673 réponses à ce sujet

[_Aine_]

jds1bio wrote...

Read the Eurogamer.net article - CDProject Red doesn't apologize for the difficulty of TW2.

Ah good!  I am glad to hear that.  I will read the article, it may well be on the "things I want to read today" list, but usually that gets bumped by " the things I want to do today" list   

I do hope they keep the difficulty and complexity up there.   It isn't "tactical" per se but it *is* challenging.  When I swear almost as much as the characters, the feeling of success when I beat something that has really challenged me is a great feeling... feeling challenged and even frustrated in those instances is much different than getting exasperated, mind you.    

[Marionetten]

Rockpopple wrote...

^ Because that's exactly what the gameplay of Dragon Age 2 was like. Heck, I just had to close my eyes and mash the X button and I got through the entire game on Nightmare. No thinking required at all on my part.

Glad to see you're finally getting around, Rock.

[Chromie]

shantisands wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

Read the Eurogamer.net article - CDProject Red doesn't apologize for the difficulty of TW2.

Ah good!  I am glad to hear that.  I will read the article, it may well be on the "things I want to read today" list, but usually that gets bumped by " the things I want to do today" list   

I do hope they keep the difficulty and complexity up there.   It isn't "tactical" per se but it *is* challenging.  When I swear almost as much as the characters, the feeling of success when I beat something that has really challenged me is a great feeling... feeling challenged and even frustrated in those instances is much different than getting exasperated, mind you.    

I know what you mean. After a long and though fight it really makes you feel relieved your not dead lol. Like I said before about Witcher 2 leveling system it's not about making it easier but about making it possible to survive. 

[Satyricon331]

Marionetten wrote...

jds1bio wrote...
Read the Eurogamer.net article - CDProject Red doesn't apologize for the difficulty of TW2.

They also take a snipe at BioWare with the interactive movie comment. But yeah, I sense that a lot of BioWare fans wants just that. An interactive movie in which you have to do nothing but press a singular button repeatedly in order to move on to the next story sequence.

Here's the article.

If you read the article you'll see his position is substantially similar to Ariella's.  "The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light."  Ariella wants to take it light, but can't.

[Marionetten]

Satyricon331 wrote...

If you read the article you'll see his position is substantially similar to Ariella's.  "The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light."  Ariella wants to take it light, but can't.

If you read the article you'll see that his definition of light clearly differs from Ariella's. In fact, he goes on to state that the game was designed for the hardcore audience. This is why it's fairly challenging even on easy when compared to other games currently on the market. I really don't see the sin in designing your game for a market more or less forgotten by all the big name publishers out there.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 01:50 .

[Satyricon331]

Marionetten wrote...
If you read the article you'll see that his definition of light clearly differs from Ariella's. In fact, he goes on to state that the game was designed for the hardcore audience. This is why it's fairly challenging even on easy when compared to other games currently on the market.

Oh?  He doesn't define "light" anywhere in the article that I see.  He recognizes the game is difficult, explains "maybe" why that is, and says the easy mode should be easy.  The article's author created a framing issue by starting the article the way he did, but if you see past that issue then the developer seems to share Ariella's perspective.

[Realmzmaster]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

jds1bio wrote...
Read the Eurogamer.net article - CDProject Red doesn't apologize for the difficulty of TW2.

They also take a snipe at BioWare with the interactive movie comment. But yeah, I sense that a lot of BioWare fans wants just that. An interactive movie in which you have to do nothing but press a singular button repeatedly in order to move on to the next story sequence.

Here's the article.

If you read the article you'll see his position is substantially similar to Ariella's.  "The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light."  Ariella wants to take it light, but can't.

I read the article. It says that our normal is not everyone else's normal. I can only assume that their easy is not everyone else's easy. There lies the problem. If their easy is everyone else's normal then Ariella's has a legitmate gripe.
If a game is frustrating on easy then that can lead to a game that will be sitting on the shelf. Because games are suppose to be fun. If you not having fun it is a waste of money.

[Marionetten]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Oh?  He doesn't define "light" anywhere in the article that I see.  He recognizes the game is difficult, explains "maybe" why that is, and says the easy mode should be easy.  The article's author created a framing issue by starting the article the way he did, but if you see past that issue then the developer seems to share Ariella's perspective.

He explains that the game was designed to be more difficult and that you shouldn't compare their normal difficulty to the normal difficulty of other games currently on the market. What makes you believe the same doesn't apply to easy? For me easy is indeed taking it light. For Ariella it isn't. For me Dragon Age II offers no challenge. For Ariella it does. Why must everything cater to one?

