254 réponses à ce sujet

[The Six Path of Pain]

Ketchup2 wrote...

The same thing everywhere? It's no contest! Okay that's it maybe for you but not for me, I just want to be entertained when I'm playing a game, experience a good story, with me interacting with it, with good action where I am dominating, and with a good flow so I dont get stuck to figure out puzzle of have to repeat a scene.

Why should I stop playing games just because I dont want a challenge in the game or I just simply suck at playing games?

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.

PS: The bosses at the end of DA2 is very difficult, atleast for me.DS

Might as well watch a damn movie if all you want is to be entertained XP

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Man, some people in this thread are rather condescending. Telling OP to quit playing video games? Wow.

I appreciate ME3's narrative mode - it made it more accessible to my two sisters who really, really enjoy Mass Effect but are unable to play it because they just haven't played video games of that kind before. Many, many people I've known have struggled extremely hard to orient to double control stick camera controls. it's not a natural thing to pick up.

 enjoy the harder difficulties, but some people just haven't played games much before. A mode that is absurdly simple to people who have played games all their life is much better than dumbing down games for everyone.

Modifié par PKchu, 27 novembre 2012 - 09:54 .

[MichaelStuart]

Just to clarify

I have beaten both Dragon Age games on Nightmare without cheating. I did this because I wanted to be challenged. (I wasn't)
Other times I played the game is because I just want to see the story. Which is why I miss cheat codes, as they would have helped me skip the combat. Which I find tedious even on the easiest difficultly.

As mentioned before, I do not know how to use the cheat console.

Modifié par MichaelStuart, 27 novembre 2012 - 12:45 .

[SteveGarbage]

Let's get a couple things out there:

RPGs of any type are exceptionally complex games. For someone not familiar with the genre or gaming in general, these games can be very daunting, imposing and difficult. My wife would NEVER be able to tackle an RPG, while I can breeze through them with little trouble.

RPGs, all games, come with skills that are learned that, since you've been doing it for so long, you take for granted. Being able to read a mini map, navigate a quest log, understand a variety of stats and how their affect your character and understanding synergy between skills, characters, etc. are all learned things that are not natural.

It's the same way that if you put me into an FPS, I suck. Back in the day I was garbage at Counterstrike. After playing it consistently for a week over Christmas break, I was headshotting enemies at a 60 percent rate.

Telling a player to quit playing is not the right response. We don't know anything about this player. Is this their first RPG? Are they young? Do they predominantly play other types of games? Do they have mental or physical limitations that limit their ability to control the game? These are all important questions.

Maybe the answer is that a game like Dragon Age is too complex, even on easy, for this player. That may not just be the combat, either. It could be the entire game. It raises the philosophical question of is it the developer's responsibility to bring accessibility to the floor or is it the player who is expected to be able to rise to at least the minimum set.

It's difficult for an experience gamer like myself to say Easy is easy enough. I expect that if I somehow convinced my wife to play DA2 on easy, she wouldn't make it past the first act. She'd get confused, frustrated or otherwise mad with the game and quit — likely because she wouldn't be able to navigate around the complete quests and figure out where she needed to go.

I don't think a super-easy mode is a bad thing for players who need it. But a casual mode that would also do things that a neophyte player not know how to do or think about doing — leveling up, choosing skills, equipping items, etc. — automatically would greatly increase access. Then it's a matter of deciding of whether implementing those auto features into the game is worth possibly capturing the few people who might need something like that.

My guess is that having an easy mode with a very low difficulty but expecting the player to at least grasp a few of the ancillary skills is the best way to go. And if a player is still unable to perform, then it is their responsibility to acquire that necessary understanding - either by reading guides, seeking help, playing similar games or trial and error.

[JimboGee]

SteveGarbage wrote...

Let's get a couple things out there:

RPGs of any type are exceptionally complex games. For someone not familiar with the genre or gaming in general, these games can be very daunting, imposing and difficult. My wife would NEVER be able to tackle an RPG, while I can breeze through them with little trouble.

RPGs, all games, come with skills that are learned that, since you've been doing it for so long, you take for granted. Being able to read a mini map, navigate a quest log, understand a variety of stats and how their affect your character and understanding synergy between skills, characters, etc. are all learned things that are not natural.

