for the dragon at a low level my first time, I didn't know what I had gotten into, and hadn't saved in a while. But that's just me. Maybe you like it when you have to buy a hundred potions, craft a thousand more, and hope double that drops. Maybe there's someone out there who likes to just buy a couple and be done with it, who knows?

Long story short: Since this isn't a MMORPG like WoW, you can change the difficulty, and can make entirely different characters if you don't like one, please don't cry for "nerf" like you do in later posts, since you can essentially do it yourself with difficulty and different characters.

[AuraofMana]

The fact that the dev's claim the graphics is more important than better gameplay really ruins Bioware for me.

[Addai]

Haexpane wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

Better distinction: static classes=not so great improvement
Smoother,faster combat system=its ok
Ability trees instead of linear progression= i can't say nothing..

But if those are the only features isn'still enough

Better ability tree is a 1000000x improvement over linear blocks in DAO. 

classes vs. no classes is an ongoing battle.  Oblivion has a true "hybrid" system you are describing. YOu can pick a "class" but it really does nothing and you can custom build your own class.

That always leads to over powered characters.  Just like the DW warrior or Legion Scout or Arcane Warrior are over powered.

The point of classes is to make each party member important instead of redundant.  And to be "grounded" in that you train in plate and swords, you should not be just as good at DWing as a rogue who has trained in light armor/ DW for years.

So what???  You make your finely pigeonholed characters and your Tank-DPS-Healer-Rogue party if you want it, and let me have my party full of misfit Legion rogues and fighting spellcasters with a DW warrior tank.  More flexibility in the classes = more customization = player control.

[Monica83]

You can easily avoid the problem with smart solution example:

classes more distinct: Add specific ability



For example:

Set a limitation to use dual wield only to warrior that use medium or light armor



For the rougue:

Add some specific items like knifes or trowing knife...

Poisoned dart..

Restrict posion to rogues



Some new ability like:

Smart blow: A rogue learned to find weak point in the opponent armor so can use this kill to make a critical hit and avoid the reduction damage given by the armor

Tactical blow: A rogue can hit a specific part of his ennemy to make temporaney damage to a statistic for example if on front of him have a twohanded blade warrior can use this hit to decrease his strange..

Agility: A rougue learned how to move fast and avoid some ennemy attack this talent give 20% possibility to an ennemy to miss the target.

Open wound: A rougue learned to use this attack to cause harm at ennemy.. example of wounds: The wounds that can be earned in DAO when a party member been killed from the ennemy and later raise up..

Disarm: A rougue use his tactical agilty to try to disarm the opponent..



For the warrior:

Charge: Warrior learn to run aganist the ennemy and use his strenght to hit them and make them fall

Advanced Training: A warrior is more trained to use his weapons with the risult of a lower increase of attack and defence

Strenght blow: A warrior can give a strong hit and make an automatic critical hit

and many much idea...



See? you can make class more distinct whitout cut other class ability..

[Zeleen]

hmph! my first playthough was a dual wielding warrior champion templar and I loved it!

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

Let me point out the caveat there, however: when it comes to a conflict between the setting and gameplay the resolution is generally an easy one: the setting must bend or change.

I still don't see how gameplay and setting can ever really be in conflict.  Unless there's some sort of gameplay-based design goal (you want players to play in a particular way), but that seems entirely wrong-headed to me.  I would always rather you left the players to play as they prefer.

And I don't mean a casual conflict. Tech Designers are going to accomodate the setting whenever they can, just as Seb pointed out. But if there's an issue where the game design needs to change and the only thing standing in the way is the fact that X has been stated in the setting at some point-- well, that's not a good enough reason. The idea that setting logic should trump everything else simply doesn't exist, despite how important the setting might be to me or any fans of the lore.

Ideal? No, but that's simply how it is.

If the lore isn't the basis for the rest of the design, why bother fleshing out the lore?  And what is the basis for the rest of the design?

[Jacks Smirking Revenge]

Well warriors new niche dps wise is melee aoe, and rogues are the single target masters now. I could see a gameplay conflict in creating a dual wielding tree that has to address both niches and not be overpowered.



I agree though about balancing and class diversity on single player games. I understand some things like not breaking lore and such, but if something isn't allowed to encourage specific niches and balance on a single player game that is kind of pointless. A single player game you can create your own house rules, or if you prefer to be demi god you can desire to do so.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Jacks Smirking Revenge wrote...

