666 réponses à ce sujet

[Unbroken Lineage]

Well, for the sake of all present owners, and for the sake of any prospective buyers who have been subjected to this thread on the front page, I hope there is an official PatchOfAwesome from BioWare that fixes everyone's pet peeves. Happy gaming.

[chizow]

F-C wrote...

chizow wrote...




[*] issues the vast majority of users see

its hard to take anything you say seriously when you think the same trolls posting over and over i can count on one hand equals the vast majority of users.

Actually its clearly evident in every single post on such topics that the vast majority of people are scratching their heads over the design decisions made by Bioware, often indefensible, falling back to obscure and meaningless justifications such as "lore" and "realism" and "because Bioware said so". 

While these problems may not be game-breaking, the game would undoubtedly be improved if they were addressed for the benefit of everyone. You can clearly see in the link posted in my sig that the overwhelming majority of people think some or all of the suggestions I made would improve the game.

You can also see similar for polls, like some of the one's Statue posted, where the overwhelming majority would like to see changes to inexplicably missing features:

Statue's polls

[Haexpane]

montana_boy wrote...

Does the game need rebalancing?

Of Course!

Every RPG or RTS ever released needed rebalancing... goes with the territory.

Sadly the trolls will never understrand this.  They will just call you a "WoW Powergamer"

Anyone who actually played BG2 remembers the patches and balance fixes... it's NORMAL to patch unbalanced RPGs single player or not

[Pocketgb]

chizow wrote...

[*]
Actually its clearly evident in every single post on such topics that the vast majority of people are scratching their heads over the design decisions made by Bioware, often indefensible, falling back to obscure and meaningless justifications such as "lore" and "realism" and "because Bioware said so". 

While these problems may not be game-breaking, the game would undoubtedly be improved if they were addressed for the benefit of everyone. You can clearly see in the link posted in my sig that the overwhelming majority of people think some or all of the suggestions I made would improve the game.

You can also see similar for polls, like some of the one's Statue posted, where the overwhelming majority would like to see changes to inexplicably missing features:

Statue's polls

By "vast majority" he's going to be referring to everyone who's purchased DA:O - and assumes that everybody is aware of these issues.

[Timortis]

Pocketgb wrote...

His point is that in DA:O, some of those roles are much more valuable than others while quite a few are incredibly lackluster. He's not saying "anything i should come up with should work" (although that would be AWESOME to see in a game like this), rather that there are a few builds/combos that exceed, be it slightly or grealy, ahead of anything else.

Ahead of anything else according which measure? I keep reading this bogus theory that two Mages are a must or the game is too difficult and all that nonsense.

Does a class combo prove viable if you can beat the game on Nightmare with it without the main character ever dying? Is it viable if you've killed both end-game bosses on your first try, without your characters even getting seriously hurt? I can post screenshots if you wish, where all my characters are near full health in the killing blow shot, except for Alistair who's at 50%.

All I had was one Mage, with only  one healing spell. People are really blowing this thing out of proportion.

[F-C]

Georg Zoeller wrote...

Odd Hermit wrote...

slikster wrote...

1. This isn't DnD or WOW.
2. This isn't multiplayer.
3. Mages are supposed to be teh powerful.
4. This is Dragon Age. Deal with it.

These aren't excuses for a bad combat system.

True, but judging from critical reception, the combat system we made is quite good. At least for those who didn't want it to be a different game (class balanced vs. party balanced; class dps equality vs. utility equality, etc.)

Not perfect, mind you, but that would be boring, leave us with nothing to improve upon.

here is another quote from georg just a minute ago incase you missed it.

if you want to sit there and troll about you know more about their game than him, well this is just a lost cause.

[chizow]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

I'm sorry, I missed the game names in your responses.  Could you compile them in a list here again?

The game doesn't force anything on anyone.  You can roll a party however you like.  You just have to accept the tradeoffs, and plan accordingly.  It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

There's nothing at all stopping you from deviating from the standard default party build in any game.  But like any game, when you do deviate you must compensate, and this game like any game gives you all of the tools you need to do so.  If this weren't the case, then Nightmare wouldn't be possible with Tank/Archer/Archer/Healer, and yet it is.

Again, *ANY* fantasy-RPG game in the past had clear archetypes that offered numerous alternatives choices for each. 

• Healer class, you have clerics, priests, paladins, bards, minstrels, red mages, white mages, etc. 
• Debuff class, you had another mage class, rogue, shaman, witch doctor etc.
• Tank class, you had warrior, paladin, ninja, whatever
• DPS class, you had rogue, thief, dark/death knight, 2H, DW, whatever.

