288 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

...except the argument for a Skip button has nothing to do with sucking at combat. Easy mode exists for that. If combat exists as a timesink and as grind, wanting to bypass that has nothing to do with lack of skill and everything to do with I'd rather be spending this time playing other parts of the game I actually enjoy.

This does not mean devs should not strive to make combat more enjoyable or innovative, but you'd be fooling yourself if you think a universally adored combat system which even the story-aholics get addicted to will ever be developed. Sometimes you just want to skip stuff to get to the parts you like, which is true of more than games.

Edit: It'd be different with a heavily combat-oriented game like Diablo where the gameplay is nothing but combat. There is no point even purchasing a game like that if you don't have 'time' for combat. But Bioware titles tend to have more to their gameplay than killing things, and a fair number of RPGers prefer the parts of the game that contain RP.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 23 février 2012 - 09:33 .

[SkittlesKat96]

I don't have much of a problem with what she said and I think people are making a big deal out of nothing (especially those guys from /v/ who decided they would be keyboard cowboys/internet tough guys and start giving Jennifer Hepler death threats)

I still disagree with what she said though, gameplay is pretty core to games, especially to DA.

At the same time I sort of see where she is coming from, gameplay in Dragon Age isn't for everyone and I think she would probably think differently if it was a game like Deus Ex where the gameplay is a more bigger part of the fun (the combat/gameplay in DA is fun as well, but not for everyone...or something like that)

I'm too tired and the things I'm saying aren't making a whole lot of sense.

[Icinix]

Morducai wrote...

First of all let me make it perfectly clear. This by no means is a rant or a personal attack on Jennifer Hepler. I came in here in order to rationally voice my position as to why I disagree with her and why I think her comments, while coming from an innocent point of view, are wrong and misguided.

I think she's forgetting the kind of medium she choose to apply her craft in. This is a video game with emphasis on the word GAME. Now I know in recent years that word took on a very wide interpretation, with games like Shenmue, Fahrenheit/Indigo ProphecyHeavy Rain, but at the core video games are just games and their main magic comes from it's interactivity and direct input  from and with the user. Games offer a "skip cutscene" because they are games and that's why we like them. 

What she wants, as a writer, is to enjoy a wonderful crafted story without having to, or to have as little to do, with the actual gameplay.  Basically what she describes is a game without gameplay which to all intent and proposes is a movie, book, interactive story, or what ever you like to call it. I understand her desire to have the same rules we apply on gameplay as they do with storytelling, but those rules just don't work well for this medium. As DA2 clearly demonstrated that the same formula can't work for two different situations. 


If you think I am wrong then look at the early video games and see how successful they were. Take Tetris for example, has zero story to it yet it still manage to be on top selling charts all over the world for more then 20 years. A game doesn't have to have a great story, or even any kind of story, in order to be successful, but if a game has bad gameplay then the whole thing simply collapses. 

Now I am not saying that story telling has no room in video games, quite the ooposite. I think story telling has become a very imprtant part of video games. However, I think gameplay should always take precedance over any other aspect of a video game. The minute you take gameplay out of the equation then it stops being a video game. 

Thoughts?

Gameplay comes in many different forms, shapes and sizes.

She merely suggested a skip button for one aspect of gameplay.

Not EVERY type of gameplay.

[Pzykozis]

Mitsukashira wrote...
 I do not mean to insult or offend you, but you are not responding to me in a way that moves the discussion forward. The majority of what you are saying to argue against my thoughts and opinions have already been addressed in other parts of my reply to you, or in other posts that I have made. I do not expect you to read the posts I have made to other people, but I hope you do not expect me to repeat myself. I will reply to a few points that I feel I have not been redundant about to any significant extent, however. 

 I am well aware that Vox and UI are not the same job as writing. I find it rather disappointing that you can take everything I have said, and assume that is where the base of my knowledge rests. I was using them as an example of one thing related to the writing, and one thing not so much related to the writing. They were illustrating my point that great writing will shine through the murkiness of inferior portions of the game, regardless of how directly tied those parts of the game are to the writing. This is true for great art direction, graphics, gameplay, ect. A reviewer, or anyone really, can look at a product and recognize that one portion of it is superior to the underwhelming rest of it-- the rest of it could also be good, which is a greater testament to the talent of the writer. 