It's the same way that if you put me into an FPS, I suck. Back in the day I was garbage at Counterstrike. After playing it consistently for a week over Christmas break, I was headshotting enemies at a 60 percent rate.

Telling a player to quit playing is not the right response. We don't know anything about this player. Is this their first RPG? Are they young? Do they predominantly play other types of games? Do they have mental or physical limitations that limit their ability to control the game? These are all important questions.

Maybe the answer is that a game like Dragon Age is too complex, even on easy, for this player. That may not just be the combat, either. It could be the entire game. It raises the philosophical question of is it the developer's responsibility to bring accessibility to the floor or is it the player who is expected to be able to rise to at least the minimum set.

It's difficult for an experience gamer like myself to say Easy is easy enough. I expect that if I somehow convinced my wife to play DA2 on easy, she wouldn't make it past the first act. She'd get confused, frustrated or otherwise mad with the game and quit — likely because she wouldn't be able to navigate around the complete quests and figure out where she needed to go.

I don't think a super-easy mode is a bad thing for players who need it. But a casual mode that would also do things that a neophyte player not know how to do or think about doing — leveling up, choosing skills, equipping items, etc. — automatically would greatly increase access. Then it's a matter of deciding of whether implementing those auto features into the game is worth possibly capturing the few people who might need something like that.

My guess is that having an easy mode with a very low difficulty but expecting the player to at least grasp a few of the ancillary skills is the best way to go. And if a player is still unable to perform, then it is their responsibility to acquire that necessary understanding - either by reading guides, seeking help, playing similar games or trial and error.

I agree to some extent. But I don't wish for my experience to be watered down so a bunch of lazy kids who cannot be bothered reading the manual or pausing the game are allowed to play. RPG's are not for everyone, and at least in my experience, you get out what you put in. If the player cannot be bothered learning how the game works then why are they playing ? They're supposed to be deep and complex  and make you want to hurl your controller/pc out the window. it's the nature of the beast. That's also why they invented first person shooters so people didnt have to do as much thinking/pausing. Maybe that's where the poster belongs.

[addiction21]

JimboGee wrote...

 That's also why they invented first person shooters so people didnt have to do as much thinking/pausing. Maybe that's where the poster belongs.

I am rather confident to say that is not why they invented first person shooters.

[Emzamination]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Ok, the forum ate my reply and while I salvaged it I'd have to edit out all the stupid carriage returns unless I wanted to inflict a hideously formatted mess on people. Since I don't find the idea of spending half an hour editing a post I spent far too much time writing to be that exciting, I'm not going to bother.

Suffice to say, how the game is meant to be played differs from game to game. That's why people are asking for change in future titles -- change that they don't intend to affect anyone who prefers more extreme difficulty settings.

If you don't like the sound of that, it's fine. No one says you have to.

(Fun fact: my connection crashed while I was trying to post this one. Fortunately I saved the BBCode version in advance, but I think that's a sign it's a good idea to bow out )

Until we disagree again dear sold.

@Jimbogee  There is much wisdom in your post, as always. *Nods approvingly*

Modifié par Emzamination, 27 novembre 2012 - 05:19 .

[berelinde]

JimboGee wrote...

I agree to some extent. But I don't wish for my experience to be watered down so a bunch of lazy kids who cannot be bothered reading the manual or pausing the game are allowed to play. RPG's are not for everyone, and at least in my experience, you get out what you put in. If the player cannot be bothered learning how the game works then why are they playing ? They're supposed to be deep and complex  and make you want to hurl your controller/pc out the window. it's the nature of the beast. That's also why they invented first person shooters so people didnt have to do as much thinking/pausing. Maybe that's where the poster belongs.

With all due respect, you're missing the point.

There will always be elitists who believe that their expertise at a game is due to superior hand-eye coordination or some other innate skill, and it is definitely true that some people have an easier time learning to work the controls than others, but with patience and appropriate challenge ratings there are very, very few people too hopeless to play RPGs. These people would not necessarily be better at FPS games. In fact, they might be considerably worse because, as you say, there is not as much thinking/pausing.