This is exactly why BioWare suffered such a tremendous backlash with Dragon Age II. They already have a franchise offering the whole interactive movie experience. That franchise is called Mass Effect. A lot of us didn't like the idea of them turning Dragon Age into yet another Mass Effect for this exact reason. It's not that I'm blind to Ariella's perspective. In fact, I know all too well how it feels to be utterly neglected.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 01:57 .

[Zanallen]

Marionetten wrote...

Satyricon331 wrote...

Oh?  He doesn't define "light" anywhere in the article that I see.  He recognizes the game is difficult, explains "maybe" why that is, and says the easy mode should be easy.  The article's author created a framing issue by starting the article the way he did, but if you see past that issue then the developer seems to share Ariella's perspective.

He explains that the game was designed to be more difficult and that you shouldn't compare their normal difficulty to the normal difficulty of other games currently on the market. What makes you believe the same doesn't apply to easy? For me easy is indeed taking it light. For Ariella it isn't. For me Dragon Age II offers no challenge. For Ariella it does. Why must everything cater to one?

'Cause that's the point of difficulty levels?

[Marionetten]

Zanallen wrote...

'Cause that's the point of difficulty levels?

Difficulty levels can only do so much. If a game is designed to be challenging and complex it's still going to be challenging and complex. Likewise, if a game isn't no amount of absurd hit point stacking is going to make it so. You can't cater to everyone.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote..
He explains that the game was designed to be more difficult and that you shouldn't compare their normal difficulty to the normal difficulty of other games currently on the market. What makes you believe the same doesn't apply to easy? For me easy is indeed taking it light. For Ariella it isn't. For me Dragon Age II offers no challenge. For Ariella it does. Why must everything cater to one?

That's bad design, though. I enjoy TW2 for being a challenging game. I wish I could play it on insane, but I don't care for their save-lock feature. But essentially having your difficultly level violate expectations is unfair to gamers.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
Difficulty levels can only do so much. If a game is designed to be challenging and complex it's still going to be challenging and complex. Likewise, if a game isn't no amount of absurd hit point stacking is going to make it so. You can't cater to everyone.

You can make TW2 a hack & slash game. You just need a difficulty that spikes Geralt's stats (dmg, vitality, regen, etc.). It's actually easy to make a complex & challenging game easy. Making an easy game complex is the challenge.

[Marionetten]

In Exile wrote...

That's bad design, though. I enjoy TW2 for being a challenging game. I wish I could play it on insane, but I don't care for their save-lock feature. But essentially having your difficultly level violate expectations is unfair to gamers.

You say bad design I say great design. A few years ago The Witcher 2's difficulty would have been perfectly normal. It's just that games have gotten easier and easier with more and more focus on cinematic presentation and less and less focus on challenging gameplay.

In Exile wrote...

You can make TW2 a hack & slash game. You just need a difficulty that spikes Geralt's stats (dmg, vitality, regen, etc.). It's actually easy to make a complex & challenging game easy. Making an easy game complex is the challenge.

At that point we're talking about God mode. I wouldn't equate that to easy as much as plain cheating. As said, there is only so much you can tweak without breaking the whole damn experience. Obviously CD Projekt RED assumes that you want some kind of challenge albeit an easier one. The Witcher 2 isn't meant to be a mindless hack and slash experience.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 02:06 .

[Satyricon331]

Marionetten wrote...
He explains that the game was designed to be more difficult and that you shouldn't compare their normal difficulty to the normal difficulty of other games currently on the market. What makes you believe the same doesn't apply to easy? For me easy is indeed taking it light. For Ariella it isn't. For me Dragon Age II offers no challenge. For Ariella it does. Why must everything cater to one?

It doesn't apply to easy because that interpretation is inconsistent with his statement about the easy difficulty.  Again, "The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light."  Ariella just wants something that's not frustrating, and I just don't understand why it would bother you if the a difficulty mode that you admittedly aren't using better accommodated the distribution of users who uses it.  If you look at the dev quotes and ignore the framing, it seems like the developer recognizes there's a problem.

And TW2 doesn't cater to everyone.  I've seen the youtube gameplay of the prologue and most of ch.1, and watched a friend play I think part of ch.2, and it's definitely not a game for me.  It's too much like DA2 for me.

edit:  Sorry, I see you edited your post while I stepped out.  

This is exactly why BioWare suffered such a tremendous backlash with Dragon Age II. They already have a franchise offering the whole interactive movie experience. That franchise is called Mass Effect. A lot of us didn't like the idea of them turning Dragon Age into yet another Mass Effect for this exact reason. It's not that I'm blind to Ariella's perspective. In fact, I know all too well how it feels to be utterly neglected.

You know, I think this concern is more significant than you realize.  The combat's difficulty might be the only thing that keeps TW2 from being an interactive movie.  I don't want it to be an interactive movie, but I think what keeps it from being such shouldn't be the easy-mode combat.

