254 réponses à ce sujet

[Emzamination]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I support having a story mode, or failing that, adding a invulnerability and one hit kill option.

I must say, I have never found Dragon Age hard on any difficultly.

I miss cheat codes

If this is the future of gamers, just strike me down now. Smh... I too wash my hands of this thread, just too nauseating now.

Modifié par Emzamination, 25 novembre 2012 - 02:44 .

[JimboGee]

I love how almost every thread starts out polite and civil and turns into " Yeah well you stink of poo".
Seriously though, Mass Effect's combat was totally different because A) you had a cover system because there were people shooting at your ass!

[Fast Jimmy]

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

wtf? Did you play it?

Indeed, I've played it.

The auto diaologue was borderline unbearable. It was as if I wasn't playing a Bioware game anymore

Then turn off the auto-dialogue if you only want casual combat.

Auto dialogue is defined as Shepard saying something when the player did not command her/him to say that thing. Ala all of ME3's writing

Then how did Story mode not work?

I agree with Maria, having Auto-dialogue is not a result of the Story Mode feature, it was a result of ME3 just having a lot of Auto-dialogue. 

The Story Mode did work well, for what it was. It made dying in combat an actual challenge and failure pretty much impossible. Even if you stood shooting at the floor the entire time, your companions would mop the floor.

The Action Mode put even more Auto-dialogue in the game, but that was for those who didn't care about choosing dialouge options and just want to see things play out. But that had nothing to do with the super-easy Story Mode, nor the more Auto-dialogue heavy Normal mode.

Just because ME3 did something and the game as a whole was terrible to a lot of people does not mean that everything ME3 did was a failure.

[nightscrawl]

relhart wrote...

To the OP's topic, the problem with gutting the mechanics even further than they have already, is that it tends to destroy the higher difficulty settings too.  Devs don't want to make 5 different versions of the game, which means harder difficulties get the same mechanics, just increased enemy stats, for the most part.  Which just makes fights longer and more tedious, not necessarily harder.  There is no way (that I can see), that you can actually "suck" at DA on casual, it takes a very minimal time investment to learn the mechanics, you don't even really need to do that, you can just mash A and get through the vast majority of fights.

This is where I think Blizzard went in the right direction with their various difficulties of raiding. You can have the normal setting, which was designed for your average guild (by this I mean to emphasize a group of known people working together), the heroic setting which is for more dedicated guilds (these put in more time and resources into beating the encounters and are prepared to switch out classes for the best group makeup), and the raid finder version which is designed for a bunch of (disorganized) strangers getting together to beat the encounter over a short period of time.

The raid finder is the easiest, where the bosses have simpler mechanics and do less damage. The normal is average. The heroic is the hardest, with increased boss damage, health, and higher complexity of the fight mechanics (sometimes the boss will gain an ability not present in normal mode, or a normal mechanic will be changed in some way.)

If would be nice of Bioware could design in a similar way, where the fight is more complex the higher your difficulty setting goes up. Perhaps trash mobs can still have their health increases (though to a lesser proportion), but boss fights should be a challenge, not only take a longer amount of time because their health has been so inflated.

[Kileyan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Just curious, for those who just want to get on with the story and hate combat getting in the way, how do you feel about having to walk across town or across maps to do quests, would it also be something you want to avoid?

This isn't really equivalent.

Combat poses the issue of it actually blocking the game player if they are unable to win the encounter.

If you know where you're going, you're moving to your destination and there's a lot of psychological factors at play (feelings of progress and so forth). Where the "walking across town" part becomes an issue if when the player feels stuck and not sure where to go.

I'm not sure how you took that, but I really wasn't a snarky question or putting down someones playstyle. A lot of people from hardcore gamers to casual hate running across maps constantly to turn in quests, sell items, and other activities.

I was just curious if those who disliked combat slowing down the story, also hated travel and maybe even selling loot type activities as well. Do they want a pure cinematic game maybe? Is any part of the standard rpg fun to them other than the choosing dialog and watching the movies?

[FaWa]

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

wtf? Did you play it?

Indeed, I've played it.

The auto diaologue was borderline unbearable. It was as if I wasn't playing a Bioware game anymore

Then turn off the auto-dialogue if you only want casual combat.

Auto dialogue is defined as Shepard saying something when the player did not command her/him to say that thing. Ala all of ME3's writing

Then how did Story mode not work?

omg I am not even understanding your point here. Story mode didn't work because you had an extremely little amount of diaologue choices even though the purpose was to focus on the story and diaologue. Action mode or whatever had the same amount of fights, but story mode had less story (Becuase the game had less story)

[upsettingshorts]

Wait. Wait.

There was a STORY MODE and a NARRATIVE DIFFICULTY level.

Just gonna point that out, that you could have a super-easy game and still play in RPG mode.

[Dhiro]

FaWa wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

FaWa wrote...

wtf? Did you play it?

Indeed, I've played it.

The auto diaologue was borderline unbearable. It was as if I wasn't playing a Bioware game anymore

Then turn off the auto-dialogue if you only want casual combat.