Back in September, I introduced my sister to DA2. We're both in our 40s, but gaming was not something that interested her. She had better things to do than shoot asteroids, she said. Anyway, I started her out on DA2 because the controls are less overwhelming to a newcomer than DA:O. It was agonizing at first, walking her through every single mouse-click, but within a week, she was able to handle casual mode without any coaching from me. By the beginning of October, she had learned most of the ins and outs of the rogue class and was ready to try experimenting with a different class. She is now playing Awakening after having completed Origins and she is totally hooked on the series. She still plays on casual, but she is having fun. A FPS would not have worked for her. There's no story to engage her, so she would have pushed the thing aside and told me I'm a nut for spending so much time gaming.

Sis was able to get by without an "easier than casual" mode because she had somebody there to walk her through the adjustment period. After the first few moments, she was OK with pointing and clicking, but she needed a lot of help with leveling, skill selection, equipment selection, and tactics.

With that in mind, a "tutorial level" might help. I'm not talking about the prologue. That's OK for people who are jumping in after playing other games, but a beginner might appreciate something a little more in-depth, like the BG2 tutorial level with Duke Belt and Xan. Ideally, that tutorial level would cover things like build and strategies and equipment selection. I will never forget the time she called me in to help her with the Arishok battle on her 2H warrior only to find that her *only* activated ability was Mighty Blow.

[esper]

@Looks at berilinde history. Only activated ability is Mighty Blow. Ouch.

Anyway, easy needs to be easy and for those of us playing on nightmare I think we have no say in what is easy. I mean it is beyond me how anyone can loose a battle in da on casual, but we have had two or three threads about how to get past the pride demon in the final stage on da2, on casual level.

If that is the case, easy is not easy enough.

[Emzamination]

esper wrote...

@Looks at berilinde history. Only activated ability is Mighty Blow. Ouch.

Anyway, easy needs to be easy and for those of us playing on nightmare I think we have no say in what is easy. I mean it is beyond me how anyone can loose a battle in da on casual, but we have had two or three threads about how to get past the pride demon in the final stage on da2, on casual level.

If that is the case, easy is not easy enough.

If it takes three threads of multiple posters to walk a person through one fight, then it is not the game, it is the person.

[sycophanticchallenger]

This thread is hilarious. What I see happening here is ketchup2 trolling the forum.

It's funny to watch someone create a thread where they say I "do not want ANY CHALLENGE from a video game" where the term GAME necessitates challenge, and then watch the developers trip over themselves to excuse and explain away why it would be a "good move" for them to include a "no challenge mode", which is doubtlessly a feature that would already be implemented if it is planned to be so.

My second thought is, a "no challenge" mode might not be a bad thing, because then Bioware can go back to trying to properly balance combat for gamers who enjoy a challenge. Give the ppl not interested in challenge their Awesome Button ™ and give the gamers an actual game.

[PSUHammer]

I think Bioware's issue is one of Positioning. It is a marketing term that implies you need to find your core competancy and strengths and focus (or position) on them. Bioware is known for RPG games with cinematic story (as opposed to Bethesda who is known for open world exploration RPGs with less cinematic story). If they try to cast too wide of a net, they will lose focus on core competencies. We saw this in DA2.

I know EA shareholders want to get the most sales possible by appealing to the lowest common demoninator. But, that philosophy will always alienate some of your core audience as they must devote resources to appeasing a varying degree of play styles.

An RPG that tries to be a shooter/adventure/strategy/RPG generally is a lesser "pure" RPG.

We are in an era where console accessibility and popularity has watered down some of the more segmented genres.  Not good for me, a long time D&D hardcore RPG fan.  I think the new Kickstarter efforts (Project Eternity comes to mind) are a refreshing break from corporate publishers pushing MOAR SALES!

Modifié par Hammer6767, 28 novembre 2012 - 03:26 .

