473 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

How is that cheating?

I view it as "discarding a mechanic I dislike."  But since I have to modify savegames in order to do it, I have no problem with technically labelling it cheating.

[Anathemic]

RangerTypeII wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

RangerTypeII wrote...

upsetting shorts

in one or the promos by bioware gave me the impression the game was hack and slash i forget the exact words cut off the edces and eliminate the strings or something like that

In appearance, possibly.  The video I think you're referring to was trying to say that the game is trying to change its presentation and style, not actually remove the dice rolls or tactical nature of its predecessor.  Have you seen the gameplay walkthrough yet?

i did see the walk through  my firs thought ws oh no there is a jump button  just need to play it and see

Starting from 3:15 in the video:

"I wanted combat that felt it wasn't silently rolling dice behind the scenes; it felt like when I was pushing a button it felt like it was responding and my characters were responding accordingly, because it looks faster...."

And the scene depicted in the video was a rogue-class Hawke tping short distances to rapidly dispatch darkspawn... makes me think of Sorceress 'blink' move from Diablo II.. hmmm... and it does look faster just like Diablo II...

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

I've never understood why we don't actually talk about this issue more. Whenever the voiced protagonist gets discussed we spin off into RP issues and completely ignore the question of whether a voiced protagonist is worth the zots.

I suspect because the answer to that question relies on the value derived from the voiced protagonist.

For those who strongly favour the voiced protagonist, that benefit is massive, and greatly outweighs the costs.

For those who strongly oppose the voiced protagonist, that benefit isn't there at all (in fact, it's a massive cost, not a benefit), so it only compounds to costs.

Since the zot costs are the same for everyone, the only point of contention is what actual value is provided by the voice.  So that's what we discuss.

[upsettingshorts]

"Felt like it wasn't" does not mean "discards" silently rolling dice behind the scenes.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:28 .

[In Exile]

Notice how it says 'felt' and 'looks' instead of 'is'.

[Anathemic]

In Exile wrote...

Notice how it says 'felt' and 'looks' instead of 'is'.

Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

And if you're going to debate that said game footage doesn't necessarily make it true, then you're just grasping at straws and same logic depicted in this view can be said for the same for Diablo 3 on calling it tactical and strategical up to par with a RTS game.

Modifié par Anathemic, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:34 .

[upsettingshorts]

Anathemic wrote...

Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

The visual evidence only supports the idea that Mike Laidlaw is talking about look and feel.

Unless it is cunningly hiding twitch mechanics somewhere we can't see them.  To me it looks like a faster and more responsive version of DAO.  Luckily, that's just what Mr. Laidlaw claims I should see. 

Anathemic wrote...

And if you're going to debate that said game footage doesn't necessarily make it true, then you're just grasping at straws and same logic depicted in this view can be said for the same for Diablo 3 on calling it tactical and strategical up to par with a RTS game.

No, we're going to debate that your interpretation of the footage is flawed.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:38 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I view it as "discarding a mechanic I dislike."  But since I have to modify savegames in order to do it, I have no problem with technically labelling it cheating.

I didn't realise you were actually changing the resulting Paragon/Renegade scores.  That makes sense now.

Since the two labels were so poorly defined as to be meaningless, I just ignored them throughout both games.  I just chose the option that was most credibly something my character would say.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Anathemic wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Notice how it says 'felt' and 'looks' instead of 'is'.

Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

Given that Mike was clearly pushing that angle, if 'is' were true he would have said 'is'.

So either Mike is really bad at his job, or he had some other reason not to make an unambiguous statement.

[Anathemic]

Screwed up post

Modifié par Anathemic, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:46 .

[Anathemic]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

The visual evidence only supports the idea that Mike Laidlaw is talking about look and feel.

Unless it is cunningly hiding twitch mechanics somewhere we can't see them.  To me it looks like a faster and more responsive version of DAO.  Luckily, that's just what Mr. Laidlaw claims I should see. 

Anathemic wrote...

And if you're going to debate that said game footage doesn't necessarily make it true, then you're just grasping at straws and same logic depicted in this view can be said for the same for Diablo 3 on calling it tactical and strategical up to par with a RTS game.

No, we're going to debate that your interpretation of the footage is flawed.

Notice how in DA2 video Hawke uses blink-ability and takes out units with 1-2 hits. Notice how in D3 video Barbarian uses jump-ability and takes out  units wiht 1-2 hits.

Granted DA2 video doesn't have the same  number of enemies depcited in D3 video but the combat mechancis for both seem eerily similar.

Modifié par Anathemic, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:47 .

[AlanC9]

Anathemic wrote...

Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

By "transitioned" you mean something like "confused with"? "Mistaken for"? "Blurred into"?

@ Sylvius: yeah, I think you're right. I'm probably more sensitive to the zot component  than a lot of folks because I'm neither strongly attached to the benefits nor perturbed by the non-zot costs, so the zots are relatively more important to me.

[In Exile]

Anathemic wrote...
Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

No, it can't. In fact, this is incoherent. ''Looks'' means ''on visual inspection appears'' so if you evidence is that the game looks action-oriented it proves exactly nothing because it's supposed to look that way.

[upsettingshorts]

Well, what I do is artificially inflate both scores to the point that it's impossible for my character to "fail" any check.

Then I pick whatever option I want. Sometimes its unlocked Paragon/Renegade choices, sometimes it's neutral ones, etc. I just don't like being restricted by the system for several reasons.

