107 réponses à ce sujet

[PsychoBlonde]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

This is very similar to the items in DA2 that improved with your level. To me, this is a great feature, since if I find myself entranced by a certain weapon (looks, history, abilities or all of the above), I can keep it as that one weapon I associate with my character. It's my Frej's Skrepp, my Gourry's Gorun Nova and my Arthur's Excalibur.

Do you all think this takes away too much from the loot aspect of the game, is it a pretty cool idea or do you not care much either way since you see an equal amount of pros and cons either way? =)

I, personally, enjoy manually upgrading my gear.  I like gear that has tradeoffs, and IMPORTANT ones, like, do I give up 30% crit for 70 extra damage?  Do I give up resistances for armor? Wow, this piece of gear is spectacular, how can I juggle my bonuses to fit it in?

In DA2, I devoted almost no time or energy to this because it wasn't necessary.  Oooo I have a staff that gives 15% fire damage instead of 13%.  But that's the only bonus it has while the other staff gives five other semi-useful things.  Yeaaaaaaahhh.  *pitch*

Presumably they want to make a game where you don't *have* to micromanage your gear if you don't want to.  All righty then, let's compromise.  Make a set (or two) of levels-with-you gear for the people who hate micromanagement.  Make it be middle-of-the-road for the level.  If you desire to micromanage your gear, that geart will be *at least* 50% to 100% better than the levels-with-you stuff.  Put a variety of ultra awesome items in the game with serious tradeoffs where you pretty much have to design your *entire build* around the item, but if you do, it is DISGUSTING.  (By the way, this system encourages people to re-play to try out those builds.)

The problem was that the levels-with-you stuff in DA2 was DLC items of one type or another, so they were pretty much universally better than anything else you could get.  Boo.

[Pasquale1234]

Filament wrote...

Though maybe they could scrap weapons having "innate" enchantments and make all enchantment be done by enchantment slotting, because it never made a lot of sense to me that weapons could both be innately enchanted and have slots, and how we could never see or perform the former type of "enchantment."

That's an interesting idea - as in, maybe a mage who has specific talents in a particular element could enchant weapons to add that elemental damage...?  I think I would require them to have some additional materials, like some specific rare herbs or something to limit it so you couldn't enchant every single weapon you acquired, but would have to be judicious about it.

[Wulfram]

I'd suggest that one major reason that there wasn't any necessity to make tough choices about which item to use was because of how rapidly items would be relegated into obsolescence.  This meant that there was only a very limited amount of items that you could concievably use at one time.

Having every item scaling - or a much shallower power curve - with level would increase the amount of real choices, because there'd be more items to choose from at any one time.

[Fallstar]

Filament wrote...

I could support a system where they're balanced based on a long list of physical properties (base damage, speed, plate effectiveness, chain effectiveness, etc) based on the individual weapon's design and don't "scale up" in terms of base power except maybe by upgrading them to mastercraft or what-have-you. And of course, enchantments. Though maybe they could scrap weapons having "innate" enchantments and make all enchantment be done by enchantment slotting, because it never made a lot of sense to me that weapons could both be innately enchanted and have slots, and how we could never see or perform the former type of "enchantment."

I actually rather liked the innate enchantments. In Origins they were usually somehow related to the weapon's origins, for example the Keening Blade had innate +cold damage and +attack enchantments, both of which made sense, seeing as it was being wielded by a powerful demon who's type (Revenant/Arcane Horror) I associated with cold damaging spells.

Or Duncan's dagger with the innate +damage to dragons, Maric's blade with the innate +damage to darkspawn. It seems to me that the innate enchantments are more to do with the weapon's history or origin, whereas slotted enchantments are more 'mundane' and can be added or removed freely.

What would be cool is if after performing some especially noteworthy feat, the weapon we used gained innate enchantments. This would go with the idea of forging a legend for your own weapon as mentioned above, without requiring a steel sword to have the raw power (read basic stats) of a dragonbone one. 

