174 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

TMZuk wrote...

To the first part: Developing you character is, E.G., deciding wether you are going to continue specializing your character in dual-wieding, or do you want him/her to pick up some skill in two-handers. In fact, it would be great, if Bioware had decided to expand on these choices, so it could also be learning magic, or picklock, or whatever else you would feel like.

Your argument seems to be that the number of options don't matter, provided you have the very specific options you want.

TMZuk wrote...
To the second part: Taking away my choices in character development is not affecting gameplay? I'll be damned.

The animations do that?

TMZuk wrote...
To the final part: It is... -working- ? Like **** it is. It's making several of the posters in this very thread extremely unsatisfied with the direction the development of this game has taken.

I'm not sure you unerstood my point there. I meant the overzealous animations are serving the purpose of reaching audiences the game might otherwise not.

[crimzontearz]

TMZuk wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

welcome to several years ago....

the devs specified that the warrior is NOT the only fighter in the game, Rogues are NOT thieves they are just a different kind of fighter, so, the Warrior uses 2 hands and sword and shield and the Rogue uses 2 weapons and long range

I could make it a really long post as per how this balances out but this is the jist of it

 THE ROGUE IS NOT A THIEF ARCHETYPE...at least not in the dev's mind. So they just basically differenciated the two fighter archetypes in a more pronounced way since they failed to do so in origins

What you apparantly fail to understand is this: We are quite a few who do -NOT- wish archetypes, but freedom in character development. And to your remark about several years ago; what is new in the fact that a rogue is sneaky backstabber who can pick locks? The only "news" here is that in DA2, he can do it while back-flipping, and kicking bottles created out of nothing in the direction of the enemy.

and you are speaking like you want the warrior to be an all end fighting archetype with ALL combat talents available to it....which is what DA2 developers do not want.

It's an archetype gameplay choice, you may not agree with it but that's what they are doing to differentiate more the combat style of the warrior and the rogue. I dislike archetypes myself hence why I do not play D20 games...I make an exception for Bioware because they are awesome storytellers 

Modifié par crimzontearz, 02 janvier 2011 - 05:18 .

[Night Prowler76]

It wont have the same level of custumization, your choices will be Hawke the Fighter/Rogue/Mage, and I think that it will make you not want to do multiple play throughs, one of the big draws of Origins is that with every new game, you could make the chracter completely different, this will not be the case, it does seem like they are going to make it like ME, which is a fine game, but I prefer DAO.

[PsychoBlonde]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

It wont have the same level of custumization, your choices will be Hawke the Fighter/Rogue/Mage, and I think that it will make you not want to do multiple play throughs, one of the big draws of Origins is that with every new game, you could make the chracter completely different, this will not be the case, it does seem like they are going to make it like ME, which is a fine game, but I prefer DAO.

Actually, since a significant number of talents in Origins were seriously underpowered (and several were seriously overpowered), you wind up making pretty much the same characters over and over.

The rogue and warrior may have fewer weapon styles to select from, but they actually have MORE ability trees with MORE path options other than "you must take this to get that".  From what I understand they're getting rid of "skills", which means you won't be forced to put four of your skill points into "Combat mastery" in order to get tier 4 talents.

There is not and has never been a game with "fully customizable" characters, because the term is and would be meaningless.  People were complaining before Origins came out that they couldn't play a Human Commoner or have body tats or change the body model and they didn't like the hairstyle limitations and you can't play a Qunari and my warrior can't pick locks and blah de blah de blah.  Origins was not "fully customizable" and there's little to no indication that Two will, in fact, have FEWER options.  DIFFERENT ones, yes.  But FEWER?  Nobody knows that except the devs.

[Negix]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

It wont have the same level of custumization, your choices will be Hawke the Fighter/Rogue/Mage, and I think that it will make you not want to do multiple play throughs, one of the big draws of Origins is that with every new game, you could make the chracter completely different, this will not be the case, it does seem like they are going to make it like ME, which is a fine game, but I prefer DAO.

if they are going chantry vs mages i guess it would be at least two playthroughs then, one as mage and one as warrior/rogue. And only because you cant change race and origin it doesn't mean you cant make different characters. this is not mass effect, where you had a preset character.

