43 réponses à ce sujet

[Adria Teksuni]

*shrug* I play on Casual for most RP games until I get all the storylines out of the way, then if I like the combat system I'll go for harder difficulties.



The following is my humble opinion:



Hard and Nightmare should be just that. Much much more difficult, but perhaps with bigger in game rewards. If a lot of folks can just blow through Nightmare, then something is wrong with that difficulty and it needs to be tweaked.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

I think the trouble is, as others have highlighted that someones 'hard' could be another persons 'nightmare'.



The levels truly would only need to be changed if a BIG group of people stated that a higher level was truly too easy.



Main problem of that then is scaling. I myself have started on easy, I did try normal at first because I'd played other RPGs on such and not had an issue and it had been ages since played on BG2 and forgot how tough I found that and so naturally after doing ok through the first part ie. upto getting to the tower of ishal ogre fight, ogre fight tough, fair dues its a boss I thought, darn well better be tough. Past that, Lothering not too bad, following that, tried some other places and got creamed by groups with mainly normal or 1 or 2 lieutenants (yellows) in the group and these weren't bosses. So seeing as read the boards a lot, did the natural thing of dropping down to easy. Now even then on first proper playthrough I'll admit I had some tough fights, but the more I played, the more I learned and I think am better now. Not entirely sure if ready to up the level but I do intend to at some point in a future playthrough, probably when I get the "I'm kind of a big deal" achievement as so far I've not gone with any principal of doing the save/reload thing if my PC dies in a fight.



Anyway, I'll admit that me, personally I doubt I'll get to the level of playing it on hard or even nightmare, those of you that can play it and solo them, I would take my hat off to you, I play this game for fun first, but I do like a challenge but know my limits.



That being said I am quite sure there are some that would like to continually raise the ladder and my main concern with people going on about the higher levels being too easy is that you could potentially cause the scaling to be too much for some people to handle.



Which is why I kind of like the idea someone suggested earlier on that you simply add levels on top of the current ones to give the people finding levels easy that challenge they are looking for, rather than potentially putting people off trying to 'climb the ladder' by making the gaps between the rungs too far apart.

[Bluesmith]

Revik wrote...

Dragon Age is unique in some respects to other games of its kind in it that it can be modded.
If these know-it-all posters think they are so smart why not just mod the game so that it does what you want. If you think you have this brilliant idea on how to make the game better just mod the game no problem. What's that? You're rather just be lazy and complain?

Balancing is much harder then breaking. That it is the developer's responsibility is a reasonable expectation, particularly because the accepted baseline for any game is indeed one of balance. 

The toolset exists so that we can expand (more areas, more campaigns, etc.) and break (god items, overpowering spells, etc.) at our leisure. 

[Heldelance]

Christ, the main reason people whinge about thing being too cheap and/or the game being too easy or somesuch is because most of them would most likely have MMO games under their belt and instead of playing the game for fun, they sit there and coldly calculate every single bloody thing about the characters.



As aforementioned, there is a toolset that makes it rather easy to mod the game. Instead of being a whingy whiney, lazy bugger and spoiling it for everyone else by asking for changes that will be made across the board (they should add an option on whether or not to apply certain changes) go change it so that you can have your fun with it.



For example, LOTS of people love meat. Don't be the annoying jerk that wants the majority to change their freaking diet. Just make your own meal and let everyone else enjoy theirs.

[DarkSpiral]

Heldelance wrote...

Christ, the main reason people whinge about thing being too cheap and/or the game being too easy or somesuch is because most of them would most likely have MMO games under their belt and instead of playing the game for fun, they sit there and coldly calculate every single bloody thing about the characters.

As aforementioned, there is a toolset that makes it rather easy to mod the game. Instead of being a whingy whiney, lazy bugger and spoiling it for everyone else by asking for changes that will be made across the board (they should add an option on whether or not to apply certain changes) go change it so that you can have your fun with it.

For example, LOTS of people love meat. Don't be the annoying jerk that wants the majority to change their freaking diet. Just make your own meal and let everyone else enjoy theirs.

Uh...I don't disagree with you, but for crying out loud let's not turn this into a discussion on the benefits of vegetarianism over eating meat.  Those "discussions' end up as flame wars.

