298 réponses à ce sujet

[Tleining]

@ Angry
repeating it doesn't change the fact that you don't have anything official on it. What i was saying was, that even if we don't get those Points at Level Start, those are only 2 points. That's a fact.
So we are missing 6 Points, 4 of those come with tomes, missing 2 more. One is added when we become a Grey Warden.
I can't account for 1 Talent Point, add to that the 2 from Level Start, at most it's 3 that we will be missing, and we don't have anything official for it.

tomes: http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Tomes

[RiverLucky]

StingingVelvet wrote...

Like many I was worried Dragon Age 2 would be a hack n' slash videogame based on the early developer comments about streamlining, accessibility and "something awesome happens."  The demo has come out though and I for one think the tactical gameplay shines as much as before, if not more so, and the changes are for the better (other than the lack of "isometric" camera distance).

The speed of animations and positioning does a lot to make combat more fun while not at all watering down tactics.  The menu system's clear and simple layout offers all the same options as before but in a more concise manner.  The focus on fun, while still being a tactical RPG, is felt with every powerful backstab or twirl of a wizard's staff.  The unique art style remings me of Team Fortress 2 in how it allows for instant recognition and clean lines, distinctive and unique in a crowded (for 20+ years now) genre of medievil fantasy.

For years I have been seeing "accessible" and "streamlining" as horrible buzzwords that actually mean simplification and dumber.  One could argue Bioware's last game, Mass Effect 2, lost a little too much of the RPG aspects in order to streamline and become more accessible.  Dragon Age 2 though?  It seems to me that it is the model to follow for making RPGs more accessible and fun without losing what they are.  Fun combat, easy to understand but challenging to master.  Fast and exciting animations, yet a deep tactical base.  It's more broad in appeal yet still the same core game, and it loses very little complexity.

Thoughts?

Alot of people mix up streamlining and simplifying.

Mass Effect 2 was simplified.

Dragon Age 2 has been streamlined.

I think DA2 plays exactly like DAO but they have streamlined the interface and few inventory choices like potions. I believe there is only one type now, which makes sense to me.

I also like some of the other changes like art style and more visceral combat. I think they should have reduced the pace of the combat animations. It would have come off better.

[AkiKishi]

Aldandil wrote...

Because the organisation is not the same, there are more than three possible icons, and because it's still possible to read the paraphrase and consider what you want to say.

Like the paraphrase

He won't be alone *3 plus intent icons? If you can guess what will come out of Hawkes mouth from that, could you do my lottery numbers..

RiverLucky wrote...
Mass Effect 2 was simplified.

Adding ammo seemed like being less simplified than just holding down the trigger, which was something you could do from about mid way through ME.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 28 février 2011 - 04:41 .

[Rawgrim]

dirtsa90 wrote...

@Rawgrim
I'm not really sure what you mean with your comment. Are you being sarcastic, agreeing/disagreeing with me? (I find it hard to tell sometimes tell especially on the internet)

I said I disliked that friendly fire is only on nightmare since it made you think twice before hurling your fireballs/lightning etc. around. A toggle on/off option would be for the people who dislike friendly fire. It's a world of magic after all so you would IMO be able to RP it being possible to harm only enemies.

Ohh I wasn t being sarcastic towards you. I agree with you when it comes to friendly fire I just found it odd that the devs would say "think like a general" when friendly fire is disabled. Alot of tactical stuff goes straight out the window when friendly fire isn`t a problem.

[blothulfur]

One could argue that a few games have benefitted from streamlining, the foremost in my mind being mask of the betrayer which kept itself grounded within a limited area and plot and then expanded the characters, story, depth and immersion to near torment levels rather than spreads itself out too thin like NWN2 did.

However I do remember first arriving in britannia after a long hiatus many years ago in ultima 7 and though the city of Trinsic was cluttered and insanely ambitious with almost everything useable or reactive in some way I never felt swamped or overwhelmed, I felt like a kid who'd been given the keys to the toy shop and told to do as I wished.

In conclusion I guess I can deal with streamlining the less important parts of the game so long as the meat of it is improved upon (the story, characters and interaction with the enviroment), however if a game really wants my undying loyalty it will drop me in the middle of a world that lives and breathes and say go on boy enjoy yourself.

Modifié par blothulfur, 28 février 2011 - 04:44 .