The problem is, the Mage class in this game provides all of those functions in a single class *better* than every other class.  Again, my intent is not to nerf mages, as that would simply increase reliance on mages further, the intent should be to buff other classes or change fundamental imbalances in the way dependencies for those classes are implemented, like Stamina. 

So again, if you want actual game names, any AD&D title going back as far as SSI Gold Box Forgotten Realms including all Bioware titles, BG1, BG2, NWN.  Any FF title, offline, online, or console.  Any other cRPG that uses a class-based system.  No other title allows for a single class to dominate in every aspect of the game, its really that simple.  Your argument for requiring a "nuclear family" type group completely falls apart when the game is designed in a matter that completely rewards mage-centric groups and penalizes alternative playstyles.

[SheffSteel]

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

[DragoonKain3]

Schyzm wrote...

wynn with heal line+spirit healer line is .95 as good as you're ever gna get a healer, and has 12? extra spells or so to pick, thats 3 entire lines.  all I said was among some of the very good spells, like mass paralyze, fireball, waking nightmare, etc I didn't know which was better.  not that I was so ragingly dumb I thought your idiotic "support caster" was actually a good build.  you're trying to say because I admitted to not knowing, among the very good spells which ones are better that I somehow don't know anything about anything.  which is a silly and inane lie.

Yeah, heal line + spirit healer is all you need for HEALING. But what about other types of support, as healing is only ONE aspect of support?

Is not Haste a good spell that warrants use? Is grease not a useful CC spell, especially if she's paired up with a fire mage? Spellbloom not useful when there's another mage?  Are the Glyphs weak (hint no they arent)? What are you going to do if someone puts CC on your tank and you need to dispel it? What then?

Seriously, you can be a healer + nuke, healer + CC, or a healer + buff management.  You're suggesting one of the first two, but when I talk about support, I talk about the latter. And there are some buff management skills that GREATLY improve my survivability, much more so than hybridizing your support character to be healer/nuke or healer/cc focused, especially when you already have another mage that covers nuking/cc (ala wizard).

I've never heard of the discrepancy before.  if it actually does turn off in one and not the other then I guess one is bugged and the other isn't.  but considering the game was bulit for pc and ported for consoles are you really sure its the way you imagine it?  again, you seem to think its bugged just because you consider it an exploit, people have said that about numerous other mage spells, that their mere use is an exploit.  I just don't buy that considering how incredibly terrible the designers would have to be.

And the PC version can't have you cast Crushing Prison on your Force Fielded tank, while the consoles allows you to.  This made Shockwave useless in PC (why the heck would you free an enemy from a forcefield when Shockwave doesn't even damage them?), but extremely useful in the consoles since your tank is unharmed by shockwave. Yet another bug where it shows that the PC version is NOT infallible in terms of intention.

It's not that the designers are 'bad', its just that their QA team is not up to snuff. Sorry Bioware, whoever is reading, but that at least is true, considering there was the dexterity bug on top of all this. Not that I don't appreciate the hotfix given by Dom, far from it, but I call it as I see it.

[F-C]

SheffSteel wrote...

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

[Unbroken Lineage]

Timortis wrote...
I keep reading this bogus theory that two Mages are a must or the game is too difficult and all that nonsense.

Does a class combo prove viable if you can beat the game on Nightmare with it without the main character ever dying? Is it viable if you've killed both end-game bosses on your first try, without your characters even getting seriously hurt? I can post screenshots if you wish, where all my characters are near full health in the killing blow shot, except for Alistair who's at 50%.

All I had was one Mage, with only  one healing spell. People are really blowing this thing out of proportion.

Indeed!  It would be helpful to the discussion if you did post those screenshots, but unlikely to sway the diehards, as they will likely say that intentionally playing with such a party is 1) stupid and 2) too much work because 3) the game is so easy with a party full of mages.

Anyway, nice to see another person that is unafraid to exercise a little discretion and accept the responsibility of playing with the party build of their choice.

[chizow]

F-C wrote...

Georg Zoeller wrote...

True, but judging from critical reception, the combat system we made is quite good. At least for those who didn't want it to be a different game (class balanced vs. party balanced; class dps equality vs. utility equality, etc.)

Not perfect, mind you, but that would be boring, leave us with nothing to improve upon.

here is another quote from georg just a minute ago incase you missed it.

if you want to sit there and troll about you know more about their game than him, well this is just a lost cause.

You do realize that statement by Georg Zoeller just invalidated all of your apologies and justifications to-date right?  It seems your function and raison d'etre for posting on these forums just disappeared. lol.

[Pocketgb]

Timortis wrote...

Ahead of anything else according which measure?...

That's
one of the bigger problems in this thread. It's that everyone has a
different definition of "success". For some they consider any build
"successful" in that no one dies in all their fights. Others see a
"successful" build in being able to breeze through the encounters.