Modifié par Satyricon331, 25 mai 2011 - 02:08 .

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
You say bad design I say great design. A few years ago The Witcher 2's difficulty would have been perfectly normal. It's just that games have gotten easier and easier with more and more focus on cinematic presentation and less and less focus on challenging gameplay.

No, you don't understand what I'm saying.

The actual design, i.e. the combat & the challenge is good. But then labelling the difficulty as something contrary to expectations is bad. 

That's it. It comes down to communication, and recognizing that different fanbases might play your game.

You rasied the point about why you should suffer if someone wants an easy game. My point is that you shouldn't. But it's easy to make a game that caters to you easy for even the most incompetent gamer. There's no reason not to take that option.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
At that point we're talking about God mode. I wouldn't equate that to easy as much as plain cheating. As said, there is only so much you can tweak without breaking the whole damn experience. Obviously CD Projekt RED assumes that you want some kind of challenge albeit an easier one. The Witcher 2 isn't meant to be a mindless hack and slash experience.

No, I'm not. Did you see that one walkthrough for TW2 that everyone jokes about? The guy (or girl) playing it really sucks. Like, doesn't use strong attacks or switch signs in combat sucks.

Why would an easier difficulty break the gaming experience? This is the same sort of insulting attitude that got Bioware into the DA2 mess - thinking a segment of the fanbase was somehow more deserving than another.

[Ariella]

jds1bio wrote...

Read the Eurogamer.net article - CDProject Red doesn't apologize for the difficulty of TW2.

After playing the prologue for the third time I began to get the hang of the combat a bit. I just think that it's been quite a while since the prologue of any PC RPG offered up a serious combat challenge.

You need to learn how to attack short/strong, block, roll, use five different magic powers (all of which do have separate keyboard hot-keys), and remember to meditate and drink a buffing potion AND populate your pockets with bombs before combat. And all this just for the first few encounters. This is not the definition of easy, no matter what difficulty level you are on.

If nothing else, both DA2 and TW2 have distinguished themselves by their combat features.

If they're going to have a mode where the combat "keeps the story rolling" (their words not mine) they should adjust for exactly that. I'm sorry, but it's a failure to say you have a casual mode but it actually isn't casual. learning curves for casual should be less steep than on normal and especially hard or nightmare. I'm not nor will I ever be someone who can play twitch based games well. But that's what casual is asking me to do in TW2, and that's not right. Why should someone get further in a game than I do based only on their reaction time?

Especially in SP games all players should have the ability to see as much content as they want, not find themselves wanting to pound the screen in frustration because the casual experience doesn't deliver what is promised.

[Marionetten]

Satyricon331 wrote...

It doesn't apply to easy because that interpretation is inconsistent with his statement about the easy difficulty.  Again, "The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light."  Ariella just wants something that's not frustrating, and I just don't understand why it would bother you if the a difficulty mode that you admittedly aren't using better accommodated the distribution of users who uses it.  If you look at the dev quotes and ignore the framing, it seems like the developer recognizes there's a problem.

You missed the point entirely. His ( and mine, for that matter ) definition of easy obviously differs from Ariella's. I find the easy difficulty to be exceedingly easy. As such, it makes sense to me. Meanwhile, Nightmare in Dragon Age II doesn't make sense to me because it's way too easy for me. 

In Exile wrote...

No, you don't understand what I'm saying.

The actual design, i.e. the combat & the challenge is good. But then labelling the difficulty as something contrary to expectations is bad. 

That's it. It comes down to communication, and recognizing that different fanbases might play your game.

You rasied the point about why you should suffer if someone wants an easy game. My point is that you shouldn't. But it's easy to make a game that caters to you easy for even the most incompetent gamer. There's no reason not to take that option.

I understand what you're saying. You don't understand that expectations CHANGE and more importantly DIFFER from person to person. CD Projekt RED has designed a game which adheres to older expectations rather than newer expectations. I see no fault in this. In fact, I commend them for it.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 02:11 .

[Satyricon331]

Marionetten wrote...
You missed the point entirely. His ( and mine, for that matter ) definition of easy obviously differs from Ariella's. I find the easy difficulty to be exceedingly easy. As such, it makes sense to me. Meanwhile, Nightmare in Dragon Age II doesn't make sense to me because it's way too easy for me. 

I'm sorry, but your interpretation of what the developer says is just unreasonable.  I've explained how the quotes support my interpretation.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
I understand what you're saying. You don't understand that expectations CHANGE and more importantly DIFFER from person to person. CD Projekt RED has designed a game which adheres to older expectations rather than newer expectations. I see no fault in this. In fact, I commend them for it.

No, you don't understand.