[JimboGee]

First off I meant no disrespect to the OP or any young people playing games. Everyone has the right to try a game but RPG's are not for everyone. Take me for example, MMO's are not my thing I had a horrid experience with WoW and never went back. I found the community rude and MMO mechanics are just not my bag.  It wasnt for the lack of trying to understand them either but they got the better of me. I came to the conclusion I just wasn't very good)

But what I didn't do was ask for an easier setting to be implimented or  that they should make a single player game or maybe that people be allowed to pause the combat. That would be silly I knew the genre wasn't for me so I stick to games I know how to play i.e turn based strategy and RPG.

That's basically my point,  that it's not a shameful thing to admit you cannot play a genre. I can't play MMO's some people can't play FPS others dont like turn based. But those games shouldn't be watered down or changed to accomodate the needs of others because then they stop becoming what they are.

Modifié par JimboGee, 28 novembre 2012 - 03:57 .

[PSUHammer]

JimboGee wrote...


That's basically my point,  that it's not a shameful thing to admit you cannot play a genre. I can't play MMO's some people can't play FPS others dont like turn based. But those games shouldn't be watered down or changed to accomodate the needs of others because then they stop becoming what they are.

Large game publishers like EA disagree with you.  The watered down and accomodating games = more sales which is all they really care about as a corporation (nothing evil with that...it's how they work).  Unfortunately, they are able to provide the "big" budgets you find in current mainstream games and can dictate development goals.

I fear, outside of independent devs & things like Kickstarter, you will find genres blend and get "watered down" for the masses, even more.

Modifié par Hammer6767, 28 novembre 2012 - 04:08 .

[Allan Schumacher]

It's funny to watch someone create a thread where they say I "do not want ANY CHALLENGE from a video game" where the term GAME necessitates challenge, and then watch the developers trip over themselves to excuse and explain away why it would be a "good move" for them to include a "no challenge mode", which is doubtlessly a feature that would already be implemented if it is planned to be so.

Because regardless of whether or not this is a troll thread, the topic is legitimate.

If you think we're "tripping over ourselves" you are mistaken. The fact that there are people that literally like our stories that struggle with the gameplay existed long before this thread.

I'd strongly encourage you, however, to not make any assumptions about what you think may or may not be already implemented based purely on whatever justifications you may have in your head. The one you made is incorrect.

First off I meant no disrespect to the OP or any young people playing games.

I think people need to get this idea that it's "young people" that struggle with our games out of their head. It's an inaccurate stereotype.

I fear, outside of independent devs & things like Kickstarter, you will find genres blend and get "watered down" for the masses, even more.

On the other hand, if a game like Project Eternity blows things out of the water, publishers will take notice.

[Luckywallace]

I agree with the OP's sentiment - I myself happily play the DA games on 'normal' setting and enjoy having some challenge in the combat, I especially love DA2's fighting. But with other games...

For ages I've wanted to play through Phantasy Star 4 but always hated the JRPG turn-based battle system and had no desire to get good at it or grind up levels. A bit of rom-hacking though and hahaha, everybody was level 99 and had their most powerful attacks - now I could just walk through the battles and simply enjoy the wonderful setting, characters and storyline of an amazing game.

I may not be one of them but I can quite appreciate that there are folks out there who love the stories/characters of something like Dragon Age but were not fans of the combat. If it wasn't for mages I *would* be one of them (I find warrior and rouge gameplay to be a bit... meh, but I love mage combat).

[Dutchess]

SteveGarbage wrote...

Let's get a couple things out there:

RPGs of any type are exceptionally complex games. For someone not familiar with the genre or gaming in general, these games can be very daunting, imposing and difficult. My wife would NEVER be able to tackle an RPG, while I can breeze through them with little trouble.

RPGs, all games, come with skills that are learned that, since you've been doing it for so long, you take for granted. Being able to read a mini map, navigate a quest log, understand a variety of stats and how their affect your character and understanding synergy between skills, characters, etc. are all learned things that are not natural.

It's the same way that if you put me into an FPS, I suck. Back in the day I was garbage at Counterstrike. After playing it consistently for a week over Christmas break, I was headshotting enemies at a 60 percent rate.

Telling a player to quit playing is not the right response. We don't know anything about this player. Is this their first RPG? Are they young? Do they predominantly play other types of games? Do they have mental or physical limitations that limit their ability to control the game? These are all important questions.