For me? I consider the build with the craziest effort:reward ratio to be the most effective.

F-C wrote...

Georg Zoeller wrote...

True,
but judging from critical reception, the combat system we made is quite
good. At least for those who didn't want it to be a different
game (class balanced vs. party balanced; class dps equality vs. utility
equality, etc.)

Not perfect, mind you, but that would be boring, leave us with nothing to improve upon.

here is another quote from georg just a minute ago incase you missed it.

if you want to sit there and troll about you know more about their game than him, well this is just a lost cause.

That little passage shows me one of two things:
1. That people are really taking the issues some of us share *WAY* out of proportion, and
2. Georg admits that there's room for improvement.

Dunno
about you, Dime, but that quote just made my day : ) Devs are
acknowledging there are problems with the game. Whether they agree with
us on what those "problems" are is still up in the air, but that saying
is still a million times better than saying "all is working as
intended". And notice he never comments about it being "broken" or not, just that it is quite good - which I agree completely with: for all it's faults the combat is still insanely fun.

[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]

Modifié par Pocketgb, 18 novembre 2009 - 09:38 .

[DragoonKain3]

chizow wrote...

Again, *ANY* fantasy-RPG game in the past had clear archetypes that offered numerous alternatives choices for each.





Healer class, you have clerics, priests, paladins, bards, minstrels, red mages, white mages, etc.

Debuff class, you had another mage class, rogue, shaman, witch doctor etc.

Tank class, you had warrior, paladin, ninja, whatever

DPS class, you had rogue, thief, dark/death knight, 2H, DW, whatever.
The problem is, the Mage class in this game provides all of those functions in a single class *better* than every other class.[/list]

Emphasis mine.



The bolded part is SO NOT TRUE.



Warriors outtank mages outside of shimmering shield (which is bugged), and mages can't hold aggro at all.



Rogues has single target DPS that only mages can dream of.



As such, mages here are the best at two classes, because the developers intended to combine both classes into a single class. Good thing they put limitations though (too less talent points), as you won't be as effective in a certain aspect of the mage (cleric or wizard) without sacrificing the other aspect's spells. So while you might be an excellent debuffer or an excellent support, you can't be excellent at both at the same time.

[chizow]

SheffSteel wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...
It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

Then let me help.

Number of warriors in balanced party:1    Number of warrior NPCs to choose from: 5 (?)

Number of rogues in balanced party: 1    Number of rogue NPCs to choose from: 2

Number of mages in balanced party: 2    Number of mage NPCs to choose from: 2

Either the game was not intended to be balanced for that party lineup, or the designers overestimated the number of times player would want to play mages, or they forgot about the whole "replay value" concept.

And that's the big picture problem with the game's mage-centric design, certain people just can't seem to see beyond their knee-jerk defense of mages to realize this.

[F-C]

chizow wrote...
You do realize that statement by Georg Zoeller just invalidated all of your apologies and justifications to-date right?  It seems your function and raison d'etre for posting on these forums just disappeared. lol.

here is my reply already typed out for you.

F-C wrote...

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

i guess trolls will refuse to face reality even when they are being smacked in the face with it.

i personally would assume most the imperfections could be labeled "bugs" such as the shimmering shield and other buffs not shutting off properly.


he said he likes the current balance.

he said its not broken.


yet you still want to pick out one line and be like "OMG OMG SEE!!" while ignoring the important section.

[Unbroken Lineage]

chizow wrote...
So again, if you want actual game names, any AD&D title going back as far as SSI Gold Box Forgotten Realms including all Bioware titles, BG1, BG2, NWN.  Any FF title, offline, online, or console.  Any other cRPG that uses a class-based system.  No other title allows for a single class to dominate in every aspect of the game, its really that simple.  Your argument for requiring a "nuclear family" type group completely falls apart when the game is designed in a matter that completely rewards mage-centric groups and penalizes alternative playstyles.

It's odd that I feel like Goldbox titles and FF titles make my point for me, that adding and subtracting spellcasters affects difficulty.  But whatever.  I'm pretty sure any team full of Mages would wreck any game.

Dragon Age has one Mage class with which to DPS, Debuff and Heal.

If it weren't for the Arcane Warrior's tanking ability, there'd be no problem I guess?

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...

i guess trolls will refuse to face reality even when they are being smacked in the face with it.

i personally would assume most the imperfections could be labeled "bugs" such as the shimmering shield and other buffs not shutting off properly.

he said he likes the current balance.

he said its not broken.

yet you still want to pick out one line and be like "OMG OMG SEE!!" while ignoring the important section.

Interpretation is a beautiful word : )

That said, if he didn't think anything was wrong, there'd be no point in his "non perfect" comment.

