628 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Zoikster wrote...


Well, I think complaining about the minor flaws in DA:O and clapping with glee at DA:2 is a bit odd. Everyone's entitled to their opinions, as I am. DA:O was a flawed game as all are, but it was a playable, fun game. It was not "broken" as you're trying to claim. Sorry.

Go rent DAO for the 360/PS3 or play DAO inmodded, make Anora queen, play an archer without putting any points in str, keep on selling items to one merchant and raise Leli's approval too quickly. You will not have fun.

[hoorayforicecream]

Monica21 wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
It's not a game breaker, but it wasn't something that (I'm guessing) the telemetry data suggested people used a lot except for coercion. Also, intimidate used the Coercion skill just like persuasion. Since everyone pretty much just chose coercion anyway, why not just make it on by default?

Because having it on by default doesn't let you build your character. I don't think that's roleplay. That's playing a character someone else created for you. Just because people used it a lot doesn't mean you remove dialogue skills trees.

I feel it takes away from the role playing if it is really the only choice. If not many people used them, there's less reason to spend developer time doing that than other things, and given the amount of time they had with DA2, it's "skills" or "something else", and they chose "something else".

[Monica21]

Zjarcal wrote...
There's only two quests that involve herbalism, the one from Elder Mirriam in Lothering and the one from that sick person in Orzammar. There's only one that involves poison (also in Lothering), one that involves Survival (the sick Halla), and one involving traps (the girl in Lothering). Other than those there are no more quests involving the skills. While it was nice when your skills became involved in quests, it was so rare that it hardly made a difference (I usually just respecced for that particular quest and moved on).

While I kind of liked the skills and the crafting, they were completely unnecessary (not useless, but totally unecessary), especially due to how everyone had access to the same skills (save coercion). There really was no reason (other than roleplaying) to give your PC skills like herbalism and poison (save your point for Combat training or Coercion instead, and just let your companion craft items). Trap making at least had the small benefit of increainsg the trap detection line of sight (convenient for the PC since the PC is always in front of the party).

I would say that the skill system was one of the things that was busted in Origins. Did it needed to be removed completely? No, of course not, it should've been improved and I can understand that people want it back, but I can't really say I miss the system as it was implemented in Origins.

Was it busted because it wasn't necessary to complete the game or busted because it didn't work? I would have to argue that it wasn't busted at all. I still spec Wynne with Herbalism because she's my potion maker (since I've never had the lady balls to kill her in the Tower). Plus, it's an easy way to get rid of the crafting materials I have in my inventory. 

I'm simply saying that "not necessary to finish the game" =/= "busted." I would actually prefer that there were more quests that required those skills if only to force the PC to think about character builds. But, I'm also weird like that.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...
There's only one that involves poison (also in Lothering)

You could use poison in Slim Couldry quests (the theft ones IIRC).

And maybe it's just me, but my character making his own poisons, discovering recipees and such, added to the experience. It felt like he wasn't just a killing machine with no brain.

I would say that the skill system was one of the things that was busted in Origins. Did it needed to be removed completely? No, of course not, it should've been improved and I can understand that people want it back, but I can't really say I miss the system as it was implemented in Origins.

I think that's part of a trend now. Apparently bioware won't do 3 act narratives again, because they implemented it so poorly. Instead of just...you know improving.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 14 août 2011 - 10:38 .

[Zoikster]

Mr.House wrote...

Zoikster wrote...


Well, I think complaining about the minor flaws in DA:O and clapping with glee at DA:2 is a bit odd. Everyone's entitled to their opinions, as I am. DA:O was a flawed game as all are, but it was a playable, fun game. It was not "broken" as you're trying to claim. Sorry.

Go rent DAO for the 360/PS3 or play DAO inmodded, make Anora queen, play an archer without putting any points in str, keep on selling items to one merchant and raise Leli's approval too quickly. You will not have fun.

I'd never play an RPG on a console.

[Darth Krytie]

Zoikster wrote...


That's not true at all, you'er just trying to argue somehow that DA 2 had better/more impactful choices, and I'm arguing that I disagree. I think it's rubbish. MHO.

Actually, I was pointing out that they were more similar than anything else. And that DA2 had quests you
could only get by making specific choices--which is an actual fact.


No where did I make any sort of qualifying statement about the type of choices and whether I preferred one over the other.

I also claim that you're dismissing any opposing opinion about actual quantifiable content based on preference alone. And are ignoring the numerous posts that point out flaws in your argument by saying you enjoyed it, so it mattered as opposed to another choice you didn't enjoy, so it didn't matter.