[Meltemph]

I like playing other races but only if there is recognition of the different race. Specially in a world that DA takes place in where racial tensions are quite high. I was not satisfied with how little of focus the dwarves and elves had, compared to the human origin. I was fine with how the human origin was delt with, in fact I praise it, but dwarves and elves got quite a bit less recognition time, and at times it seemed like most didnt either recognize or forgot that you were a different race, except on those rare occasions.



It's kinda like playing a Drow in NWN2. How the hell are people not wigging out when they see one running around in towns? It just becomes more disappointing, to me. So if they are not going to take full advantage of the lore/racial tensions of a race/area then I would rather not have them put resources into such a character.

[Night Prowler76]

Negix wrote...

Night Prowler76 wrote...

It wont have the same level of custumization, your choices will be Hawke the Fighter/Rogue/Mage, and I think that it will make you not want to do multiple play throughs, one of the big draws of Origins is that with every new game, you could make the chracter completely different, this will not be the case, it does seem like they are going to make it like ME, which is a fine game, but I prefer DAO.

if they are going chantry vs mages i guess it would be at least two playthroughs then, one as mage and one as warrior/rogue. And only because you cant change race and origin it doesn't mean you cant make different characters. this is not mass effect, where you had a preset character.

I realize what your saying, but my main point is no matter what "path" you chose, you are still Hawke, and not a character of your own making, thats why I dont think the allure of replayability will be there, it will just be like, oh great, now Im hawke with a sword instead of a staff, I have a really bad feeling this game is going to get streamlined and watered down for the masses:<

Im not dissing the game guys, Im getting it for sure, It just seems like they are taking a commercialized direction, and with TES coming out in the fall, they better bring their A game.

Modifié par Night Prowler76, 02 janvier 2011 - 06:03 .

[In Exile]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

I realize what your saying, but my main point is no matter what "path" you chose, you are still Hawke, and not a character of your own making, thats why I dont think the allure of replayability will be there, it will just be like, oh great, now Im hawke with a sword instead of a staff, I have a really bad feeling this game is going to get streamlined and watered down for the masses:<

It was the same thing in DA:O. The game does not treat you differently whether you have pointy ears and a sword or you're 4 feet tall and have a sword. What does make a difference is how you view the character yourself. So yes, if you happen to think that Hawke is not your character and there is only one possible Hawke, that will make you feel like there is less choice. But that's a psychological difference on the part of the player, not a meaningful aspect of the design.

[crimzontearz]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Negix wrote...

Night Prowler76 wrote...

It wont have the same level of custumization, your choices will be Hawke the Fighter/Rogue/Mage, and I think that it will make you not want to do multiple play throughs, one of the big draws of Origins is that with every new game, you could make the chracter completely different, this will not be the case, it does seem like they are going to make it like ME, which is a fine game, but I prefer DAO.

if they are going chantry vs mages i guess it would be at least two playthroughs then, one as mage and one as warrior/rogue. And only because you cant change race and origin it doesn't mean you cant make different characters. this is not mass effect, where you had a preset character.

I realize what your saying, but my main point is no matter what "path" you chose, you are still Hawke, and not a character of your own making, thats why I dont think the allure of replayability will be there, it will just be like, oh great, now Im hawke with a sword instead of a staff, I have a really bad feeling this game is going to get streamlined and watered down for the masses:<

people have a hugely different idea of what makes a game "replayable"

in my case I finished ME 1 and 2 about 20 times a piece.......always with the very same character Etrius Shepard

[upsettingshorts]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

I realize what your saying, but my main point is no matter what "path" you chose, you are still Hawke, and not a character of your own making,

Then you didn't use your imagination.  What was Hawke like in Lothering this playthrough?   All we know so far is that he or she is a human refugee fleeing the Darkspawn.  The rest is up to you.

Same as how with say, the Dwarf noble, all we know is that he was betrayed or conned into killing his brother and exiled.  You didn't "make" that part of their character, did you?  

Night Prowler76 wrote...