Well warriors new niche dps wise is melee aoe, and rogues are the single target masters now.

This is part of the problem.  Why are the class designs trying to enforce roles?

[Jacks Smirking Revenge]

I don't know. It doesn't make much sense to me to do that on a single player game unless there are like lore reasons, but I don't see anything lore wise that would prevent a warrior to shoot a bow or wield two weapons at once.

[AlanC9]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...
What is a class but a bundle of skills and restrictions? Why could you organize weapon training along certain parameters of concept, a tree of basic weapons leading to more specialized ones? Why would this not also work with armor? I'm not suggesting that you just pick and choose skills willy nilly at first level to have a mage at second level who is proficient in plate mail and claymores. Attributes of strength, dexterity, constitution, willpower, magic and cunning would still also regulate what abilities and items a character could use. Each party member would progress towards filling a "job" in the group, I don't see where there is an arguement that classes fill any void. If someone makes a party of redundant fighters and wants to play that way...maybe it's possible? Those who want a balanced class will pick or choose people with different skillsets that the characters have been working towards. A character who has advanced in skills using two weapons along a tree doesn't have to be a rogue, it could be a mage at the cost of focusing in magic, but the end result could make for an interesting story and it would fill a specialist niche in the party, just as any combination of skills might.
 
Why can't a mage pick locks? Why must a fighter or a rogue fight with certain weapons or styles? There's no story or logical explanation for it so why adhere to the mechanic? The party would only end up being redundant if there were very basic skills that anyone could purchase too soon (bad game design) or if the player intentionally made all the characters the same way. As long as skill and spell trees are well thought out, a system like this could make traditional warriors, rogues, mages, or any combination a player can think of.

I think this pretty much says it all. classless systems work just fine. If anything, their problem is that characters become too specialized over time.

OTOH, classes are better for more casual players, who can use them to keep things organized.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

OTOH, classes are better for more casual players, who can use them to keep things organized.

Given that a great many players seem to stick with the default character creation choices (note the ME player telemetry data), why not have classes that are customisable?

It would effectively be a classless system, but the casual player wouldn't ever need to know that.

I'm a big fan of enforcing IT standards compliance through user ignorance.  If they don't know how to break something, they're less likely to break it.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 16 septembre 2010 - 07:42 .

[AlanC9]

Depends on what they do at level-ups. If they just hit recommend then they'd be fine -- or rather, only as screwed as the default package makes them.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Depends on what they do at level-ups. If they just hit recommend then they'd be fine -- or rather, only as screwed as the default package makes them.

They'd still have a class (as far as they could tell).  The level-ups would work as well as they do in a class-based system.

More advanced players could either design their own class (which progressed according to their design) or eschew the entire class structure and pick and choose abilities each level.

[tmp7704]

AlanC9 wrote...

OTOH, classes are better for more casual players, who can use them to keep things organized.

DAO has auto-level system which allows exactly that, and can be turned off if the player desires manual control over how their characters develop.

[Sylvius the Mad]

tmp7704 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

OTOH, classes are better for more casual players, who can use them to keep things organized.

DAO has auto-level system which allows exactly that, and can be turned off if the player desires manual control over how their characters develop.

Except that manual control is still constrained by the class limitations.

[Tirigon]

classes are a cool, shiny word for what I prefer to call "unnecessary limitation of my freedom to play as I want".

[tmp7704]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Except that manual control is still constrained by the class limitations.

Yes, but it doesn't mean it couldn't be used in combination with broader classes. For example, having both the rogue and warrior have the same set of talents available for manual selection, but auto-level along different paths depending on what class was picked by the player/assigned to NPC.

Modifié par tmp7704, 16 septembre 2010 - 06:22 .

[AlanC9]

Note that classless systems tend to be balance nightmares. Not much of an issue in an SP game as long as the player has the same control over NPC companion levelups as he has over his PCs. But it does mean that a player needs to know what he's doing. And if he does know the game's going to get awfully easy, unless the default classes are engineered very well.

Morrowind was a particular offender here. OTOH the default classes were wildly unbalanced too, so I'm not sure a player could do that much worse.