Maybe the answer is that a game like Dragon Age is too complex, even on easy, for this player. That may not just be the combat, either. It could be the entire game. It raises the philosophical question of is it the developer's responsibility to bring accessibility to the floor or is it the player who is expected to be able to rise to at least the minimum set.

It's difficult for an experience gamer like myself to say Easy is easy enough. I expect that if I somehow convinced my wife to play DA2 on easy, she wouldn't make it past the first act. She'd get confused, frustrated or otherwise mad with the game and quit — likely because she wouldn't be able to navigate around the complete quests and figure out where she needed to go.

I don't think a super-easy mode is a bad thing for players who need it. But a casual mode that would also do things that a neophyte player not know how to do or think about doing — leveling up, choosing skills, equipping items, etc. — automatically would greatly increase access. Then it's a matter of deciding of whether implementing those auto features into the game is worth possibly capturing the few people who might need something like that.

My guess is that having an easy mode with a very low difficulty but expecting the player to at least grasp a few of the ancillary skills is the best way to go. And if a player is still unable to perform, then it is their responsibility to acquire that necessary understanding - either by reading guides, seeking help, playing similar games or trial and error.

DAO was my first RPG. My gaming experience prior to that was limited to The Sims (1 and 2) and Tomb Raider (Anniversary and Legend). Oh, and Redcat, but that's a children's game. I sucked at DAO during my first playthrough. I died more times than I care to count. But I found a challenge in trying the battles agan and see if I could get through. I tried a different strategy. I completed the game on normal, without ever switching to casual. For later play throughs I started reading strategy guides, and gradually I worked my way up to nightmare, and the "I'm a pretty big deal" achievement on that difficulty.
In DA2 I started on hard difficulty (confident that after completing DAO on nightmare, I knew all the tricks). I died. A lot. But this time I only became immensely frustrated by it. The fightings seemed far too random and unpredictable, with the waves of enemies falling right on top of my mage's head. Also the boss battles with just 10000000000000000 health drove me insane. Rockwraith had me so annoyed that I went from hard to easy to beat it.

Anyway, long story short: DA can certainly be difficult for noobs, at least on normal. On easy, no. And as a noob at that time, I can confidently say it's feasible to beat DAO on normal, although it does take some determination, yes. But navigating a map and knowing where to go for quests is certainly not a problem I recognize myself in. Honestly, I think something is wrong with you if you can't understand a map and don't know who to talk to for a quest with Bioware's bright yellow arrow on top of a quest person's head. At least I couldn't come up with ways how that could be made any simpler. 

[PSUHammer]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I fear, outside of independent devs & things like Kickstarter, you will find genres blend and get "watered down" for the masses, even more.

On the other hand, if a game like Project Eternity blows things out of the water, publishers will take notice.

One can only hope!  Not that there is anything wrong with trying to appeal to the masses...it just complicates things for the hardcore gamers or fans of specific genres.  It is exactly what alienated some DAO fans with DA2.  They say DAO as a return to the traditional RPG style games in grand fashion.  DA2 was a step in the wrong direction (action, accessibility, etc.) for them.

[lanawinst]

JimboGee wrote...

I agree to some extent. But I don't wish for my experience to be watered down so a bunch of lazy kids who cannot be bothered reading the manual or pausing the game are allowed to play. RPG's are not for everyone, and at least in my experience, you get out what you put in. If the player cannot be bothered learning how the game works then why are they playing ? They're supposed to be deep and complex  and make you want to hurl your controller/pc out the window. it's the nature of the beast. That's also why they invented first person shooters so people didnt have to do as much thinking/pausing. Maybe that's where the poster belongs.

Ok, seeing as this thread is turning onto a casual vs harcore gamers discussion, I'm gonna add my own perspective.

First, I need to cut short of these stereotypes: I'm not a lazy kid who cannot play RPG. I'm 30, have a work that keeps me buzy, and I have been playing RPG since Baldur's gate. Yet, if the game offers a option to skip/dumb down combats, i'll heartily take it. And it isn't that I can't do it. I have even done hard modes in some games, like playing ME1 in nightmare. It's just that I realized that I don't care for combat. At all. And since I have only so little time to play, it's a waste of time and all I want is moving on with the story. I don't want to be challenged, I want to experience the story without taking too much time in useless fights, so if I can skip them, or shorten them by making it easier, yes, I'm in.