Modifié par Darth Krytie, 14 août 2011 - 10:38 .

[devSin]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Regarding the actual skills, Coercion was pretty much a necessity, and the rest of them I don't remember ever using. I occasionally remember a quest or two requiring herbalism, but that's all.

They actually had quests for each of the skills, and you 100% know that the only reason those quests existed was to point out the system to players, because it was so easy to overlook and even harder to justify using.

I know I wasn't happy with an early playthrough (on Normal), when I actually decided to waste points in building out the crafting junk skills. What a waste of skill points that was.

They got smart in Awakening and just let you directly buff health and mana instead of crap skills.

[Hatchetman77]

Zjarcal wrote...
There's only two quests that involve herbalism, the one from Elder Mirriam in Lothering and the one from that sick person in Orzammar. There's only one that involves poison (also in Lothering), one that involves Survival (the sick Halla), and one involving traps (the girl in Lothering). Other than those there are no more quests involving the skills. While it was nice when your skills became involved in quests, it was so rare that it hardly made a difference (I usually just respecced for that particular quest and moved on).

While I kind of liked the skills and the crafting, they were completely unnecessary (not useless, but totally unecessary), especially due to how everyone had access to the same skills (save coercion). There really was no reason (other than roleplaying) to give your PC skills like herbalism and poison (save your point for Combat training or Coercion instead, and just let your companion craft items). Trap making at least had the small benefit of increainsg the trap detection line of sight (convenient for the PC since the PC is always in front of the party).

I would say that the skill system was one of the things that was busted in Origins. Did it needed to be removed completely? No, of course not, it should've been improved and I can understand that people want it back, but I can't really say I miss the system as it was implemented in Origins.

Somebody never played a Dalish Elf rogue with maxed out stealth skills who would scout ahead and set traps, then pull and herd enemies into said traps.  I dedicated a whole playthrough to this with completly different combat tactics than in previous playthroughs with toons with other skills. I also had a blast doing it. 

The skills weren't necessary but damn they were fun to tinker and play with.

[TEWR]

Zjarcal wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

There are a few quests for herbalism which aren't game breakers either and have more to do with how you've built your party if you even decide to complete them.

There's only two quests that involve herbalism, the one from Elder Mirriam in Lothering and the one from that sick person in Orzammar. There's only one that involves poison (also in Lothering), one that involves Survival (the sick Halla), and one involving traps (the girl in Lothering). Other than those there are no more quests involving the skills. While it was nice when your skills became involved in quests, it was so rare that it hardly made a difference (I usually just respecced for that particular quest and moved on).

While I kind of liked the skills and the crafting, they were completely unnecessary (not useless, but totally unecessary), especially due to how everyone had access to the same skills (save coercion). There really was no reason (other than roleplaying) to give your PC skills like herbalism and poison (save your point for Combat training or Coercion instead, and just let your companion craft items). Trap making at least had the small benefit of increainsg the trap detection line of sight (convenient for the PC since the PC is always in front of the party).

I would say that the skill system was one of the things that was busted in Origins. Did it needed to be removed completely? No, of course not, it should've been improved and I can understand that people want it back, but I can't really say I miss the system as it was implemented in Origins.

Slim Couldry's quest involved stealing and stealth (the latter being a talent and not a skill)

That said, I agree with your post. Though I did like crafting poisons. Did I need to? No, but it felt like my Warden was trying to make fighting the Blight easier

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 août 2011 - 10:42 .

[Zanallen]

Well, it seems to me that the OP doesn't actually want a discussion. He seems to believe that his opinions are the only ones that matter and that if he isn't happy with the game, no one else should be either. Oh, and that Laidlaw is out to get him.

[Zjarcal]

Monica21 wrote...

Was it busted because it wasn't necessary to complete the game or busted because it didn't work? I would have to argue that it wasn't busted at all. I still spec Wynne with Herbalism because she's my potion maker (since I've never had the lady balls to kill her in the Tower). Plus, it's an easy way to get rid of the crafting materials I have in my inventory. 

I'm simply saying that "not necessary to finish the game" =/= "busted." I would actually prefer that there were more quests that required those skills if only to force the PC to think about character builds. But, I'm also weird like that.

I say that it was busted in the sense that it needed fixing for it to be a system that actually benefited the game in a meaningful way. Of course, it does work and has its benefits, but that's not really what's being argued on my part, it's that in my view, the system was simply very poorly implemented.

