139 réponses à ce sujet

[bsbcaer]

Destello wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Destello wrote...

Please, Stop the 'CONSOLIZATION', Games for PC must be games for PC.

In Dragon Age I have my inventory organized alphabetically! Don't you miss those inventories sorted by cursor, like Sacred, Dungeon Siege or Neverwinter Nights?

I'm with Harid  on the attitude.

As for the question: Inventory tetris is a stupid waste of time. I don't have anything particular against inventory weight/bulk limits, as long as they're more rational than the ones in NWN.

But if you're not going to do a sensible system, you might as well go all the way to a KotOR-style list inventory.

Always you have the auto sort button or something like this.

Seriously, the console compatibility ruins the PC game, and vice-versa. Maybe Bioware has to return to the idea of  two differents games, like in Baldur's Gate / Dark Alliance. Where both player's types felt satisfied.

Well then, it's a good thing that DA2 is being developed for both the Console and the PC and not being ported from one to the other

[Destello]

AlanC9 wrote...

TimelordDC wrote...
The auto-sort was a click-able button, IIRC. 
Inventory tetris rocks. It's like a mini-game in itself

A sucky  and boring mini-game , yep. And at best, auto-sort just gets you to where you already are with a list inventory. At worst, like in NWN2 where items aren't all that distinguishable, autosorting makes things harder to find rather than easier.

I like to sort my inventory, according sets for example. In DAO I lose my gloves, boots and chests spreads among the rest of the similar stuff. When I compare items, I equip and unequip them many times, and it is very un comfortable to search between 5 similar items, reading their specifications.

The 'tetris' inventory is much more flexible than the list one. Maybe you can switch to a menu-inventory besides the auto-sort. This is not difficult to make, the only limitation resides in its console compatibility.

Modifié par Destello, 03 novembre 2010 - 09:00 .

[tmp7704]

TimelordDC wrote...

I don't understand how what you are saying and what I said are any different unless you mean you want to go through with the same builds but just change tactics?

Yes, i mean it more along the lines of the latter -- i think builds should provide player with "tools" which should be generally equally viable, and the challenge was in utilizing these tools to the best effect (coordinating attacks and abilities, picking targets in efficient order, using available cc where and when it has the most effect, using environment to one's advantage, etc. At lower levels of difficulty the game should be forgiving enough to allow player still get through encounters even if they're sloppy or make poor decisions while at higher levels the tactics should become crucial.

To put it differently, if the game provides say, three different character builds but then forces you to stick just to one on higher difficulty because the other options fall short, the it isn't part of "more difficult" for me to force me to "optimize the build" by picking that single viable option, but it's instead source of boredom due to negative impact this has on variety.

[tmp7704]

Destello wrote...

I like to sort my inventory, according sets for example. In DAO I miss my gloves, boots and chest spreads among my other similar stuff.

DAO inventory was first sorted by item category, then within the category by item name. So you'd have all gloves (split into smaller groups depending if they were light gloves, medium, heavy etc) then all the boots arranged in similar way, then the chest pieces, then clothing/robes. The other categories were similar.  It's not ideal but more sophisticated that people would tend to give it credit for

[AlanC9]

Destello wrote...
I like to sort my inventory, according sets for example. In DAO I lose my gloves, boots and chests spreads among the rest of the similar stuff. When I compare items, I equip and unequip them many times, and it is very un comfortable to search between 5 similar items, reading their specifications.

I get the set issue, but I don't see how a grid inventory helps when comparing items. Al the boots are next to other boots, all the gloves are next to other gloves, etc. A grid inventory can't get easier than that, and if the grid is on a per-character basis it could get a lot harder, since not all of your spare armor sets will fit on one character, assuming there are any kind of realistic weight/bult limits.

Or is the proposal to have a grid inventory that works like the KotOR unlimited inventory except for the interface?

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 novembre 2010 - 09:36 .

[Destello]

tmp7704 wrote...
DAO inventory was first sorted by item category, then within the category by item name. So you'd have all gloves (split into smaller groups depending if they were light gloves, medium, heavy etc) then all the boots arranged in similar way, then the chest pieces, then clothing/robes. The other categories were similar.  It's not ideal but more sophisticated that people would tend to give it credit for

Yes, I know that, but I have the spanish version, so the names are inversed, "blood dragon armor" is "armadura de sangre de dragón" xD ... but for the english sort its the same, when you test sets, you switch many times between them, with the menu system is unconfortable to do that because you need to scroll the menu to look at the item every time.

Modifié par Destello, 03 novembre 2010 - 09:48 .

[maxernst]

Destello wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

TimelordDC wrote...

A sucky  and boring mini-game , yep. And at best, auto-sort just gets you to where you already are with a list inventory. At worst, like in NWN2 where items aren't all that distinguishable, autosorting makes things harder to find rather than easier.

Is there another kind of mini-game?  I personally like lists because I'm not very methodical and never remember where I put things even when I try to be, but one which had flexible sorting options would be nice.  I didn't find DA:O that bad...ME1's inventory was a nightmare.

Modifié par maxernst, 03 novembre 2010 - 09:42 .

[AlanC9]

Destello, I don't know what kind of grid inventory you're thinking of. I can get more plate suits on one page of the DAO inventory than I can get on one page of the NWN1 inventory, and I know which ones they are at a glance, at least by name. NWN2 I can fit more suits because the icons are all tiny, but I would still have to tab between characters because nobody can carry all the heavy gear -- at least until massive STR-boost gear is available. And I'm still faced with trying to figure out which icon stands for which piece of gear, which is harder with the small icons.

[Aermas]

My problem with the inventory was that I couldn't see if something was highlighted or not when scrolling down, Codex suffered this problem too.