 As you have alluded to, there are changes that are made all of the time in game development. I never once said that all ideas are used, or even that all good ideas are used. I mentioned that great ideas are likely to be used, but that is at the judgment of the project leads. Just look at Blizzard and Valve, who take forever on their games, because they are always changing aspects of the game around. Both are highly successful and full of money, but I fail to see how a studio as successful and with as much influence as Bioware would not have the resources to throw around at innovation. It is rather that they will not, because they prefer to be safe and successful. 

 If they wished to innovate, they would not have made this skip battle, or super easy battle mode, for Mass Effect 3. They would have, as another user elaborated on, created a more fluid and less obtuse way of the player avoiding combat all together. Is adding a third wheel to a motorcycle truely innovative, or is it a quick and easy way to create something "new"? 

I'm not entirely sure what this repetition of I do not mean to insult or offend you is all about (other than a terrible attempt to somehow bring into question my comprehension skills I guess), essentially I just think you're fundamentally wrong, the idea that a great writer should write but other writers should somehow pad their work with more technical stuff rather than.. you know, writing? Seems well silly.

Aside from that your view to a jaded guy like me is far too idealistic you want people to be happy and passionate about what they do, problem with that is that its a job you don't normally get to pick and choose your stuff (though Gaider has made comments in the past that sound like they do have this option) sometimes you'll be working on something your heart just isn't in, and thats the way of things, because its a job.

In terms of bringing Vox and UI in it was pointless then, we were/are focused on writing and its not really hard to understand that great whatever will be picked up it just seemed to be misleading or to illustrate a lack of understanding of game dev, though I also think it's naive to think that great writing is purely the product of one person and their skill (within the industry anyway), and more the surrounding factors, resources, tech, iteration, people to bounce it off of etc.

"All the time" is a massive stretch, things can and do change, but not all the time and not usually big things or new systems or new mechanics once the game has gone into production since budget and resources have already been planned out, and your two examples are terrible, valve self funds and so can do whatever the hell it likes and blizz has its warchest full of money from WoW so they're just left to it, I doubt any other studio outside of indy development has as little oversight as those two. They also consistently bring out very polished medicore (with a few gems) too but that's a subjective point.

As for innovation I can partially agree but I think you're coming at it from the wrong angle, this isn't about innovation insomuch as allowing people to play the game the way they want to play In the broadest terms its like adding a new super easy difficulty mode, as for making situations able to be talked out of or whatever.. its more resources more man hours etc. it's not cheap and in most cases it's just not viable.

[DreGregoire]

I find it interesting that certain individuals arguing against the option to skip combat are at the same time pointing out flaws to the games' direction and claiming that this skip combat is some how going to make the current intended products any different than they were going to be. Seriously? Allowing another person the option to play a game how they want to play it does not harm the intended product in any way or form. Running scared because a game developer isn't going in the direction you want and pointing the finger at an audience you perceive is in blame is so far beyond fair minded that I cannot even comprehend the thought process that leads people there. The developers are still listening to people and trying to improve the product the best they can while still heading in the direction they have chosen. Adding a function to a game is not going to change the quality of other portions of the game. What changed from DAO to DA2 was a change in the priorities and direction of the developer. The change has been made and the developer is making improvements on that change. They have made it clear there will be no going back to the old system, but they are still making an effort to try to please a larger audience. Good on them.

[Malanu]

Zanallen wrote...

She didn't say they should remove gameplay, She didn't say they should remove combat. She suggested a skip combat button because she isn't very good at combat. She didn't have the time, what with having a career and being pregnant and all, to spend doing something that frustrated her. There is nothing wrong with that. It would the same as a skip cut scene button or a skip puzzle button as already found in several games.

Isn't that like complaining about game play in a shooter game cause you don't like guns? It's similar to saying I like mountain climbing but I don't like the rock! *Face plant*:innocent:

[Halarid]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Surprisingly, those who felt like using the option, did so. Those who did not want to use the option, did not. Equally as surprisingly, the game industry has not collapsed, neither game failed to sell or be appealing to consumers, and no one's taste in videogames has changed as a result.