[Dave of Canada]

So my Warden who 1-2 hits enemies but has to shuffle around them for five seconds and spend another five seconds to do an attack animation makes it like Diablo 3 but slowed down?

[Anathemic]

In Exile wrote...

Anathemic wrote...
Notice how said statements are said with real-time footage of in-game battle scenes. 'Looks' can be easily transitioned into 'is' with physicial (or in this case visual) evidence complimenting it.

No, it can't. In fact, this is incoherent. ''Looks'' means ''on visual inspection appears'' so if you evidence is that the game looks action-oriented it proves exactly nothing because it's supposed to look that way.

I'm pretty sure it's = it is, so what you directly said was "It is supposed to look that way" so you complimented my point? or are you nitpicking on words and said in-game footage is actually tactical and strategical even if it looks eerily similar to a Diablo3 in-game video I posted in a previous post?

[Anathemic]

Dave of Canada wrote...

So my Warden who 1-2 hits enemies but has to shuffle around them for five seconds and spend another five seconds to do an attack animation makes it like Diablo 3 but slowed down?

Thought we are talkigng about DA2? in DA:O the Warden can't blink into enemies (which imo a blink-like spell defeats the purpose of shuffling around enemies).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Well, what I do is artificially inflate both scores to the point that it's impossible for my character to "fail" any check.
Then I pick whatever option I want. Sometimes its unlocked Paragon/Renegade choices, sometimes it's neutral ones, etc. I just don't like being restricted by the system for several reasons.

That's an excellent idea.  I should have done that.

I will for ME3 (assuming it has a relevantly similar system).

[In Exile]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Well, what I do is artificially inflate both scores to the point that it's impossible for my character to "fail" any check.
Then I pick whatever option I want. Sometimes its unlocked Paragon/Renegade choices, sometimes it's neutral ones, etc. I just don't like being restricted by the system for several reasons.

Which savegame editor do you use? This actually sounds like a great idea. I want to do the same for both ME1 and ME2 to be able to roleplay in a situationally coherent way and not be bound by the scores.

Anathemic wrote...
I'm pretty sure it's = it is, so what you
directly said was "It is supposed to look that way" so you complimented
my point? or are you nitpicking on words and said in-game footage is
actually tactical and strategical even if it looks eerily similar to a
Diablo3 in-game video I posted in a previous post?

Bioware says the following: the game ought to look hack and slash, but under the hood the mechanic is indentical to DA:O; only visual presentation varies.

You want to say: the game is hack and slash; under the hood the mechanic has changed and the combat is not stat. driven the same way.

To prove your point, you can't show evidence that is consistent with both positions. Your evidence - the combat looking like hack and slash - does not refute what Bioware wants to say. It is a bad argument with poor evidence.

[Dave of Canada]

Anathemic wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

So my Warden who 1-2 hits enemies but has to shuffle around them for five seconds and spend another five seconds to do an attack animation makes it like Diablo 3 but slowed down?

Thought we are talkigng about DA2? in DA:O the Warden can't blink into enemies (which imo a blink-like spell defeats the purpose of shuffling around enemies).

The "blink" is what's replacing shuffling, that's why I brought it up. So going next to an enemy and two shotting them in the video (on probably the easiest difficulty) is exactly like shuffling and two shotting an enemy in Origins.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:54 .

[Anathemic]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

So my Warden who 1-2 hits enemies but has to shuffle around them for five seconds and spend another five seconds to do an attack animation makes it like Diablo 3 but slowed down?

Thought we are talkigng about DA2? in DA:O the Warden can't blink into enemies (which imo a blink-like spell defeats the purpose of shuffling around enemies).

The "blink" is what's replacing shuffling, that's why I brought it up.

And 'blink' is what makes said DA2 video eerily similar to the D3 one I posted, so I see no reason why your bringing DA:O up when obviously the Warden didn't have this 'blink' ability and had to manually shuffle around enemies, not to mention said Warden was slower to large degree compared to Hawke in the DA2 video.

[upsettingshorts]

In Exile wrote...

Which savegame editor do you use? This actually sounds like a great idea. I want to do the same for both ME1 and ME2 to be able to roleplay in a situationally coherent way and not be bound by the scores.

I wasn't able to do it in ME1 (I had to use exploits for that to bump my Charm/Intimidate, though there may be programs out now I'm not aware of) but in ME2 I use the Gibbed Save Editor.

[AlanC9]

Anathemic wrote...
Notice how in DA2 video Hawke uses blink-ability and takes out units with 1-2 hits. Notice how in D3 video Barbarian uses jump-ability and takes out  units wiht 1-2 hits.

Granted DA2 video doesn't have the same  number of enemies depcited in D3 video but the combat mechancis for both seem eerily similar.

You hit things and they die? Yep, exactly alike.

[Anathemic]

AlanC9 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...
Notice how in DA2 video Hawke uses blink-ability and takes out units with 1-2 hits. Notice how in D3 video Barbarian uses jump-ability and takes out  units wiht 1-2 hits.

Granted DA2 video doesn't have the same  number of enemies depcited in D3 video but the combat mechancis for both seem eerily similar.

You hit things and they die? Yep, exactly alike.

Thanks for dumbing it down to an elementary-school level to satisify yourself as you see fit. If you actually read it and analyzed it to a degree that one would do in a proper argument you would see the point I'm making is the speed and action on how killing takes places which eerily resembles hack-n-slash games like Diablo 3.