Anyway, back on topic.  I've said this in other threads before.  The issue I have with people that demand certain changes be made is with the fact they are deamnding those changes be made across the board.  This is still a single-player game.  Balance is not a baseline here.  If it is someone's opinion that balance is a baseline, well I'll just have to disagree with you.

Lets use another game as an example.  Fable 2, using the mutliplayer, allows a MIUCH higher level person to become a henchman to a lower leveled player, and he can simply waltz right through the game's quests.  Peter Molyneux said in an interview that the option to do such a thing was OBVIOUSLY powergaming, and he felt that having the option was in fact a good thing, because it meant that players that enjoyed playing the game in that fashion could so so.  If that was fun for them, let them do it.

As others have said, the game is modable.  Someone can, and most likely will, create a mod that will alter the game in the way that makes forefield, or scattershot, or whatever, work in the manner you so choose.  If you cannot actually do such a thing yourself, then create a social group (that IS one of the things the Network is for, afterall) and try to recruit people that can, and want to do so.  Screaming that Bioware MUST do something is a waste of your time.  To my knowledge, they haven't responded to this kind of topic at all, which makes me think that even if this is an issue, it's one that is fairly close to the bottom of the list.

Of course, I could be wrong.  Maybe it's a priority.  Anyone heard word from anyone at Bioware that they think these things are worthy of their time?  Anyone at all?

[BelgarathMTH]

I'm not sure that all these "game is unbalanced, too easy on Nightmare" threads are productive.



The developers have provided four levels of difficulty to meet a variety of tastes and tolerances for challenge.



If the toughest set of parameters provided by them is not tough enough, they have also provided a toolset that allows modding the various parameters up or down, such that the players can created their own level of challenge.



What is the point of complaining that Nightmare difficulty is "too easy"? How much difficulty is "just right"? How much is "too hard"? Enemies do double damage, you do one-half? Enemies do triple damage, you do one-fourth?



I mean, come on, people, these games are governed by mathematical formulae. If you don't like one set of formulae, the tools are there in the game for you to create your own.



I think these threads are merely an expression of the human desire for pride and one-upsmanship. They are started by Pride Demons.



Hey, there's a new expression for "Troll"! Let's post that idea into every one of these "Pfeh, too easy", "Wah, too hard" threads. The "Pheh, too easy"'s are Pride Demons. The "Wah, too hard"'s are Sloth Demons!



There you go. Like all Demons, they are to be defeated and sent back to the Fade where they belong! When you engage them on their own terms. you only let them increase their power by feeding on you!

[AntiChri5]

BelgarathMTH wrote...

I'm not sure that all these "game is unbalanced, too easy on Nightmare" threads are productive.

The developers have provided four levels of difficulty to meet a variety of tastes and tolerances for challenge.

If the toughest set of parameters provided by them is not tough enough, they have also provided a toolset that allows modding the various parameters up or down, such that the players can created their own level of challenge.

What is the point of complaining that Nightmare difficulty is "too easy"? How much difficulty is "just right"? How much is "too hard"? Enemies do double damage, you do one-half? Enemies do triple damage, you do one-fourth?

I mean, come on, people, these games are governed by mathematical formulae. If you don't like one set of formulae, the tools are there in the game for you to create your own.

I think these threads are merely an expression of the human desire for pride and one-upsmanship. They are started by Pride Demons.

Hey, there's a new expression for "Troll"! Let's post that idea into every one of these "Pfeh, too easy", "Wah, too hard" threads. The "Pheh, too easy"'s are Pride Demons. The "Wah, too hard"'s are Sloth Demons!

There you go. Like all Demons, they are to be defeated and sent back to the Fade where they belong! When you engage them on their own terms. you only let them increase their power by feeding on you!

Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed.Agreed. Agreed Agreed. Agreed.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

Faerell Gustani wrote...

Actually, you have the complaint backwards.
"Bioware should nerf it so that I can use it and have a challenge, and I don't have to ignore the tactic cause it's too 'cheap' anymore."

It's one thing for spells or talents... but for TACTICS.  Such as exploiting the AI with pulling and Forcefield or spamming Cone of Cold.  That is intentional abuse that can be avoided.