But... that's absolutely marvelous! OPTIONS!
I mean...  the geniality of the option to skip parts of the game, to skip combat, to skip gameplay... for mums with babies etc. ... I feel overwhelmingly enlightened.



Although, I am curious if the same design philosophy of "OPTIONS" applies to implementing options that would make the world believable, plausible, coherent.. like, let's say, the option of playing the game without level scaling?

Sure, It takes 15 minutes to modify the 2da file with the scaling ranges to a single number for each area - so the option could be too simple/trivial for Bioware to implement and for this reason they could be tempted to skip it, just like combat. Skipping combat >  believable/plausible/coherent world, after all.

[Annie_Dear]

I think skiping combat in certain situations is fine. For example, the fight with the Arishok is skippable if you play your game right.

However, I don't support having a button you just press if you don't feel like fighting.

[DragonRageGT]

I support the autoplay feature on super easy difficulty. You let the game running and go do whatever it is you gotta do and come back for the dialogues/story/cutscenes/cinematics. Autoplay feature would also help people who hates games but just love a good story.

There could even be autoplay tournaments in Lan Houses to see who autoplays the best, with skip prizes and stuff. And N7 ranking for autoplaying the game.

Pity that they can't even give us the freedom to use 4 different buttons for 4 different actions. They have to be all bound to one single button/key and screw the gameplay. Soon gameplay actions will be bound to just one button. The skip button, so people don't have to think about gameplay anymore. And it would certainly be a lot cheaper to develop a game like that.

Why nobody say "don't like combat? Suck it up, princess!"

[philippe willaume]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wow.... this thread jumped a few pages.

From what I've read, I must say I agree with Fast Jimmy. I would rather Bioware focus on improving the combat and other gameplay rather then implement a skip combat button.

If Bioware feels that they still want to implement a skip combat feature after working on making gameplay and story more cohesive and better linked together, then that's fine with me. I won't use it, but I'll at least know they gave the gameplay needed attention.
 
My fear is that a "skip combat" button -- were something like that to ever actually be worked on by Bioware -- would take priority over working on the actual gameplay and combat.

EDIT: cleared up a few things.

It is very likely  that the command exist in console mode for testing (if only testing how the dialog pans out. so all the button has to do is open the console issue the command, close the console. At least in the fist iteration

I am all in favour of people having choices.
I teach fencing as a martial art so there is body conditioning, getting used to the idea that your going to get hit, and a bit of ground fighting.
if your are interested in artistic fencing, you can do 0 to as much as you want press-up instead of the 60 and ask people to take it easy on you when fencing or wresting it is fine. I can even help you with fight choreography but that still will be actual fencing used in choregraphic way
 
As you guessed I will savagely object if you try to turn it into a pure choregraphic/artistic fencing. That is not what we are about.
 
I really think that people who ask for kill all hostile buttons are after my first artistic fencing option.
 
That being said I totally agree with you, it must not come at the price of an even more tedious combat because we can now skip it if we don’t like it.
 
I am all for more diverse way to resolve and encounter either through combat or other means, and I would like combat to be as diverse as it was for me in DA:0.
Ie having to adapt to the situation rather than applying the same tactic over and over.
 
phil

[Joy Divison]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Edit: It'd be different with a heavily combat-oriented game like Diablo where the gameplay is nothing but combat. There is no point even purchasing a game like that if you don't have 'time' for combat. But Bioware titles tend to have more to their gameplay than killing things, and a fair number of RPGers prefer the parts of the game that contain RP.

How is DA and DA2 not combat oriented? 90% of the game is advanced by killing stuff.  100% of things you get from leveling up is dedicated to killing stuff.  Sure, there is a story in there, but the game at its heart, like most RPGs in the style of Gygax's Dungeons and Dragons, is about becoming a hero by killing things and taking their stuff.

[DarkAmaranth1966]

IMHO, they can do both. Why not go with a better story with more OPTIONAL social settings. Borrow ideas from the Sims games, have a tavern for both rich and poor, a brothel for both as well, and homes for the PC and companions where there is more free form socializing available. Now the rest of the outside world is pretty as is cannon but, that gives places to go for the story, IF the player wants to explore that aspect more while still keeping the combat heavy world we all love as well.