Auto dialogue is defined as Shepard saying something when the player did not command her/him to say that thing. Ala all of ME3's writing

Then how did Story mode not work?

omg I am not even understanding your point here. Story mode didn't work because you had an extremely little amount of diaologue choices even though the purpose was to focus on the story and diaologue. Action mode or whatever had the same amount of fights, but story mode had less story (Becuase the game had less story)

Auto-dialogue is a problem across all modes, not just Story Mode. As such, there's no point in blaming it and assuming it wouldn't work in DA.

[Mummy22kids]

Personally I find the biggest reason I play on easy is because of time constraints. I have 2 kids, a job and a husband and my time on the computer is limited. 20-30 years ago I had time and energy to spend hours and hours trying to complete a level of a game but I don't anymore. I don't know how many hours I spent on impossible mission, bard's tale, or super mario 64. Maybe in 10 years when my youngest moves out I'll switch to nightmare.

[Fast Jimmy]

Kileyan wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Just curious, for those who just want to get on with the story and hate combat getting in the way, how do you feel about having to walk across town or across maps to do quests, would it also be something you want to avoid?

This isn't really equivalent.

Combat poses the issue of it actually blocking the game player if they are unable to win the encounter.

If you know where you're going, you're moving to your destination and there's a lot of psychological factors at play (feelings of progress and so forth). Where the "walking across town" part becomes an issue if when the player feels stuck and not sure where to go.

I'm not sure how you took that, but I really wasn't a snarky question or putting down someones playstyle. A lot of people from hardcore gamers to casual hate running across maps constantly to turn in quests, sell items, and other activities.

I was just curious if those who disliked combat slowing down the story, also hated travel and maybe even selling loot type activities as well. Do they want a pure cinematic game maybe? Is any part of the standard rpg fun to them other than the choosing dialog and watching the movies?

A pure cinematic game would run, at most, five hours. It basically becomes a Choose Your Own Adventure book, but with CG cutscenes rendered in an engine.

I'm not saying that in a snarky or negative way, its just what it would be. 

If that sounds good to you, I'd seriously suggest picking up Farenheit/Indigo Prophecy or Heavy Rain. They are both great games and don't have much in the way of "combat" or even "video game" elements to them, per se. 

But, for a game like DA, which is GOING to have lots of combat, I would say add ME3's Narrative Difficulty/Story Mode (one or both) and just call it a day. When ME3 was announced with it, I decried the death of gaming, but ME3's combat was difficult enough on its harder levels for me to see the Game Over screen a handful of times, despite combat on these Story difficulties being laughably easy.

There are worse things that having the option for insanely easy combat. Like the endings for ME3.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 25 novembre 2012 - 03:18 .

[Taint Master]

I wouldn't use it myself since I enjoy theory crafting and calculating my character builds for combat, but I don't really care how someone else chooses to play their game. I don't see the harm in it.

[thesnake777]

The Six Path of Pain wrote...
...Also might want to try Demons Soul's and Dark Souls those games are pretty easy:whistle:

...You Sir! are a sick man!. 

[Allan Schumacher]

Kileyan wrote...

I'm not sure how you took that, but I really wasn't a snarky question or putting down someones playstyle. A lot of people from hardcore gamers to casual hate running across maps constantly to turn in quests, sell items, and other activities.

I was just curious if those who disliked combat slowing down the story, also hated travel and maybe even selling loot type activities as well. Do they want a pure cinematic game maybe? Is any part of the standard rpg fun to them other than the choosing dialog and watching the movies?

I didn't take your question snarky.  I am saying that the psychology of moving somewhere is different than being stuck somewhere.

Yes, it does suck to feel like you're constantly running back and forth for not much good reason, but part of that is that it feels like it's slowing down progress.  The player gets annoyed because they could have been done this part more efficiently.

It's probably also important to note that gamers aren't particularly rational.

[ImperatorMortis]

I have no words.. 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 25 novembre 2012 - 09:01 .

[Allan Schumacher]

omg I am not even understanding your point here. Story mode didn't work because you had an extremely little amount of diaologue choices even though the purpose was to focus on the story and diaologue. Action mode or whatever had the same amount of fights, but story mode had less story (Becuase the game had less story)

Story mode did not have less story than the game in "standard mode" if that's what you're implying. Story mode makes the combat trivial, but you still get the same amount of story as the basic play mode.

If your argument is the game has a poorer story, you're arguing something else.

[ImperatorMortis]

Ketchup2 wrote...

I sucks at video games, so you can make the game very easy on easy? Almost every game out there is made ​​for hardcore players, and usually  easy is also extremely difficult, and even if I would not suck at video games, I'm still not looking for any challenge in a game, I'm want to experiencing a good story, atmosphere, and good action that I can integrate with, and feel that the game has a good flow, so you do get stuck and have to repeat the same play sequencesc over and over again.

Go see a movie! Or buy a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book. 

I'm starting to understand why so many people look down on casuals. 

Emzamination wrote...

If this is the future of gamers, just strike me down now. 