So you interpret how you'll want to hear it, and we'll interpret it how we want to hear it, and we'll both be happy!

[AlphaMagnum]

Sevitan7 wrote...

Not to derail the topic, but if AlphaMagnum is still around, which line in the ABI_base governs damage? (cooldown and cost seem to be easy enough to find).

Or perhaps, is there anywhere where I can get an explanation of what each column does?

Sorry if I wasn't clear about that, but it's only the cost/cooldowns/prereqs/reqs/fatigue/upkeep? which can be altered in the ABI_base file.

If you want to alter damage formulae or effect durations or even mana drains caused by some modal abilities, you need to go into the scripts.

Those are accessible via the toolkit, but you need to take a few precautions outlined in the 'Click here if the Toolset broke your game' thread which is located in the Toolset Forum, as a sticky.

[F-C]

Pocketgb wrote...

F-C wrote...

i guess trolls will refuse to face reality even when they are being smacked in the face with it.

i personally would assume most the imperfections could be labeled "bugs" such as the shimmering shield and other buffs not shutting off properly.

he said he likes the current balance.

he said its not broken.

yet you still want to pick out one line and be like "OMG OMG SEE!!" while ignoring the important section.

Interpretation is a beautiful word : )

That said, if he didn't think anything was wrong, there'd be no point in his "non perfect" comment.

So you interpret how you'll want to hear it, and we'll interpret it how we want to hear it, and we'll both be happy!

nothing in life is perfect, and as there are bugs in the current game saying it was perfect would be wrong so he wouldnt put himself in that situation.

however when someone said it was bad he replied with "its quite good"
then he goes on to say "unless you wanted a different game and dont like our balance"

you can interpret it however you want and have little delusions in your fantasy world, but its pretty clear what his stance on it is for anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together.

Modifié par F-C, 18 novembre 2009 - 09:51 .

[Kahryl]

F-C wrote...

SheffSteel wrote...

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

Wow! The developer of a game says his game is good, and that's good enough for you.  You're a dream customer, you know that?

Modifié par Kahryl, 18 novembre 2009 - 09:56 .

[F-C]

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

SheffSteel wrote...

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

Wow! The developer of a game says his game is good, and that's good enough for you.  You're a dream customer, you know that?

ive never been upset with the game, before he even made a post.

i guess it just makes you bitter to be wrong and not get your way.

[Schyzm]

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

SheffSteel wrote...

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

Wow! The developer of a game says his game is good, and that's good enough for you.  You're a dream customer, you know that?

If the developers REALIZED that warriors and rogues were terrible compared with mages there's be no need for this topic.  The fact that they don't get it is the whole reason the topic exists in the first place.

fanboi powers unite!  form of: troll!

[Kahryl]

F-C wrote...

Kahryl wrote...

F-C wrote...

SheffSteel wrote...

Nice that georg sees things to improve upon... for those who think the game is perfect.

its interesting you cherry picked out the one line that supports your trolling.


if you will notice the section above that :
the combat system is quite good, not broken.
things are balanced how they want them.

thats the real point there.

Wow! The developer of a game says his game is good, and that's good enough for you.  You're a dream customer, you know that?

ive never been upset with the game, before he even made a post.

i guess it just makes you bitter to be wrong and not get your way.

If the developers REALIZED that warriors and rogues were terrible
compared with mages there's be no need for this topic.  The fact that
they don't get it is the whole reason the topic exists in the first
place.

[Sevitan7]

AlphaMagnum wrote...

Sevitan7 wrote...

Not to derail the topic, but if AlphaMagnum is still around, which line in the ABI_base governs damage? (cooldown and cost seem to be easy enough to find).

Or perhaps, is there anywhere where I can get an explanation of what each column does?

Sorry if I wasn't clear about that, but it's only the cost/cooldowns/prereqs/reqs/fatigue/upkeep? which can be altered in the ABI_base file.

If you want to alter damage formulae or effect durations or even mana drains caused by some modal abilities, you need to go into the scripts.

Those are accessible via the toolkit, but you need to take a few precautions outlined in the 'Click here if the Toolset broke your game' thread which is located in the Toolset Forum, as a sticky.

Thanks a lot! Looks like there is lots of reading to do before I start rebalancing the game in my view then.

Considering how accessible this appears to be, I think it would be a good idea if you, or someone intersted, started a thread or project on rebalancing the game through the override forlder. Gathering from what is going on in this topic, it seems like there could be a lot of interest and input generate in order for the community to create a balancing project/patch/mod/whatever this may be.

Would it be possible for you to upload the file you used to mod the game so far? It seems that pretty much everything you have changed greatly agrees with me as far as making the game better balanced and enjoyable.