I'd love some of the treasures and a shop to provide things you can add to your home, and companion gifts you actually end up seeing on display in their homes as well as more conversation and, thus hearing more of the story from all of them as well as notable NPCs in the social locations.

[G00N3R7883]

A few random thoughts having not read much of the thread so far ...

Obviously I'm disappointed about these attacks on Jennifer Hepler. Nobody deserves to suffer through that, and the people who are guilty of these attacks should be ashamed of themselves. By all means give feedback when you disagree with something, but do it in a civilised manner.

Now onto the subject of the "skip gameplay" feature. Its not something that I would ever want to use. I also personally don't see the point in "skip cutscenes" features. When I buy a game, I want to experience ALL of it. I guess cutscenes can be annoying if you have to watch them again after a death, but in that case its not the cutscene that is the problem, its the positioning of the checkpoint. But that's kind of another topic. My point is, nobody seems to rage about the inclusion of a "skip cutscene" feature, and a "skip gameplay" feature would be exactly the same thing - an OPTION for a player to skip content.

The only reason that I would be against an option to skip gameplay would be if it harmed my experience. For example with immersion. You know all those huge "press B to skip cutscene" messages in the top corner of the screen on certain games? Don't put an equivalent on my screen when I'm trying to play the gameplay (I wish developers would stop putting them in the cutscenes as well). Put it in a menu screen somewhere that I won't see it. And also for example with balance. I don't want to experience boss fights that are just stupidly unwinnable on the basis that "well you can just skip it if its too hard for you, noob".

tl;dr: I'm happy for other people to spoil their games by skipping huge chunks as long as it doesn't spoil my own experience.

Modifié par G00N3R7883, 23 février 2012 - 04:13 .

[Silfren]

Joy Divison wrote...

People who worry about a "skip combat" button option are concerned that 1) gamers who dislike combat design combat oriented games and 2) combat will receive less priority than it does which will make for worse combat mechanics - a bad thing for combat heavy games like DA.

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Referring to the bolded portion:  It isn't necessary to be alarmed over Hepler, though.  It is hardly as though her opinions mean that the game will lack valuable insight and input and be compromised.  Hepler is only one person, and not part of the design team.  I don't think anyone needs to worry that her presence at Bioware will have a comprehensive effect on the gameplay aspects.

[Monica83]

Maybe i'm wrong but at this point if you skip gameplay parts.. You better buy a DVD or a book.....

[Huntress]

Joy Divison wrote...

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Do you know whats a writer's job? I guess not.. here let me spell it out for you.

A writer, is all about creating a story, and thats what Hepler do very well, she has nothing to do with combat design, she has nothing to do with game desing, she  made a comment about skip combat 6 years ago and people as paranoid as you blow it out of proportion. She in no way or form is saying that is going to be included in the games but never mind that lets insult her! because she clearly deserve it, you guys make me want to puke, you all know she is a writer but still insult her because of a game design.. sick.. thats the word you guys are sick and need help.

Skip combat is not new I remember using it in Lords of magic, Etherlords and many others games, after reading all this I belive the haters need a  Brain Doctor http://www.thefreedi...om/brain doctor

[Joy Divison]

Huntress wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Do you know whats a writer's job? I guess not.. here let me spell it out for you.

A writer, is all about creating a story, and thats what Hepler do very well, she has nothing to do with combat design, she has nothing to do with game desing, she  made a comment about skip combat 6 years ago and people as paranoid as you blow it out of proportion. She in no way or form is saying that is going to be included in the games but never mind that lets insult her! because she clearly deserve it, you guys make me want to puke, you all know she is a writer but still insult her because of a game design.. sick.. thats the word you guys are sick and need help.

Skip combat is not new I remember using it in Lords of magic, Etherlords and many others games, after reading all this I belive the haters need a  Brain Doctor http://www.thefreedi...om/brain doctor

If you are done making ad hominem attacks and care to actually explain how my post was "paranoid," how I insulted her, or blew her comments out of proportion, then do so.

I also suggest you re-read my post, then re-read yours, and ask yourself honestly if the way you treated me and my post is the same thing as what Hepler's critics do who make you want to "puke."