Let me try to be more blunt:

Do you think that alienating potential fans is good? Not having a varied set of difficulties does just that. You are, essentially, praising the game for not making a small and otherwise negligible effort to include some other gamers. Other than showing the middle finger to those gamers, there's no reason not to have a causal mode.

ETA:

And wtf is an older expectation? That's just nonsensical. The entire reason for having an expectation is to know what you're getting. How can you possibly predict that TW2 is using the circa 2001 dififculty labels and not the circa 2007 ones or the circa 1996 ones?

Modifié par In Exile, 25 mai 2011 - 02:19 .

[Marionetten]

In Exile wrote...

No, you don't understand.

Let me try to be more blunt:

Do you think that alienating potential fans is good? Not having a varied set of difficulties does just that. You are, essentially, praising the game for not making a small and otherwise negligible effort to include some other gamers. Other than showing the middle finger to those gamers, there's no reason not to have a causal mode.

You still don't get it.

For every Ariella I'm sure there's a person who is absolutely loving The Witcher 2 on easy right about now and would be devastated if CD Projekt RED changed it. How are they less deserving? The simple truth here is that you can't cater to everyone. Just by making the game twitch based they excluded a whole lot of people. The difficulties are varied but no amount of variation is going to cover every single person.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 02:20 .

[Zanallen]

The simple solution would be to add another difficulty level that addresses people who don't want to deal with alternating signs and various alchemical concoctions. That way no one is left out. You can have your Casual, Easy, Normal, Hard and Masochist.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
You still don't get it.

For every Ariella I'm sure there's a person who is absolutely loving The Witcher 2 on easy right about now and would be devastated if CD Projekt RED changed it. How are they less deserving? The simple truth here is that you can't cater to everyone. Just by making the game twitch based they excluded a whole lot of people. The difficulties are varied but no amount of variation is going to over every single person.

No, you don't get it. This might melt your brain, but it is possible to have more than three difficulties.

So they could keep all of the difficulties the exact same, and add 'Super Easy', 'Really Really Easy' and 'So Easy It Breaks The Gameplay Experience'.  That's what I've been saying from the start.

You're married to these labels, but it doesn't matter. It's the relative ranking that matters. The expectation has nothing to do with the language used (they could call it novice, apprentice, master, and grand master or causal, easy, hard, insane) but with the relative and absolute difficulty.

Modifié par In Exile, 25 mai 2011 - 02:22 .

[Marionetten]

In Exile wrote...

No, you don't get it. This might melt your brain, but it is possible to have more than three difficulties.

So they could keep all of the difficulties the exact same, and add 'Super Easy', 'Really Really Easy' and 'So Easy It Breaks The Gameplay Experience'.  That's what I've been saying from the start.

You're married to these labels, but it doesn't matter. It's the relative ranking that matters. The expectation has nothing to do with the language used (they could call it novice, apprentice, master, and grand master or causal, easy, hard, insane) but with the relative and absolute difficulty.

They could have five hundred difficulties and I'm sure someone would still feel left out. Different people have different expectations and all. What makes you think super easy would have been the perfect fit for Ariella and what makes you believe that there wouldn't be yet another person having difficulties with super easy and requesting yet another difficulty to be added because it's so damn easy according to you. Doesn't take any development time at all to tweak all those statistics. Nope!

Now this is the kind of sentiment which got us Dragon Age II. BioWare thinking they could effectively cater to two distinct fanbases at once while simultaneously luring in new players. I'd rather CD Projekt RED keep doing whatever they're doing instead of taking tips from BioWare. It's not going to work for everyone but it works for me. As said, you say bad design I say great design. I'm afraid we're not going to get past that point.

Modifié par Marionetten, 25 mai 2011 - 02:26 .

[Ariella]

Marionetten wrote...

In Exile wrote...

No, you don't understand.

Let me try to be more blunt:

Do you think that alienating potential fans is good? Not having a varied set of difficulties does just that. You are, essentially, praising the game for not making a small and otherwise negligible effort to include some other gamers. Other than showing the middle finger to those gamers, there's no reason not to have a causal mode.

You still don't get it.

For every Ariella I'm sure there's a person who is absolutely loving The Witcher 2 on easy right about now and would be devastated if CD Projekt RED changed it. How are they less deserving? The simple truth is that you can't cater to everyone. Just by making the game twitch based they excluded a whole lot of people.

They aren't less deserv ing, but why am I less deserving or those like me, hmm? In paid the same money, as every other Witcher owner in America did, and I'm not getting my money's worth because the "casual" mode isn't. I expect a modicrum of difficulty, but not death in the first minute or so of combat. I expect the hardest fights to be the boss fights, there I expect to die until I can learn the pattern and form tactics, not dying against a bunch of junk enemies in the first moments.