Honestly, you're better off just finding a mod that changes what you want.  That way everybody is happy. (Except hardcore players on the console)

[Heldelance]

I disagree with the tactics part. Anything is a valid tactic even if it makes everything cakewalk. In FPS games, sniping in one spot is often considered camping and as such is considered a "cheap tactic". What everyone fails to realize is that it still IS a tactic, it's a way of playing, in fact, snipers in real life, are supposed to stay in one spot until the position becomes untenable. In anything, the best tactic is often to EXPLOIT an adversary's WEAKNESS, it shows it in many books about war and tactics and it is pretty much common sense.



To simplify the sniper/camping analogy, "A cheap tactic while frowned upon by others is still a valid tactic as tactics are supposed to be formed in such a way that you take advantage of your opponents weaknesses thereby allowing you to emerge victorious against superior odds or defeat lesser/equal opponents with great ease."



If you look up the definition for tactic, http://www.merriam-w...ctionary/tactic

It removes all arguments that ANY tactic in ANY game is "abuse".

[TastyLaksa]

LynxAQ wrote...

Nightmare difficulty is there for a reason. Time for them to use it as such. I am one of those "verteran raiders" as you put it and on my first play through in this game I played on hard, cause it seemed like the proper way the game should be played. Normal had that silly half damage from friendly fire thing.

But halfway through the game I remember thinking to myself that this was a little easy... I didnt realise at that time the difficulty could be changed mid game, as most games that ask you what difficulty you want on the character creation screen can't normally be changed mid game. So I just continued and finished the game. Every playthrough after that has been on nightmare and still alot of fights are too easy and I dont use any cheese tactics. I only ever have 1 mage max in my group, I don't use FF, only allow myself 1 CoC use per fight (so I have to use it tactically if I have the spell) etc along with a load of silly limitations I put on myself just to get some resemblance of a challenge.

This is when I think to myself, surely I shouldnt have to do that in order to get a challenge when playing on nightmare difficulty.

Its not about a spell being over used so it should get nerfed, its about me being able to use every spell given in the game but still have a challenge. ATM that is not possible.

Unfortunately you have reached the stage that no game can challenge you ever. So it's one of the drawbacks of being so good at something it's not fun anymore.

[Litryx]

The only people I find more annoying than the people who talk about the game being too easy are the people who say that since it is a single player game there should be no effort put into balancing it, especially when the effort being put into balancing it is a matter of tweaking some variables on cooldowns and/or durations.



The single player argument goes both ways; if you don't like the changes being made in the name of "balance", use the toolset to revert, or don't patch at all.

[Faerell Gustani]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Faerell Gustani wrote...

Actually, you have the complaint backwards.
"Bioware should nerf it so that I can use it and have a challenge, and I don't have to ignore the tactic cause it's too 'cheap' anymore."

It's one thing for spells or talents... but for TACTICS.  Such as exploiting the AI with pulling and Forcefield or spamming Cone of Cold.  That is intentional abuse that can be avoided.

Honestly, you're better off just finding a mod that changes what you want.  That way everybody is happy. (Except hardcore players on the console)

Taunt + Forcefield is very likely a bug in the AI.

CoC spam is not.  CoC spam was a valid tactic as it was working as intended by the developers.  That is until they decided to change CoC, which indicates that they made a mistake with the cooldown vs freeze duration ratio.

Being a programmer, I have a general sense towards what was intentional programming and what is not based purely on the complexity of the code that is going to be required.  The prblem with CoC is literally 2 variables: cooldown and freeze duration.  It's almost impossible to screw that up outside of a typo.  There was no miscalculation of any sort.  It was game design (not software) choice and a very bad one...fortunately they rectified this.

Taunt + Forcefield is a problem with the AI...something much more complex than 2 variables.  Implementing a code to aggro-wipe could have unintended consequences and implementing code to aggro suppress for the duration of the spell is likewise wonky as well as a bit more intensive to make.  Additionally, a pure aggro-wipe or even suppression may not be 'balanced'...after all, what's the point of making you immune to physical if no one ever hits you?
So ideally we have an AI that is smart enough to recognize that their target is under a temporary status effect that renders the attacks ineffective (After a few good whacks for nothing) such that the AI decides to leave that target alone for a bit and check back later.  Of course, this would require more detailed coding.

I hope that better explains my stance on this and why I expected Bioware to address these changes.  This is also why I am not surpised that the Taunt+FF bug has not been fixed yet, while CoC was done almost immediately.