[Rawgrim]

RiverLucky wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

Like many I was worried Dragon Age 2 would be a hack n' slash videogame based on the early developer comments about streamlining, accessibility and "something awesome happens."  The demo has come out though and I for one think the tactical gameplay shines as much as before, if not more so, and the changes are for the better (other than the lack of "isometric" camera distance).

The speed of animations and positioning does a lot to make combat more fun while not at all watering down tactics.  The menu system's clear and simple layout offers all the same options as before but in a more concise manner.  The focus on fun, while still being a tactical RPG, is felt with every powerful backstab or twirl of a wizard's staff.  The unique art style remings me of Team Fortress 2 in how it allows for instant recognition and clean lines, distinctive and unique in a crowded (for 20+ years now) genre of medievil fantasy.

For years I have been seeing "accessible" and "streamlining" as horrible buzzwords that actually mean simplification and dumber.  One could argue Bioware's last game, Mass Effect 2, lost a little too much of the RPG aspects in order to streamline and become more accessible.  Dragon Age 2 though?  It seems to me that it is the model to follow for making RPGs more accessible and fun without losing what they are.  Fun combat, easy to understand but challenging to master.  Fast and exciting animations, yet a deep tactical base.  It's more broad in appeal yet still the same core game, and it loses very little complexity.

Thoughts?

Alot of people mix up streamlining and simplifying.

Mass Effect 2 was simplified.

Dragon Age 2 has been streamlined.

I think DA2 plays exactly like DAO but they have streamlined the interface and few inventory choices like potions. I believe there is only one type now, which makes sense to me.

I also like some of the other changes like art style and more visceral combat. I think they should have reduced the pace of the combat animations. It would have come off better.

Removing all non-combat skills isn`t simplifying is it? Adding symbols to click on during conversations, instead of having to read up to find a fitting response isn`t simplifying either? Or using the same "simplified" static outfits for your companions, that ME2 used?

[AngryFrozenWater]

Rawgrim wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

Just to pre-emptively defend myself (!), I'm sure I'll love DA2, I enjoyed the demo and have had the SE pre-ordered for several months now. Thought combat was more fun overall, especially for rogues.

That said, I will think it's a shame if I can't pick my non-combat skills as well as raise my stats and choose combat talents. Is it true of all skills from Origins that they are purely personality/attribute based rather than chosen manually? Herbalism, survival, traps and the like, or are they still in? I guess I'm hoping for some manual input, having my non-combat skills chosen for me would be streamlining a little too much for my personal tastes. Not enough to make me not enjoy the game, I'm sure, but still. What can I say, I enjoy maximum fiddling about with character stats and builds x

Actually, I don`t think there are any non-combat skills in DA2 (i could be wrong though). And given that Warriors can`t dual-wield, there is less point in putting points in DEX for Warriors. And Rogues can`t use swords or axes anymore, so I am thinking there is one less stat for them to worry about (strength).

Here's something you can experiment with: Level up in the demo and hover with your mouse above the attributes in the level up screen. You'll see what attributes contribute to what. Nice option, BTW. Dexterity (as an example) still has uses. Even for a mage and warrior. Try it out.

[Aldandil]

Rawgrim wrote...

Removing all non-combat skills isn`t simplifying is it? Adding symbols to click on during conversations, instead of having to read up to find a fitting response isn`t simplifying either? Or using the same "simplified" static outfits for your companions, that ME2 used?

Comparing to what the non-combat skills were used for in DA:O, then no, it's not simplifying. Most of them played no part whatsoever in DA:O. What never was complex can't really be simplified.
As I've said a few times now, you don't need to click symbols, you can read the paraphrases. To divine what you're saying based on the paraphrases is hard, all things considered. Far from simple. The symbols does not tell you much about the line that follows, and even if the paraphrases often aren't satisfying, they definitely provide ground for decision making.

[dirtsa90]

I hope there still are abilities like coercion and herbalism in DA2 now just defined by an attribute-score compared to being completely removed. I have a fondness of making my RP-characters huge smooth-talkers *coughmanipulatorscough*

I personally like the new dialogue-system but I'm able to see why some would prefer the old system.

Modifié par dirtsa90, 28 février 2011 - 04:58 .

[Veex]

Rawgrim wrote...

Removing all non-combat skills isn`t simplifying is it? Adding symbols to click on during conversations, instead of having to read up to find a fitting response isn`t simplifying either? Or using the same "simplified" static outfits for your companions, that ME2 used?

Not if those non combat skills have been implemented in a different fashion.

No, it's simply a different way of presenting dialogue options. Reading (Intimidate) Give me all your gold... isn't any harder than choosing (Hammer) I'll take that.