For example whatever weapon we used to kill the Arishok gave a +10 damage VS Qunari, whatever we used to kill the high dragon gave a +10 fire damage, whatever we used to kill Xebenkeck gave a 5% chance to proc blood slave, that sort of thing. 

Whilst the standard slotting enchantments provide a degree of customisation.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 11 juillet 2012 - 04:57 .

[Kidd]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I, personally, enjoy manually upgrading my gear.  I like gear that has tradeoffs, and IMPORTANT ones, like, do I give up 30% crit for 70 extra damage?  Do I give up resistances for armor? Wow, this piece of gear is spectacular, how can I juggle my bonuses to fit it in?

You can have that, and I would argue, even more so with a system where items scale. It removes the variable of "base damage," which would allow all the items in the game to be different in other ways. In a scaling system, the moment "5 damage and +1 strength or 10 damage and +1 strength? well that's a no-brainer" will never appear. Instead, you will be choosing between bonuses. Do you prefer a higher critical chance? Fire damage? Resistance? More damaging criticals?

These questions rarely came up with the DLC gear in DA2 simply because they were designed as a few DLC items on top of the ordinary game. If every item scaled, the items would have to be different in their bonuses.

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Presumably they want to make a game where you don't *have* to micromanage your gear if you don't want to.  All righty then, let's compromise.  Make a set (or two) of levels-with-you gear for the people who hate micromanagement.  Make it be middle-of-the-road for the level.  If you desire to micromanage your gear, that geart will be *at least* 50% to 100% better than the levels-with-you stuff. 

That sounds neat. A problem with it however would be that there indeed would only be a set or two to choose from. Not a whole lot of gear to customise the character with (aesthetics and build alike).

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 11 juillet 2012 - 04:45 .

[-Semper-]

BobSmith101 wrote...

It's a matter of effectiveness. The sword won't magically transform at all, it will just become more effective.
Who wins between the peasent with his sword or the grandmaster with the shinai.

the one who is more trained - detached from the items they use. it's right that they will fight better and with more efficiecny but only because of their skills gained through earlier training and experience. that is covered well by a meaningful lvlup system. in regard to this item scaling feels plain and poorly developed with barely any connection to realism.

it's the same with monster/npc scaling. such stuff simply destroys every atmosphere and lore - even the whole lvlup becomes meaningless. the pace and diffculty of every single fight and the whole game never change, which eventually ends in boredom.

Modifié par -Semper-, 11 juillet 2012 - 05:12 .

[Wulfram]

I think the way Act 1 weapons might as well be tooth picks compared to Act 3 weapons is far more destructive to the atmosphere.

[Fallstar]

Wulfram wrote...

I think the way Act 1 weapons might as well be tooth picks compared to Act 3 weapons is far more destructive to the atmosphere.

To the contrary, the 7 year time gap allows for improved smithing techniques to be developed, new magical research to take place, better fletching techniques to be developed etc. That's one thing that the 7 year time gap does explain away easily.

[Wulfram]

DuskWarden wrote...

To the contrary, the 7 year time gap allows for improved smithing techniques to be developed, new magical research to take place, better fletching techniques to be developed etc. That's one thing that the 7 year time gap does explain away easily.

7 times better?  And many of the items we are told were created long ago.

[The Hierophant]

Pretty please for whoever's in charge of the weapon designs, can you please ease up on the hilts of the greatswords. In DA2 most of the new models hilts had ridiculous girth, and length *lmao*, that made pc look like he/she were swinging around logs instead.

[-Semper-]

Wulfram wrote...

I think the way Act 1 weapons might as well be tooth picks compared to Act 3 weapons is far more destructive to the atmosphere.

which is purely bad game design.

[The Hierophant]

-Semper- wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

I think the way Act 1 weapons might as well be tooth picks compared to Act 3 weapons is far more destructive to the atmosphere.

which is purely bad game design.

Imho the devs should have kept DA:O & Awakenings weapon/armor tier system. I remember the Warden Longsword Alistair started with was tier 2 grey iron, and i converted it to tier 9 in Awakenings using it to kill The Mother...good times.