The Game designers (not software designers) probably looked at CoC and went "What did we do?  Indefinite freeze-lock?  Ok yeah that is absurd."
So really that's up to the Devs to fix, not the modding community.

They probably think similarly of Taunt+FF, but like I said, it's something that will take longer to implement.

I hope this explains things a bit more.

[LynxAQ]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien actually made a really good post, and understand what hes saying about having the rungs to far apart for some people, but perhaps there should be more options on difficulty in the game. Perhaps 4 just isnt enough in this day and age, and the way they made the difficulties harder was perhaps the wrong way.



As for the silly comments about just change it in the Toolset, I would take a very educated guess and say that the majority of the players playing this game have very little if any knowledge of 2da file editing or C++ which is required to make any change in the toolset. Unfortunately Bioware isnt Blizzard, who actually give you powerful but extremely user friendly toolsets (Warcraft 3). Anyone could make a complex map on Warcraft 3 with no knowledge of programming or 2da file editing. That is not the case with DA:O.



As for the comment about using other peoples mods, that is not always the solution 99% of the time. Alot of the time those mods include alot of changes people don't want in the game.



TBH my solution to the difficulty thing is not to have a difficulty selector anymore but to instead have a difficulty tab in the options menu. Under this tab you can adjust damage and health of white / elite / boss mobs in different sections to your hearts content. The programmers only have to program in the base values.



For example high dragon base melee damage is 50 damage. If I wanted to make it 100 per swing I would go into the difficulty options and under boss tab, I would go to the damage scroller which is on the default 0% and change it to 100%. This would mean that all boss monsters in the game would deal 100% more damage than their base damage. There would be scrollers for health / defense / armour and attack as well. Obviously white / elites and bosses would all have their own scrollers.



This way players can customise the difficulty to their hearts contents and this would be pretty simple to code in tbh. So a player could have all the monsters with 200% extra health but everything else at base because that player like longer battles but thinks the other attributes are fine.



Thats my solution to the difficulty thing and I am not paid to think these things up and I am 1 person.



But until then I do think, that balance needs to be achieved in higher difficulty levels.

[WillieStyle]

DarkSpiral wrote...

Heldelance wrote...

Christ, the main reason people whinge about thing being too cheap and/or the game being too easy or somesuch is because most of them would most likely have MMO games under their belt and instead of playing the game for fun, they sit there and coldly calculate every single bloody thing about the characters.

As aforementioned, there is a toolset that makes it rather easy to mod the game. Instead of being a whingy whiney, lazy bugger and spoiling it for everyone else by asking for changes that will be made across the board (they should add an option on whether or not to apply certain changes) go change it so that you can have your fun with it.

For example, LOTS of people love meat. Don't be the annoying jerk that wants the majority to change their freaking diet. Just make your own meal and let everyone else enjoy theirs.

Uh...I don't disagree with you, but for crying out loud let's not turn this into a discussion on the benefits of vegetarianism over eating meat.  Those "discussions' end up as flame wars.

Anyway, back on topic.  I've said this in other threads before.  The issue I have with people that demand certain changes be made is with the fact they are deamnding those changes be made across the board.  This is still a single-player game.  Balance is not a baseline here.  If it is someone's opinion that balance is a baseline, well I'll just have to disagree with you.

Lets use another game as an example.  Fable 2, using the mutliplayer, allows a MIUCH higher level person to become a henchman to a lower leveled player, and he can simply waltz right through the game's quests.  Peter Molyneux said in an interview that the option to do such a thing was OBVIOUSLY powergaming, and he felt that having the option was in fact a good thing, because it meant that players that enjoyed playing the game in that fashion could so so.  If that was fun for them, let them do it.

As others have said, the game is modable.  Someone can, and most likely will, create a mod that will alter the game in the way that makes forefield, or scattershot, or whatever, work in the manner you so choose.  If you cannot actually do such a thing yourself, then create a social group (that IS one of the things the Network is for, afterall) and try to recruit people that can, and want to do so.  Screaming that Bioware MUST do something is a waste of your time.  To my knowledge, they haven't responded to this kind of topic at all, which makes me think that even if this is an issue, it's one that is fairly close to the bottom of the list.

Of course, I could be wrong.  Maybe it's a priority.  Anyone heard word from anyone at Bioware that they think these things are worthy of their time?  Anyone at all?