Actually the companion outfits would be less dumbed down, as it requires making unique sets of armor for each companion that changes over time, rather than equipping a generic set of leathers or robes that look exactly the same as the last and only change statistically.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Aldandil wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Removing all non-combat skills isn`t simplifying is it? Adding symbols to click on during conversations, instead of having to read up to find a fitting response isn`t simplifying either? Or using the same "simplified" static outfits for your companions, that ME2 used?

Comparing to what the non-combat skills were used for in DA:O, then no, it's not simplifying. Most of them played no part whatsoever in DA:O. What never was complex can't really be simplified.

Hehe. Don't be ridiculous. Of course they played a part in the game. They were there for a reason. You didn't feel the need to use them. That's cool. Others did.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 28 février 2011 - 05:02 .

[AkiKishi]

Veex wrote...

Actually the companion outfits would be less dumbed down, as it requires making unique sets of armor for each companion that changes over time, rather than equipping a generic set of leathers or robes that look exactly the same as the last and only change statistically.

If you think the only reason to equip armour is for the visuals...

[Blablabla79]

Rawgrim wrote...

Truth be told: I allways felt that DA:O was pretty dumbed down as well. When searching for something you need to complete a quest, for example, you get the location marked with a big arrow on the map. I am too used to older rpgs, I guess - so i am abit biased.

Weird how an Action RPG like Divine Divinity 2 has next to no markers and let's you figure out what to do on your own, while a "RPG" like DA points you to where to go next. 

Imagine that, even though I talked to the NPC in DD2 about a location and I still missed it, because I was so used to a quest to be activated and a marker to appear, when someone talks about a location where you can do a quest or so. 

Modifié par Blablabla79, 28 février 2011 - 05:08 .

[Veex]

BobSmith101 wrote...

If you think the only reason to equip armour is for the visuals...

If only we could customize the stats of our companion's armor with runes and such...

Modifié par Veex, 28 février 2011 - 05:10 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Veex wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

If you think the only reason to equip armour is for the visuals...

If only we could customize the stats of our companion's armor with runes and such...

I think you'll find your going to be very much more limited in how many stats and slots can enchant or place runes compared to DA:O with larger variety or stats based gears and selections of gears. Now as to how good or bad that will be I will reserve judgement until played full game not demo. People seem to be making the mistake of streamlined or simplified... It's been both. If you need examples I think your an idiot here's a couple examples, Streamlined=Combat and Equipment and Skills / Simplified=Chat system and UI. Simplified does mean dumbed down in sense it means requires less effort or thinking to use not that have to be an idiot to use it even in it's dumbed down state.

As to how good the game is and whether any of those become series ruining or improving I will wait and see.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 28 février 2011 - 05:24 .

[Ginen]

Streamlining/Accessibility is not all bad. Of course it's highly dependent on what you want to make more accessible. If you create an UI that can't be navigated with less than 5 fingers, you clearly have a design issue. I remember reading in a game design book that a well designed game is one that your grandmother can play even if she hates it. Streamlining/Accessibility is for creating game mechanic systems; it has no bearing on story and dialogue or even art style. Or at least that is how I see Streamlining/Accessibility. Did you ever notice that Tetris is still one of the most popular titles to play? The rules are very simple; make a complete row of blocks by aligning a number of falling puzzle blocks at the bottom of the interface and it will disappear. Rise and repeat; the problem is that as you advance, the speed increases; so you need to think fast and smart; either that all the blocks will gather at the top and then game over. Tetris is a very accessible game, but its very hard to master. I don't think anyone would consider Tetris to be 'dumbed down.' RPGs are a different beast; complexity has long been part of the deal because they are very system heavy. Statistics and mathematical models are stopgaps in order to simulate real world events. It really is like pulling teeth; can we create a system in order to perfectly calculate the odds of an arrow flying through the air only to catch an errant breeze which pushes it off course and into a wall, thereby missing the target? Not really, but we can use dice to determine probability, and if it rolls a certain way and if we properly calculate distance, speed, plus the ability of the archer; we can say pass/fail. The question is can we create a complex RPG that plays like Tetris?