The word "busted" here doesn't really mean "it didn't work at all" (like say X talent was bugged and didn't work as it was intended to work). Perhaps the term "busted" is not the most appropriate as it gives the impressions that something just doesn't work. "Flawed", "poorly implemented" might be better terms to convey the feeling.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Slim Couldry's quest involved stealing and stealth (the latter being a talent and not a skill)

Right! I had forgotten that one.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 14 août 2011 - 10:43 .

[Zoikster]

Darth Krytie wrote...

Zoikster wrote...


That's not true at all, you'er just trying to argue somehow that DA 2 had better/more impactful choices, and I'm arguing that I disagree. I think it's rubbish. MHO.

Actually, I was pointing out that they were more similar than anything else. And that DA2 had quests you
could only get by making specific choices--which is an actual fact.


No where did I make any sort of qualifying statement about the type of choices and whether I preferred one over the other.

I also claim that you're dismissing any opposing opinion about actual quantifiable content based on preference alone. And are ignoring the numerous posts that point out flaws in your argument by saying you enjoyed it, so it mattered as opposed to another choice you didn't enjoy, so it didn't matter.

And the same can be said to you, just because you didn't enjoy doesn't mean it wasn't fun, meaningful, or impactful. I see we are going round in circles here. You're biased in your dislike, I'm biased in my liking, there.

Modifié par Zoikster, 14 août 2011 - 10:44 .

[Monica21]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
I feel it takes away from the role playing if it is really the only choice. If not many people used them, there's less reason to spend developer time doing that than other things, and given the amount of time they had with DA2, it's "skills" or "something else", and they chose "something else".

But it's not the only choice. You can still get into the Tower without using Persuade or Intimidate, it just takes a bit longer. 

If developer time is what we're talking about then that's perfectly understandable, especially given the short development cycle.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mr.House wrote...
 DAO was broken, an unmodded and fixed DAO is not fun at all.

I played DA:O on console initially, and while flawed I never thought it was broken and I had a lot of fun with it.

[Zoikster]

Zanallen wrote...

Well, it seems to me that the OP doesn't actually want a discussion. He seems to believe that his opinions are the only ones that matter and that if he isn't happy with the game, no one else should be either. Oh, and that Laidlaw is out to get him.

Doesn't help when you're hyperbolic.

[Darth Krytie]

Zoikster wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

Zoikster wrote...


That's not true at all, you'er just trying to argue somehow that DA 2 had better/more impactful choices, and I'm arguing that I disagree. I think it's rubbish. MHO.

Actually, I was pointing out that they were more similar than anything else. And that DA2 had quests you
could only get by making specific choices--which is an actual fact.


No where did I make any sort of qualifying statement about the type of choices and whether I preferred one over the other.

I also claim that you're dismissing any opposing opinion about actual quantifiable content based on preference alone. And are ignoring the numerous posts that point out flaws in your argument by saying you enjoyed it, so it mattered as opposed to another choice you didn't enjoy, so it didn't matter.

And the same can be said to you, just because you didn't enjoy doesn't mean it wasn't fun, meaningful, or impactful. I see we are going round in circles here. Your biased in your dislike, I'm biased in my liking, there.

Actually, you're wrong because I loved Origins and loved DA:2. So, you're making that accusation out of whole cloth. I just can actually step back and see how little is different between choices we have and companion dialogue between the two games.

[Monica21]

Zjarcal wrote...

I say that it was busted in the sense that it needed fixing for it to be a system that actually benefited the game in a meaningful way. Of course, it does work and has its benefits, but that's not really what's being argued on my part, it's that in my view, the system was simply very poorly implemented.

The word "busted" here doesn't really mean "it didn't work at all" (like say X talent was bugged and didn't work as it was intended to work). Perhaps the term "busted" is not the most appropriate as it gives the impressions that something just doesn't work. "Flawed", "poorly implemented" might be better terms to convey the feeling.

And this is where I'd rather see the system refined rather than stripped altogether.

[Zoikster]

Darth Krytie wrote...

Zoikster wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

Zoikster wrote...


That's not true at all, you'er just trying to argue somehow that DA 2 had better/more impactful choices, and I'm arguing that I disagree. I think it's rubbish. MHO.

Actually, I was pointing out that they were more similar than anything else. And that DA2 had quests you
could only get by making specific choices--which is an actual fact.


No where did I make any sort of qualifying statement about the type of choices and whether I preferred one over the other.