[soteria]

To put it differently, if the game provides say, three different character builds but then forces you to stick just to one on higher difficulty because the other options fall short, the it isn't part of "more difficult" for me to force me to "optimize the build" by picking that single viable option, but it's instead source of boredom due to negative impact this has on variety.

I agree, within limits. For example, all weapon styles should be equally viable for warriors and rogues, but I wouldn't say that some combination of two or three styles should also be viable. Neither should putting points in magic and willpower be viable--again, I'm talking about nightmare. So where I disagree with you is in describing the game as having (say) three builds when really it has dozens. They just aren't all viable, and I don't think they should be.

[tmp7704]

soteria wrote...

Neither should putting points in magic and willpower be viable--again, I'm talking about nightmare.

Well, i'd disagree here -- there should be imo instead a benefit to investing points in all attributes big enough at least to make the player consider potential trade-offs and weight their options. Because again, i don't see forcing the player to min-max all points into 1-2 stats as increase in difficulty per se. If anything, it could be argued that actually makes things easier, by taking away from the player any need to decide how to divide their points and how then to play to strengths of their individual build.

It'd seem BioWare takes similar stance for DA2 at least, with their attempt to make every attribute provide something useful for every character, no matter the class.

[soteria]

Well, i'd disagree here -- there should be imo instead a benefit to investing points in all attributes big enough at least to make the player consider potential trade-offs and weight their options. Because again, i don't see forcing the player to min-max all points into 1-2 stats as increase in difficulty per se. If anything, it could be argued that actually makes things easier, by taking away from the player any need to decide how to divide their points and how then to play to strengths of their individual build.

There's an idealist in me that thinks that all all 6 stats should be valuable to everyone, but the realist is posting now. What I would like to see is 3 stats being important to everyone, with each class basically having two primary stats to choose from and a secondary. Warriors should want strength/con and dex, rogues cun/dex and will, mages magic/will and str. Or, something like that.

I just don't see a benefit in making magic valuable enough for warriors to consider taking that over strength. As long as warriors are choosing between spending a single point in strength or a single point in magic, strength is going to win. An argument could certainly be made for a system that caps or taxes points spent on a given stat after a point, but that's not the system we have.

I do agree that keeping the number of valuable stats low makes the game easier. I just don't see that as a totally bad thing, believe it or not. Stats can confuse a lot of people, but if the game doesn't try to trick them into thinking every stat is more-or-less valuable (like DA:O does), that just makes the game a little more accessible. I'm all about making 3 or possibly even 4 stats valuable to everyone, but I don't see the point in trying to sell magic to warriors and rogues (for example).

[tmp7704]

soteria wrote...

I just don't see a benefit in making magic valuable enough for warriors to consider taking that over strength.

Well, i imagine the benefit here would be ability to have different but equally useful warrior builds, and potentially a different playstyle associated with either of these. I.e. more variety to the game. The magic could for example be used to provide resistance against magical attacks, reduction of incoming magical damage and increase of received heals, which could make it useful attribute for warrior focused on survival/tank role. (of course it doesn't work very well with the way DAO is at the moment, given the "magic" damage isn't very common)

Modifié par tmp7704, 04 novembre 2010 - 02:43 .

[ladydesire]

tmp7704 wrote...

soteria wrote...

I just don't see a benefit in making magic valuable enough for warriors to consider taking that over strength.

Well, i imagine the benefit here would be ability to have different but equally useful warrior builds, and potentially a different playstyle associated with either of these. I.e. more variety to the game. The magic could for example be used to provide resistance against magical attacks, reduction of incoming magical damage and increase of received heals, which could make it useful attribute for warrior focused on survival/tank role. (of course it doesn't work very well with the way DAO is at the moment, given the "magic" damage isn't very common)

I haven't looked through every line of script in DAO, but I do know for a fact that your character's Magic stat has an impact on all
Health poultices, and is also part of the calculation for %healing received items; it may also do some other things as well. The same is true for Willpower for Lyrium and Stamina potions. I haven't found all the places where Cunning is beneficial, but I assume that has uses for Warriors and Mages as well.

[maxernst]

soteria wrote...

Well, i'd disagree here -- there should be imo instead a benefit to investing points in all attributes big enough at least to make the player consider potential trade-offs and weight their options. Because again, i don't see forcing the player to min-max all points into 1-2 stats as increase in difficulty per se. If anything, it could be argued that actually makes things easier, by taking away from the player any need to decide how to divide their points and how then to play to strengths of their individual build.

I just don't see a benefit in making magic valuable enough for warriors to consider taking that over strength. As long as warriors are choosing between spending a single point in strength or a single point in magic, strength is going to win. An argument could certainly be made for a system that caps or taxes points spent on a given stat after a point, but that's not the system we have.
.

I don't think all stats should be equal for all characters, but I actually like the idea of diminishing returns, so that if you already have high attributes in certain areas, you might get more benefit from improving your weaknesses.  Suppose, a warrior has 50 strength and 10 magic, I don't think it would be so unreasonable to have him gain more through a 10% increase in his magic stat than a 2% increase inhis strength stat.  It's more important for a wide receiver to be fast and for an offensive lineman to be strong, but that doesn't mean that a particular offensive linemen might not be better served by working on his speed than his strength.  I don't understand the "that's not the system we have" argument when we're making a new game; we can change the system.

One thing I quite liked about Planescape:Torment was that intelligence, wisdom, and charisma, which had limited use in traditional D&D games except for spellcasters, were useful for opening additional dialogue options.  Of course, that only worked for the protagonist, just like it wasn't useful for your companions to put points into coercion.