[AkiKishi]

-Semper- wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

I think the way Act 1 weapons might as well be tooth picks compared to Act 3 weapons is far more destructive to the atmosphere.

which is purely bad game design.

It's normal for RPG games. You won't find many level 20 characters using +1 swords.  It really comes down to how the damage is structured and how much of it is character and how much of it is weapon.

As far as I recall different weapons in DA are made of different materials. The problem arises when you scale the game so everything improves along with you. An iron sword should still work on a bandit, but probably not so well on a dragon.

[-Semper-]

BobSmith101 wrote...

It's normal for RPG games. You won't find many level 20 characters using +1 swords.

that's mainly an "issue" of the used setting. if you play a low magic rpg where slightly better gear is worth tons of gold and very rare, the same items can be used throughout the whole campaign.

your character will become better as a combatant while leveling up and gaining skills to handle different situations.

while item tiers are definable within the lore (as said through different materials, masterworks and legendaries) scaleable gear always feels out of place and illogical.

[Isaidlunch]

I'd love the option to have two weapon slots, one for appearance and one for stats. Item upgrading would still be an important part of character progression and people wouldn't be punished for equipping RP items. Everyone wins.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

It's normal for RPG games. You won't find many level 20 characters using +1 swords.

Now.  Not always.

And it used to be that reaching level 20 at all was a major achievement.  It made some sense for those people to have more powerful weapons, because there were probably only 30 of those people in the entire world.

[wowpwnslol]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

It's normal for RPG games. You won't find many level 20 characters using +1 swords.

Now.  Not always.

And it used to be that reaching level 20 at all was a major achievement.  It made some sense for those people to have more powerful weapons, because there were probably only 30 of those people in the entire world.

True from RPG perspective. However, mechanically, the D&D rules dictate a +1 enhancement for every 4 levels, which means a level 20 character can expect to wield a weapon of +5 enhancement. Anything less and you are pretty much running a campaign based on house rules. A party cannot survive encounters without magic items appropriate for their level.

[Barry Bathernak]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Barry Bathernak wrote...

Oh and KiddDBeauty mass effect 1 is the only one with an inventory and that was scaled also so you seem to be hypocritical right now since m.e.2 and m.e.3 both had you go to an armory for you guns. 

p.s. If you love a piece of gear a lot then just put in a storage chest when it can no longer be useful or put in your alt weapon spot.

First of all, you may as well throw away what you cannot reasonably use. You're never going to equip it again any way unless you know a certain quest won't involve any fighting and you want to look fabulous in the cutscenes.

As for ME and inventories, ME1 equipment does not scale with you. It's very similar to the DA inventory actually, where you get the same weapon multiple times, with the only difference being some arbitrary "tier" function to the item. Somehow the Scorpion VII is twice as powerful as the Scorpion IV, similar to how the red steel swords are somehow twice as powerful as the iron swords.

ME2/3 removes this and instead has gear that never gets old - you simply choose which kind of bonuses (and looks) you want and then you can go with it. Protective gear never ceases to be protective, gear that makes you agile never ceases to make you agile, etc. I love that system, aside from how you can't change gear outside of your cabin.

1. I used "scale" with the context you gave witch was more like a musical note scale not as in you are lvl.1 and so is your weapon, and your weapon will be lvl.10 when you are. So while we are both wrong you are more at fault for the use of the wrong contex while im at fault since i dont like to change context and im lazy.

2. m.e.2 weapons don't even have stats that can be found in game and those have all the qualities of different colored bricks since they all had there own purpose so it was just prefference.

3. m.e.3 weapons aren't scale either they are tiered since yes they are always there but with out uprgading past I your gun will still be weaker then its X counterpart no matter your level also the weapon and ammo mods are just mass effects versions of enchantmants only the latter are class specific and not availible to all. So once again there is no scaling in m.e.3 its just a small list of weapons.