I also claim that you're dismissing any opposing opinion about actual quantifiable content based on preference alone. And are ignoring the numerous posts that point out flaws in your argument by saying you enjoyed it, so it mattered as opposed to another choice you didn't enjoy, so it didn't matter.

And the same can be said to you, just because you didn't enjoy doesn't mean it wasn't fun, meaningful, or impactful. I see we are going round in circles here. Your biased in your dislike, I'm biased in my liking, there.

Actually, you're wrong because I loved Origins and loved DA:2. So, you're making that accusation out of whole cloth. I just can actually step back and see how little is different between choices we have and companion dialogue between the two games.

You're free to diminish them. I disagree.

Modifié par Zoikster, 14 août 2011 - 10:46 .

[Mr.House]

Monica21 wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

I say that it was busted in the sense that it needed fixing for it to be a system that actually benefited the game in a meaningful way. Of course, it does work and has its benefits, but that's not really what's being argued on my part, it's that in my view, the system was simply very poorly implemented.

The word "busted" here doesn't really mean "it didn't work at all" (like say X talent was bugged and didn't work as it was intended to work). Perhaps the term "busted" is not the most appropriate as it gives the impressions that something just doesn't work. "Flawed", "poorly implemented" might be better terms to convey the feeling.

And this is where I'd rather see the system refined rather than stripped altogether.

Bioware likes striping though.

[Vormaerin]

Zoikster wrote...

There are people positing that game choices have to have impacts on the end of the game to be worthy, I disagree. Simple as that.

That's fine.  But you can't take that line and then turn around and dismiss every decision in DA2 as irrelevant.   There are lots of decisions in both games.  Both games are linear.  DA2 is slightly less linear, because more of your decisions are reflected in the story.   But neither is anything remotely like a branched story, much less a sandbox.  Bioware doesn't make branched story or sandbox games.

You may prefer to decide whether Bhelen or Harrowmont is King rather than decide whether a unique magical talent like Feynriel becomes Tranquil, Abomination, or Tevinter apprentice.  Fine, but don't claim there are more decisions in DA:O, because there aren't.

[Monica21]

Mr.House wrote...
DAO was broken, an unmodded and fixed DAO is not fun at all.

My first Origins playthrough was unmodded and unpatched. Yes, flawed, yes, needed patching, but certainly playable and nothing game-breaking. I had a blast.

[Darth Krytie]

Zoikster wrote...


You're free to diminish them. I disagree.

You have this pathological inability to admit being wrong. lol. It's great. Makes debating anything with you pointless.

*goes back to playing ME2*

[Monica21]

Mr.House wrote...

Monica21 wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

I say that it was busted in the sense that it needed fixing for it to be a system that actually benefited the game in a meaningful way. Of course, it does work and has its benefits, but that's not really what's being argued on my part, it's that in my view, the system was simply very poorly implemented.

The word "busted" here doesn't really mean "it didn't work at all" (like say X talent was bugged and didn't work as it was intended to work). Perhaps the term "busted" is not the most appropriate as it gives the impressions that something just doesn't work. "Flawed", "poorly implemented" might be better terms to convey the feeling.

And this is where I'd rather see the system refined rather than stripped altogether.

Bioware likes striping though.

Unless it's a love scene. 

[Zjarcal]

Hatchetman77 wrote...

Somebody never played a Dalish Elf rogue with maxed out stealth skills who would scout ahead and set traps, then pull and herd enemies into said traps.  I dedicated a whole playthrough to this with completly different combat tactics than in previous playthroughs with toons with other skills. I also had a blast doing it. 

The skills weren't necessary but damn they were fun to tinker and play with.

Funny, I did do that on most of my rogue runs (though I fail to see why you have to be dalish...).

It was fun indeed, but that doesn't mean the system didn't need plenty of improvement.

Monica21 wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

I say that it was busted in the sense that it needed fixing for it to be a system that actually benefited the game in a meaningful way. Of course, it does work and has its benefits, but that's not really what's being argued on my part, it's that in my view, the system was simply very poorly implemented.

The word "busted" here doesn't really mean "it didn't work at all" (like say X talent was bugged and didn't work as it was intended to work). Perhaps the term "busted" is not the most appropriate as it gives the impressions that something just doesn't work. "Flawed", "poorly implemented" might be better terms to convey the feeling.

And this is where I'd rather see the system refined rather than stripped altogether.

Agreed of course.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 14 août 2011 - 10:50 .