I have a really bad feeling this game is going to get streamlined and watered down for the masses:<

Oh you're one of those posters.  Nevermind.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 janvier 2011 - 06:07 .

[hawkmoondirge]

Despite the lack of origins, the level of customization is grand.



Now lets think, for one moment.



You make a warrior archer yes? In DAO. You fill out the archery tree. No warrior talents. Now here you just pick a rogue. Problem=solved.



Can't dual wield warrior...pick a rogue. Take aggro talents and dual wielding talents. Just made a warrior with two weapons.



Want a thief? You specced out deft hands in origins.



Wjhat I'm getting to, it that you specced your character to be what you want, you just need to know what each class can do. We, however lack the information to do so at this time because oh we haven't played it.



Finally, the race issue. Yes he's human blah blah blah. Howeve rthis is a story about 1 specific character.Of cours ehis background is already chosen. However, if you look at it you had 6 identifiable reactions from npcs due to origin

"Your royalty!" "Elf!" "Magic user!" "Dwarf! " which you could reply as an angry dale, or whatever. really not a game breaker.



In addition the same level of choice remains intact. This whole story is just that your story. You are now making your origin. We allready know your the champion, the question is now how do you get that way?

[soteria]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

The rogue and warrior may have fewer weapon styles to select from, but they actually have MORE ability trees with MORE path options other than "you must take this to get that". From what I understand they're getting rid of "skills", which means you won't be forced to put four of your skill points into "Combat mastery" in order to get tier 4 talents.

This is a really good point, and I'd like to expand on it. In Origins, it's true that you had the choice of playing a warrior as SnS, 2h, DW, archery, or some combination. In practice, though, every SnS warrior picked pretty much the same talents because there were only 12 of them and the talent trees were incredibly linear. Likewise with all the other talent trees.

Potentially in DA2 we'll be able to build two different SnS warriors with fairly distinct builds, and I think that's pretty exciting. Warriors archers and rogue archers played almost identically in practice, and to a lesser extent the same could be said for DW. For that reason I don't really mind losing those two trees for the warrior since I still may get the same variety in actual warrior builds. The effect *may* be that we get a greater number of distinct warrior and rogue builds, even though the warrior class loses two trees.

[Tinxa]

I don't see how being "Hawke" is any different from being "Gray warden". For story purposes the PC is always "something".

The only difference is you can't be different races but you can be a female character and fully customise your appearance. You can't do that in The witcher or Deus ex 3 for example. In planescape torment you were always the same looking namless one. But no one is saying those games are watered down.

It's just a different approach.

[TMZuk]

hawkmoondirge wrote...

Despite the lack of origins, the level of customization is grand.

Now lets think, for one moment.

You make a warrior archer yes? In DAO. You fill out the archery tree. No warrior talents. Now here you just pick a rogue. Problem=solved.

What a load of nonsense. In DA:O, I take some archery talents, some DW talents, and some -warrior- talents.

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Can't dual wield warrior...pick a rogue. Take aggro talents and dual wielding talents. Just made a warrior with two weapons.

I want my rogue to have some archery talents, some rogue talents and some sword/shield talents.

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Want a thief? You specced out deft hands in origins.

What has that got to do with anything?

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Wjhat I'm getting to, it that you specced your character to be what you want, you just need to know what each class can do. We, however lack the information to do so at this time because oh we haven't played it.

None so blind as those who refuse to see.

I Want To Make A Rogue With Sword/buckler If I Like.

Is that so bloody hard to comprehend? Perhaps it is of no importance to you, but it is to me! So stop the nonsense about "the level of customization is grand." It is not. It wasn't very good in DA:O. and it is -worse- in DA2. And, combined with the IMO awful animations, it is excactly the dealbreaker.

[In Exile]

TMZuk wrote...
None so blind as those who refuse to see.

I Want To Make A Rogue With Sword/buckler If I Like.

Is that so bloody hard to comprehend? Perhaps it is of no importance to you, but it is to me! So stop the nonsense about "the level of customization is grand." It is not. It wasn't very good in DA:O. and it is -worse- in DA2. And, combined with the IMO awful animations, it is excactly the dealbreaker.