4.Did you realy just say you want to look "fabulous" for cut scenes realy. I'm almost speechless on how litlle i care about that argument other then by saying i don't care what you say my chainmail will always be stronger then your dress.

5. armor in m.e.2 and 3 dont reduce the amount of damage you take only and abilites do (and the heavy weave in m.e.2 but that was for you skin) so your armor is there only to give buffs not to protect you and the shield and health boost buffs don't reduce the damage you take they only allow you to take more damage.

[Kidd]

Barry Bathernak wrote...

1. I used "scale" with the context you gave witch was more like a musical note scale not as in you are lvl.1 and so is your weapon, and your weapon will be lvl.10 when you are. So while we are both wrong you are more at fault for the use of the wrong contex while im at fault since i dont like to change context and im lazy.

I have no idea what you want me to answer here.

Barry Bathernak wrote...

2. m.e.2 weapons don't even have stats that can be found in game and those have all the qualities of different colored bricks since they all had there own purpose so it was just prefference.

They have stats, BioWare just decided to hide them from us for whatever reason. You can find the stats on the wiki. I do not support the hiding of stats. The weapons are all good against different kinds of defences and they function differently, so you go with whatever one fits with what you want to do.

Barry Bathernak wrote...

3. m.e.3 weapons aren't scale either they are tiered since yes they are always there but with out uprgading past I your gun will still be weaker then its X counterpart no matter your level also the weapon and ammo mods are just mass effects versions of enchantmants only the latter are class specific and not availible to all. So once again there is no scaling in m.e.3 its just a small list of weapons.

The weapons are tiered, yes. The armour is not. I never meant to compare anything to ME originally btw.

Barry Bathernak wrote...

4.Did you realy just say you want to look "fabulous" for cut scenes realy. I'm almost speechless on how litlle i care about that argument other then by saying i don't care what you say my chainmail will always be stronger then your dress.

I meant there to be a subtext there that said I didn't think looking fabulous in cutscenes instead of having good stats was a very good idea. In other words, with equipment that doesn't scale, you might as well throw the old items away no matter how cool they are. You said they could be put in the stash, and I agree I suppose, but I see no point when you're never going to put them out of the stash again any way.

Barry Bathernak wrote...

5. armor in m.e.2 and 3 dont reduce the amount of damage you take only and abilites do (and the heavy weave in m.e.2 but that was for you skin) so your armor is there only to give buffs not to protect you and the shield and health boost buffs don't reduce the damage you take they only allow you to take more damage.

Giving you more HP and reducing the damage is quite the same thing, really. And really, now you're talking technicalities. The armour didn't have "damage reduction," no. But it easily could have had that.

[Momiji.mii]

I really want scaling weapons. More of those, please.

[Lotion Soronarr]

The easiest and most reliastic way to fix te problem of scaling...is to not have scaling.

Problem solved.
Now your beloved weapon is viable trought the rest of the game, because other weaposn won't be so redicolously better that they make it utterly useless.

[Lotion Soronarr]

-Semper- wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

It's normal for RPG games. You won't find many level 20 characters using +1 swords.

that's mainly an "issue" of the used setting. if you play a low magic rpg where slightly better gear is worth tons of gold and very rare, the same items can be used throughout the whole campaign.

your character will become better as a combatant while leveling up and gaining skills to handle different situations.

while item tiers are definable within the lore (as said through different materials, masterworks and legendaries) scaleable gear always feels out of place and illogical.

Agreed.
And to add to that, just because something is normal in a game type, doesn't make it good. Plenty of bad game mechanics seem to linger on.

Redicolous MMO-like scaling and loot-oriented gameplay belongs in the deepest pits of MMO hell, and not in a proper RPG.

[Kidd]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The easiest and most reliastic way to fix te problem of scaling...is to not have scaling.

I'm up for this.

[AkiKishi]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The easiest and most reliastic way to fix te problem of scaling...is to not have scaling.

I'm up for this.

Then you will be faced with hours of grinding to keep your underpowered gear. Removing grinding was one of the primary reasons for scaling.