How well would abolishing the rogue/warrior distinction actually work? Can anyone think of warrior talents they'd like on a rogue, or vice versa? I can think of a few R/W talents I wouldn't mind having on a mage.

Modifié par AlanC9, 16 septembre 2010 - 06:30 .

[Haexpane]

Lokanaiya wrote...


This may sound mean, but if you're having too easy a time and something seems "overpowered," there's a simple solution:

Turn up the difficulty, or maybe even don't make a DW warrior.

It doesn't sound mean at all.  Although you are making the assumption that I am not already playing on a harder difficulty.  Or that I am not aware of a difficulty slider.  Which is a poorly thought out assumption.

"Hey, Dr.  my arm hurts when I do this..{lifts arm}" - Patient
"The cure is, don't do that" - Doctor

That old trope is not a solution for game balance

Lokanaiya wrote...

  Maybe you like it when you have to buy a hundred potions, craft a thousand more, and hope double that drops. Maybe there's someone out there who likes to just buy a couple and be done with it, who knows?

Blame the victim much?  Why is it the end user's fault that the game is based on potion healing? I don't like potions any more than anyone else.  It's one of my least favorite methods of RPG healing.  I didn't design DAO, if you want to bash Potion chugging, talk to Bioware.

Lokanaiya wrote...

Long story short: Since this isn't a MMORPG like WoW, you can change the difficulty, and can make entirely different characters if you don't like one, please don't cry for "nerf" like you do in later posts, since you can essentially do it yourself with difficulty and different characters.

Here we go again, why is it any time someone mentions balance, they assume they are a "WoW kiddie" I dont play WoW.  WoW is not the center of the universe, WoW did not invent balance.  WoW did not invent RPGs or classes or dual wielding

I'll ask for nerfs any damn time I please thank you very much.

Despite your poorly thought out assumptions, again WoW did not invent Nerf.  

[Haexpane]

Monica83 wrote...

You can easily avoid the problem with smart solution example:
classes more distinct: Add specific ability

For example:
Set a limitation to use dual wield only to warrior that use medium or light armor

For the rougue:
Add some specific items like knifes or trowing knife...
Poisoned dart..
Restrict posion to rogues

Some new ability like:
Smart blow: A rogue learned to find weak point in the opponent armor so can use this kill to make a critical hit and avoid the reduction damage given by the armor
Tactical blow: A rogue can hit a specific part of his ennemy to make temporaney damage to a statistic for example if on front of him have a twohanded blade warrior can use this hit to decrease his strange..
Agility: A rougue learned how to move fast and avoid some ennemy attack this talent give 20% possibility to an ennemy to miss the target.
Open wound: A rougue learned to use this attack to cause harm at ennemy.. example of wounds: The wounds that can be earned in DAO when a party member been killed from the ennemy and later raise up..
Disarm: A rougue use his tactical agilty to try to disarm the opponent..

For the warrior:
Charge: Warrior learn to run aganist the ennemy and use his strenght to hit them and make them fall
Advanced Training: A warrior is more trained to use his weapons with the risult of a lower increase of attack and defence
Strenght blow: A warrior can give a strong hit and make an automatic critical hit
and many much idea...

See? you can make class more distinct whitout cut other class ability..

Exactly, balance and class distinction.  That is the route Bioware is going for DA2.

[Haexpane]

Zeleen wrote...

hmph! my first playthough was a dual wielding warrior champion templar and I loved it!

Of course, b/c DW warriors of any class are overpowered super heroes   But IMO it gets old when there is no risk of death

[Haexpane]

AlanC9 wrote...

Note that classless systems tend to be balance nightmares. Not much of an issue in an SP game

That opinion is highly debatable and the core of this thread.  To say that balance is not an issue simply because it's single player ignores decades of game design and user feedback.

In general, the majority of gamers want a game that is challenging.   Pushing balance onto the user and saying, hey you can be a god class or a chump, up to you  = 99% of users playing a god class and finding the game too easy.

[Addai]

Haexpane wrote...

In general, the majority of gamers want a game that is challenging.   Pushing balance onto the user and saying, hey you can be a god class or a chump, up to you  = 99% of users playing a god class and finding the game too easy.

And whining about it on forums, yes.  As if Bioware sent people to their house to beat them up because they weren't making enough Arcane Warriors or Legion Scouts.