This. Just.. Just Kill me now Video Game Gods. I don't have the strength for this. 

Ketchup2 wrote...

But no, I do NOT want a challenge, so I do not want to get better on games, it's not a challenge I am looking for when I play games, I'm looking to be entertained! I want to have NO challange at all, beasue I find it annoying and distraction from want I want from a game. 

Modifié par ImperatorMortis, 25 novembre 2012 - 09:11 .

[LPPrince]

Very disappointed with the attitude of some people here.

Come on guys, not everyone's good at games. Its better to be open-minded and accepting of other player's skill levels than just shooting them down because they aren't as good as you.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'm starting to understand why so many people look down on casuals.

I don't. If you do based on this thread, you're coming to a bizarre conclusion. Why someone would judge another human being simply for liking something different is beyond me.


Game combat difficulty is a relatively flexible thing to adjust.

There are many that love the stories, but often struggle (or do not care for) the combat aspects.

It's possible to skip the conversation and story elements of the game if one wants to. Would you really be against the game if we still provided a challenging combat for yourself, but a game mode that made it so that those that love the stories could experience what they want?

If so, why?

[Fredward]

I really don't get the snobbish attitude people adopt when others say they want easier games. Or prefer story over difficulty/challenge. I've never played a game on anything but the default difficulty, does that make me less of a gamer? The omnipresent argument against people who like story over challenge is "GO READ A BOOK/WATCH A MOVIE/PLAY A CINEMATIC GAME!" goes both ways people who want a challenge can go play a arcade game cranked up to its highest difficulty.

Games aren't supposed to be all about story or all about challenge, they're supposed to strike a balance. Or RPG games are anyway.

Oh and I don't think anyone has yet but if someone starts going "back in MY day we had to sacrifice our first born to beat the highest level" I'm chucking a book at yah. Nothing more annoying than golden agers. xp

[Dave of Canada]

I'd rather want skipping combat to be tied into the narrative. Stealth, diplomacy, ect.

I don't understand how Casual difficulty can be too hard for anyone, however.

[LPPrince]

I think it'd be cool if there was a replay cutscenes system, or a movie type feature where after beating the game all the significant(and some side story as well if possible) cutscenes are unlocked in a sort of theatre mode and you can watch them all individually or all in one continuous movie like sequence.

I'm sure some players that are REALLY into the story and not the gameplay would appreciate that. Especially if you could alter decisions in that theatre mode to see how things would've played out differently.

[WazzuMan]

I wouldn't say I've ever found any combat sections challenging but ever since I finished a GTA game, I've never really struggled much in any game. However I'm in favour of making combat easier and quicker to pass through since I'm usually more interested in the story and characters than the challenge of combat.

One thing about DAII I did loathe was how even on the easiest difficult I couldn't drop all the enemies fast enough so I could just move on, especially if I was replaying the game for the umpteenth time.

[74 Wrex]

I don't know what some people find hard on casual difficulty

[Redbelle]

Speaking as someone who grew up with PC and PS£ games, I'm not afraid to say I'm above average on playing them..........

Stick me on a Xbox however and my little brain strains on what the buttons do and how responsive the controls are. And while this is happening I'm repeatedly fragged while the call goes out that Redbelle is an easy target and you can rack up a high score easily.

The point is, there are more reasons why ppl are not good at a game. Some gamers may have bad eye sight, some may not be able to hear the audio cues that give us a heads up to react before the banchee warps in behind us. Maybe others experience hand tremors or bad co-ordination. Some of us may be over at a friends house who hasn't learnt the joys of playing on a <ahem> proper games console instead of one that shall not be named:whistle:

Anyway. Not everyone can play to a set standard and because I want them to enjoy gaming as much as I do, I wouldn't want them to. Each player has the right to enjoy gaming at their skill level. And if that means I sometimes have to work on increasing my skill level, well that's a gift right? After all, sooner or later I want to be able to farm gold as regularly as I do silver. And I can't do that if I'm not challenged to get better.

Modifié par Redbelle, 25 novembre 2012 - 09:37 .

[nightscrawl]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'm starting to understand why so many people look down on casuals.

I don't. If you do based on this thread, you're coming to a bizarre conclusion. Why someone would judge another human being simply for liking something different is beyond me.


Game combat difficulty is a relatively flexible thing to adjust.

There are many that love the stories, but often struggle (or do not care for) the combat aspects.

It's possible to skip the conversation and story elements of the game if one wants to. Would you really be against the game if we still provided a challenging combat for yourself, but a game mode that made it so that those that love the stories could experience what they want?

If so, why?

Keep in mind that these are some of the same people who carry on about player-sexual LIs because they somehow magically know that some other player in some other game half a world away gets to experience something totally contrary to what this player wants/likes, even though it has no impact whatsoever on how this person plays their own game.

Several posters in this thread have also tried to make the point that there are a multitude of reasons why a person might "suck" at games, or might just prefer to skip combat, but those are ignored in favor of the "omg casuals are destroying games" attitude.

So yeah, I don't get it either.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 25 novembre 2012 - 09:38 .