[LilyasAvalon]

Why the hell are you playing a video game is you're just going to skip combat? Play a visual novel then, or read a real novel.

[Joy Divison]

Silfren wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

People who worry about a "skip combat" button option are concerned that 1) gamers who dislike combat design combat oriented games and 2) combat will receive less priority than it does which will make for worse combat mechanics - a bad thing for combat heavy games like DA.

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Referring to the bolded portion:  It isn't necessary to be alarmed over Hepler, though.  It is hardly as though her opinions mean that the game will lack valuable insight and input and be compromised.  Hepler is only one person, and not part of the design team.  I don't think anyone needs to worry that her presence at Bioware will have a comprehensive effect on the gameplay aspects.

You're right.  But would Hepler not be a more valuable contributor to the game design team if she could offer relevant observations on the game beyond that of her job title?  It's not necessary, but having a excellent writer who could offer cogent advice on combat could only be a net positive, no?

[Wittand25]

Joy Divison wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

People who worry about a "skip combat" button option are concerned that 1) gamers who dislike combat design combat oriented games and 2) combat will receive less priority than it does which will make for worse combat mechanics - a bad thing for combat heavy games like DA.

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Referring to the bolded portion:  It isn't necessary to be alarmed over Hepler, though.  It is hardly as though her opinions mean that the game will lack valuable insight and input and be compromised.  Hepler is only one person, and not part of the design team.  I don't think anyone needs to worry that her presence at Bioware will have a comprehensive effect on the gameplay aspects.

You're right.  But would Hepler not be a more valuable contributor to the game design team if she could offer relevant observations on the game beyond that of her job title?  It's not necessary, but having a excellent writer who could offer cogent advice on combat could only be a net positive, no?

I think someone who has a different point of view regarding design choices is more valuable then someone who agrees to them without question.
If everybody who is involved in the creation of a game would love the same things games would only evolve in one direction loosing more and more possible customers (anyone who does not 100 % share the same view as the developer team) and the result would be that only niche games for a nice audience get made and most players would need to find another hobby.
As much as older gamers might complain but triple A games today most try to appeal to as many players as possible and must keep those players interested as long as possible (if DLC are part of the business strategy).And the truth is that there are many players who don´t went to spend hours of their time on pointless and repetitive combat, or who don´t want to sit through the voicework of dialog when they can read the subtitles much faster, so a way to circumvent those and other gamefeatures is in demand. (and always has been as should be proven enough by all those cheat and walkthrough sites on the internet).

[TEWR]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

There wouldn't be much implementation required though, because as has been pointed out earlier in the thread, a console command already exists where you can kill all hostiles. Turning it into a button accessible via the GUI shouldn't take all that much work away from improving general gameplay.

It would be desirable whether or not combat was improved, because no matter how easy combat is or how pretty it looks it'll always take time (if you add up all the minutes every combat takes, it's a lot of time).

But a good portion of the fun in video games like these stems from the combat and gameplay. It adds to a sense of how you do things.

I guess in a way it's a facet of roleplaying (for me anyway). Did you weaken the Archdemon by spamming the Ballistae (in terms of gameplay combat, it's somewhat cheap. In terms of realistic combat, it's a fair tactic)? Did you weaken him by hurling magic at him? Did you fight him up close and personal with a sword and shield.

To skip over it for any reason -- whether it's too difficult even on Casual (not that anyone actually has this problem. Just an example) or you just don't have time -- cuts out some of that. How did you accomplish your goals?

Even though it may not take much to implement, what's to stop Bioware from saying "Well we did this thing with the skip combat feature. Let's call it a day on combat and gameplay and focus on other things."?

Now while other things might be better, gameplay would suffer. And not just how gameplay plays out, but how it's linked to the story and world.

Gameplay needs to not only be fun and tactical* for DA, but it also needs to reflect on the lore of DA.

Also, if you skip combat and move into a cutscene, you may not know what happened. Hell, you may miss out on valuable loot, especially in scenarios like Tranquility. Personally, I hated that design decision, but it's just an example.

It also means that you can just easily plow through the game. To quote a character from Kingdom Hearts II:

Where's the fun in this? -- Xaldin

*I gave this an asterisk because I don't find the combat in either games to be tactical, but that's another matter entirely.