And I don't get why you guys see this as a danger to you gamers, since it would be an option, as it should be. That way everyone should be happy. Those who want a challenge could ignore it and go hard modes while others like me could take that option. Could we stop having these talks about dumbing down games for noobs and more generally these bashing of people who don't have the same opinion as you? Everyone play games for its own reasons and everyone should be entitled to their opinion. I hate FPS but that doesn't mean FPS players are dumb or even that FPS can't be great. Just not for me. We should rather try to find a way to make everyone happy, casual gamer or not, people who like romance or not etc.  That's my point of view anyway.

[Kerilus]

"I suck at life, so you can give me more money on welfare programs?"
Pretty much.

[JimboGee]

Ok first of all, I wasn't referring to people who don't have a lot of time I was specifically talking about "People who struggle to understand the mechanics of an RPG"  It was not specifically aimed at any one group either.

But since your determined to make it that then fine, that's where I''l head next. We  all have jobs/lives/girlfriends/dogs to contend with thats understandable. My overarching point is that games like RPG's SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE A LACK OF TIME/LACK OF SKILL. I thought i'd put it in caps just incase anyone was having trouble reading it.

I find it increasingly disturbing that my favourite game genres are beng changed due to laziness or cos people dont have time. If I dont have time, then I dont have time its that simple.

Civ V is a classic example of this when they took out all the micro managment because people didnt like it. Thanks Sid... Thanks.

Modifié par JimboGee, 29 novembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[Fredward]

Kerilus wrote...

"I suck at life, so you can give me more money on welfare programs?"
Pretty much.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

No.

[SilentK]

JimboGee wrote...

Ok first of all, I wasn't referring to people who don't have a lot of time I was specifically talking about "People who struggle to understand the mechanics of an RPG"  It was not specifically aimed at any one group either.

But since your determined to make it that then fine, that's where I''l head next. We  all have jobs/lives/girlfriends/dogs to contend with thats understandable. My overarching point is that games like RPG's SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE A LACK OF TIME/LACK OF SKILL. I thought i'd put it in caps just incase anyone was having trouble reading it.

I find it increasingly disturbing that my favourite game genres are beng changed due to laziness or cos people dont have time. If I dont have time, then I dont have time its that simple.

Civ V is a classic example of this when they took out all the micro managment because people didnt like it. Thanks Sid... Thanks.

"My overarching point is that games like RPG's SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE A LACK OF TIME/LACK OF SKILL."

Why is it so bad? If there was something along a narrative mode in DAIII I might get a friend to try out the game. She would love the story-aspect of the game. Why is it so bad if there is something in the game that you personally will not use?

[Kerilus]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Kerilus wrote...

"I suck at life, so you can give me more money on welfare programs?"
Pretty much.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

No.

No? Why not?
Welfare programs are there for the weak and the unfortunate. You think you are more unfortunate and weaker than te others, you demand more.
Almost as nonsensical as demanding easy mode to be even easier, except those on welfare are actually in need, while you(OP) just suck and are asking people to compensate for that fact more so than they should.

[Dutchess]

lanawinst wrote...

First, I need to cut short of these stereotypes: I'm not a lazy kid who cannot play RPG. I'm 30, have a work that keeps me buzy, and I have been playing RPG since Baldur's gate. Yet, if the game offers a option to skip/dumb down combats, i'll heartily take it. And it isn't that I can't do it. I have even done hard modes in some games, like playing ME1 in nightmare. It's just that I realized that I don't care for combat. At all. And since I have only so little time to play, it's a waste of time and all I want is moving on with the story. I don't want to be challenged, I want to experience the story without taking too much time in useless fights, so if I can skip them, or shorten them by making it easier, yes, I'm in. 

I don't mean this as an attack or anything, but if you're an experienced RPG player, how can easy mode in DA2 not be easy enough to your liking?
Pre-patch I could not even get a quarter off of the Rockwraith's health with my first character on hard difficulty, but on easy it went down without problems.