[the_darkness]

One thing that I would like to address is the NPC armor. Was the armor really that big of a choice in DA:O? I don't really see that it was. Who here kept their tier 3 armor when they found some tier 4 because the 3 had less fatigue? There really was no real choice yes the better armor had more fatigue but the armor to fatigue ratio was better so no real choice. Yeah there was the whole armor that increased stats but wer're getting that with whole rune slots feature in DA2. For those who want a better explanation of what I'm talking about check out this link www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2590-Choice-and-Conflict

So in conclution I think that we really haven't lost anything that is really all that important as far as control over our npc party. Also one way that people express who they are is through their choices in cloths, so we get improved characterization. For those who will argue that cloths don't help to define a character look a Kratos, would everything about Kratos scream violence and madness if he were running about in full plate armor, of course not.

[Veex]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

If you need examples I think your an idiot

I chuckled. Then I sighed.

[Elsariel]

Ginen wrote...

Streamlining/Accessibility is not all bad. Of course it's highly dependent on what you want to make more accessible. If you create an UI that can't be navigated with less than 5 fingers, you clearly have a design issue. I remember reading in a game design book that a well designed game is one that your grandmother can play even if she hates it. Streamlining/Accessibility is for creating game mechanic systems; it has no bearing on story and dialogue or even art style. Or at least that is how I see Streamlining/Accessibility. Did you ever notice that Tetris is still one of the most popular titles to play? The rules are very simple; make a complete row of blocks by aligning a number of falling puzzle blocks at the bottom of the interface and it will disappear. Rise and repeat; the problem is that as you advance, the speed increases; so you need to think fast and smart; either that all the blocks will gather at the top and then game over. Tetris is a very accessible game, but its very hard to master. I don't think anyone would consider Tetris to be 'dumbed down.' RPGs are a different beast; complexity has long been part of the deal because they are very system heavy. Statistics and mathematical models are stopgaps in order to simulate real world events. It really is like pulling teeth; can we create a system in order to perfectly calculate the odds of an arrow flying through the air only to catch an errant breeze which pushes it off course and into a wall, thereby missing the target? Not really, but we can use dice to determine probability, and if it rolls a certain way and if we properly calculate distance, speed, plus the ability of the archer; we can say pass/fail. The question is can we create a complex RPG that plays like Tetris?

Wall-of-text crits for 1000...  *dies*

[the_darkness]

Now on the to the conversation wheel. This is more of a presentation choice that a major change to conversations. Has anyone here played a game where you had full text and then a voice over. It gets old quickly. With the emotion icons and the general description of what will be said I think that bioware has given us very good tools to make out choice of response.

[IRMcGhee]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Thing I hate about the Icons. I had to know what made my companions tick before I could known what made them approve and disaprove, now thanks to the friend/rival icon I'm Sigmund bloody Freud.

That's not what the icons represent, if I'm understanding you correctly. They tell you how the reply will be delivered, not whether they approve/disapprove of the chosen response. You'll still need to know how they tick to affect them the way you wish.  

[Elsariel]

IRMcGhee wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Thing I hate about the Icons. I had to know what made my companions tick before I could known what made them approve and disaprove, now thanks to the friend/rival icon I'm Sigmund bloody Freud.

That's not what the icons represent, if I'm understanding you correctly. They tell you how the reply will be delivered, not whether they approve/disapprove of the chosen response. You'll still need to know how they tick to affect them the way you wish.  

I believe you are correct.

[AngryFrozenWater]

the_darkness wrote...

One thing that I would like to address is the NPC armor. Was the armor really that big of a choice in DA:O? I don't really see that it was. Who here kept their tier 3 armor when they found some tier 4 because the 3 had less fatigue? There really was no real choice yes the better armor had more fatigue but the armor to fatigue ratio was better so no real choice. Yeah there was the whole armor that increased stats but wer're getting that with whole rune slots feature in DA2.

You are missing the point. The problem is "instant gratification". Of course you use the low level armor. Until you find better armor. That's part of the fun. But these days even that needs to be dumbed down, so we have compagnion armor. That's less trouble for our beloved customers. I think I saw a weapon for DA2 that automatically levels up. It becomes better when you level up. Haha. That's how stupid BioWare thinks their customers are. Gameplay dev: "Maybe they don't want to search for a better sword". Marketing: "We'll give them a sword that auto levels up. Works fine as a game promototion. That'll convince them to buy the game. We need the money. Get to it. "

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 28 février 2011 - 05:47 .

[deuce985]

I personally agree. While it definitely is streamlined, it is NOT Dragon Effect as some people on here swear. They kept most of the RPG elements in battle and now it seems like combo magic has even more strategy. This is the fastest fantasy RPG I've played in recent memory(if ever). Kudos to Bioware for that.