And honestly, from my perspective, if it's super duper easy where you can't even die...forcing people to do that combat for the sake of the combat is as infuriating as two divergent dialogue choices giving you the fundamentally same outcome.

All the more reason for gameplay to improve first and make it challenging/tactical.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I would love the ability to skip combat. I would likely only use it in games with bad combat (like DA2), but being able to avoid part of the game that I'm not enjoying would be very welcome.

[philippe willaume]

Monica83 wrote...

Maybe i'm wrong but at this point if you skip gameplay parts.. You better buy a DVD or a book.....

 
 
  
Well not as much as wrong but slightly missing the point may be
you would be correct if we were talking about a flight simulator in campaign mode.
ie what the point if you skip all the flying.

But in DA:0 and DA:2 at least until ACTIII, you might want to see what the different dialog option offers or you want to import a game in DA3 for example. And to be fair one time through DA:2 combat is punishment enough.

Like a fair few of us, I would not use it, like you I like DA/ME for the combat and the story.
Personally if some want it why the hells not, It is likely to cheap and cheerful.


The danger is that because of that "kill all button" there is much less attention given to the quality of the combat.

So I would prefer to see way out of combat via dialogue or and skills and the possibility of a more tactical approach to combat.
I kind of understand what TEWR is saying as that “kill all button” reminds me of “why do we have to go to through the whole map that we have already explored and may be a second one to go to place we have already explored.”
And then you end up with much less and much shorten map, when all you wanted was a quick travel marker to go the destination or at least to the closest local map access point.
 
Philippe


The danger is that because of that "kill all button" there is much less attention given to the quality of the combat.

So I would prefer to see way out of combat via dialogue or and skills and the possibility of a more tactical approach to combat.
I kind of understand  as it reminds me of “why do we have to go to through the whole map that we have already explored and may be a second one to go to place we have already explored.”
And then you end up with much less and much shorten map, when all you wanted was a quick travel marker to go the destination or at least to the closest local map access point.
 
Philippe

[Silfren]

Joy Divison wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

People who worry about a "skip combat" button option are concerned that 1) gamers who dislike combat design combat oriented games and 2) combat will receive less priority than it does which will make for worse combat mechanics - a bad thing for combat heavy games like DA.

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Referring to the bolded portion:  It isn't necessary to be alarmed over Hepler, though.  It is hardly as though her opinions mean that the game will lack valuable insight and input and be compromised.  Hepler is only one person, and not part of the design team.  I don't think anyone needs to worry that her presence at Bioware will have a comprehensive effect on the gameplay aspects.

You're right.  But would Hepler not be a more valuable contributor to the game design team if she could offer relevant observations on the game beyond that of her job title?  It's not necessary, but having a excellent writer who could offer cogent advice on combat could only be a net positive, no?

Do you not think Bioware would let Hepler go if they didn't consider her valuable?  Who are you, precisely, to question whether Hepler is sufficiently valuable to the company?  Are you part of Bioware's marketing team, or quality control? Seriously, do you hear yourself?  Clearly her observations and everything else she brings to the table are quite valuable and relevant.  Otherwise she would not be employed there.

For that matter, who is to say that Hepler's opinion on the value of an OPTIONAL skip combat button is not cogent advice?  All the detractors may want to believe that the idea is completely ludicrous and against what any "real" gamer or Bioware fan would want, but that is not the reality.  The comments in this thread and others, from people who would appreciate having such a feature, prove that.  The very fact that a lot of people do support Hepler's opinion indicates that her view is in fact a valuable suggestion for the design team to consider.

Modifié par Silfren, 23 février 2012 - 07:26 .

[TEWR]

Do you not think Bioware would let Hepler go if they didn't consider her valuable? Who are you, precisely, to question whether Hepler is sufficiently valuable to the company? Are you part of Bioware's marketing team, or quality control? Seriously, do you hear yourself? Clearly her observations and everything else she brings to the table are quite valuable and relevant. Otherwise she would not be employed there.

I don't think Joy Division was claiming that Hepler isn't valuable already. I think she was just saying that her value to the company would increase even more then it already is if she offered her opinions on combat and gameplay and whatnot.

Which doesn't mean she isn't a valuable employee.