But if you appreciate that your preference is unique and dependent on your tastes, you have to be able to appreciate how for other people other things make the game customizable, and so the game could be customizable for them while not being customizable for you.

All of which creates the problem that the term customization then losses meaning because it depends on whatever any one person wants.

[Bryy_Miller]

Karyuudan wrote...

Yep but still , it was awesome be able to play with 3 different race.
I mean 1st run i did as elf mage , 2nd i did as dw rogue human , 3rd i did as warrior dwarf.
IF i have to play with only 1 dude i think i would not going to play 3 times.
Well i'm hope i'm wrong.

Considering Origins had about thirty or more different variables that could change by the end, and DA2 will reportedly double that with twelve ending to Origins' four (plus all the new variables), I don't think replayability is a very big issue.

Counting my deleted characters, I've played Dragon Age 1 about twenty times.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 02 janvier 2011 - 06:59 .

[Cobrawar]

It is a step backward the player loses a ton of control and freedom for a character that is voiced

[Ziggeh]

TMZuk wrote...

None so blind as those who refuse to see.

I Want To Make A Rogue With Sword/buckler If I Like.

Is that so bloody hard to comprehend? Perhaps it is of no importance to you, but it is to me!

And the point he is making is that a rogue with a sword and shield is called a warrior now; The distinction is largely artificial.

TMZuk wrote...
So stop the nonsense about "the level of customization is grand." It is not. It wasn't very good in DA:O. and it is -worse- in DA2.

You're still making the argument that being able to do WXY is less customisable than being able to do XYZ. Pycho' just posted the point that the talent trees allow for significantly more customisation in that are, yet your position is that if you can't do a small set of very specific things it is in some way less.

[Meltemph]

TMZuk wrote...

hawkmoondirge wrote...

Despite the lack of origins, the level of customization is grand.

Now lets think, for one moment.

You make a warrior archer yes? In DAO. You fill out the archery tree. No warrior talents. Now here you just pick a rogue. Problem=solved.

What a load of nonsense. In DA:O, I take some archery talents, some DW talents, and some -warrior- talents.

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Can't dual wield warrior...pick a rogue. Take aggro talents and dual wielding talents. Just made a warrior with two weapons.

I want my rogue to have some archery talents, some rogue talents and some sword/shield talents.

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Want a thief? You specced out deft hands in origins.

What has that got to do with anything?

hawkmoondirge wrote...
Wjhat I'm getting to, it that you specced your character to be what you want, you just need to know what each class can do. We, however lack the information to do so at this time because oh we haven't played it.

None so blind as those who refuse to see.

I Want To Make A Rogue With Sword/buckler If I Like.

Is that so bloody hard to comprehend? Perhaps it is of no importance to you, but it is to me! So stop the nonsense about "the level of customization is grand." It is not. It wasn't very good in DA:O. and it is -worse- in DA2. And, combined with the IMO awful animations, it is excactly the dealbreaker.

Sounds like you want DA to be DnD.

[Bryy_Miller]

Cobrawar wrote...

It is a step backward the player loses a ton of control and freedom for a character that is voiced

We get it. You don't like the changes in DA2. Instead of blanket statements, unfunny jokes in response to posts directed at you, and parrotting others, you should really give your own opinion as to why.

[upsettingshorts]

Cobrawar is just mad that Bioware didn't ask him to come back to work on Dragon Age 2.

[Cobrawar]

whats the point bioware has already made the game anything I say to try and change is a attempt in futility and will have close to little if not no impact on the game itself when it is relseased

Modifié par Cobrawar, 02 janvier 2011 - 07:28 .

[Cobrawar]

Honestly I think bioware is shooting themselves in the foot. I think they are being lazy and just copying what they did in mass effect to a fantasy setting because its an easy game for them to make

[upsettingshorts]

Cobrawar wrote...

 its an easy game for them to make

And you know this because you worked with Bioware to "help create the Qunari!"  It's all coming together.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 janvier 2011 - 07:25 .

[Ziggeh]

Got to love a platitude.