You are wrong. It is a priority for Bioware as stated by a couple developers including the lead developer Georg.
And the latest patch demonstrates this by nerfing some of the most overpowered, most complained about spells in the game.  The latest patch also buffs stamina regen which is a bigger boon to rogues and warriors. This was another complaint made by us "balance whiners".  Georg has also made clear that further balance changes will come in the future.

I will say this, for the first time I am starting to understand the point of view of those who argue against class balance changes. It isn't that they think balance isn't important.  They actually think it IS important; they just like the current state of balance in the game.  This is because these overpowered spells make them feel powerful/effective and they fear that without them, the game will be too hard.  I sympathise, but rest assured, no matter how many nerfs mage spell recieve, you will still be able to finish the game on Easy.

[Gecon]

Whailor wrote...

I like the game as it is. Why should the game be changed for me when I like it, just because someone else doesn't like it? I see no reason so those who whine should stop it. Game has, after all, several difficulty settings and if someone still cannot play it on Easy setting, which is REALLY EASY, then perhaps that person should stick with crosswords and not try to change the genre.

I disagree. The game has to offer a lot of story etc. If people dont want to bother with combat, just give them a godmode so they can still experience the story.

[Gecon]

andyr1986 wrote...

I wasn;'t around the forums back in BG2 days but did they have the same sought of threads for chain Contingeancy(sp?), Certain Spell Immunity combinations, Alacrity items and haste. Amongst the other broken spells in BG2?

Err, if its working as intended its not broken.

And I would be glad if someone would finally do some "extreme" magic system like back in BG2. Something more unforgiving and complex where you really have to learn the system to master it.

Unlike so many magic systems nowadays where all you need to know about mages is "hit them hard - and if they still move, hit them even harder".

[Dark83]

The Advanced Tactics mod has a "Target Invulnerable" status, so the game does have a means of checking it. It should be smart enough to not keep whacking at someone in a Force Field, I think.

[kevinwastaken]

BioWare should nerf this thread.

[GueRakun]

Foofad wrote...

Anyone who is asking for something to be hard for anyone at any skill level is asking for something totally impossible. That would be the holy grail of game design. Challenge scaling just doesn't work like that in the real world. Ultimately, every encounter is just a routine that has to be learned (or found, however you want to put it) and gone through in order to surmount. Perceived "difficulty" is an amalgamation of a lot of factors, but mostly boils down to time and complexity.

Thus the main ways to increase difficulty are to manipulate those factors. You can increase the time to complete a task, and you can increase the complexity required to complete it, and as you do that the number of people who are patient enough to take the time and clever enough to work out the complexity will decrease. Which makes sense. Not everyone wants to spend ten minutes on a trash pull that requires extensive tactics and coordination to pull off - and not everyone has the coordination and game knowledge to pull it off. It's naturally exclusive.

But then the catch comes in. Anyone patient enough can learn the routine. And that's the crux of the issue. On the one hand, you're excluding people - and on the other, you can't keep people from learning the routines. As soon as someone learns the routine, unless they screw up or the encounter takes too long and outweighs the player's patience, NO amount of added complexity can make the encounter "harder" when the player knows how to beat it.

WoW raiding (or really, any generic MMORPG) is a perfect example of this. Remember when Onyxia was a hard encounter? The hardest, in fact. How long did that last? It only lasted until every major raiding guild worth its salt memorized the routine for killing her. It's the same with every major raid boss.

Now, if you bring some sort of fluid or dynamic difficulty scaling into the picture such that every encounter is different (even encounters at the same point in the overall game) THEN there is an opportunity for hitting on perfect balance. The AI Director in Left 4 Dead comes to mind although it's far from perfect. In theory, if the players are having too easy of a time, the Director will throw in another horde just to keep you on your toes. Stuff like that. It's essentially like having a Dungeon Master. Then the issue becomes finding a difficult (read: complex) task for the player to get through that is surmountable for the player's skill level at that point in time, but isn't a cakewalk, and doing so on the fly.

Again, this is the holy grail of game design. Anyone in a rage over this game's difficulty scale should just pat themselves on the back for being clever or patient enough to beat Nightmare blindfolded, or whatever they do these days.

This post is awesome.. I learned alot from this.. so this thread is not useless..