Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
LinksOcarina wrote...
Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
Reinforces what, exactly?
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
LinksOcarina wrote...
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
Modifié par aldien, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:05 .
aldien wrote...
Nevemind MP. What about what EA are doing with SimCity 5? They are making it so that you must be online to play SP. Your game is saved on their servers and you can't reload. It's another level DRM so I have to wonder if DA3 will turn into a Diablo style SP, in that you have to be online to play. Perhaps they will make it so that you have to buy single items instead of DLC. A sort of integrated store like they have in the Sims 3. It wouldn't surprise me at all.
First off, the game did not require the mashing of any buttons, that's just false. Second, Origins required no tactics of any kind either. Spamming your most powerful abilities could get you through the entire game with little difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
Reinforces what, exactly?
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
The press release promised alot of tactical combat. Think like a general and fight like a spartan, I belive the quote was. What we got was a button-mashing fest, with no need for tactics at all. They also said the story would span over a decade. Wasn`t true. It lasted for 7 years. Our choices would also affect the ending of the game. So I can understand perfectly how Babagannoosh was expecting something else than what he got.
Modifié par Atakuma, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:11 .
Atakuma wrote...
First off, the game did not require the mashing of any buttons, that's just false. Second, Origins required no tactics of any kind either. Spamming your most powerful abilities could get you through the entire game with little difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
Reinforces what, exactly?
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
The press release promised alot of tactical combat. Think like a general and fight like a spartan, I belive the quote was. What we got was a button-mashing fest, with no need for tactics at all. They also said the story would span over a decade. Wasn`t true. It lasted for 7 years. Our choices would also affect the ending of the game. So I can understand perfectly how Babagannoosh was expecting something else than what he got.
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Atakuma wrote...
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Sure it was. It was also going to have tactical combat + more than 1 cave, right?
In Origins you can't spam your most powerful abilities as their cooldowns were 40+ secs. Plus enemy archers in Origins would use Scattershot which would stun/disrupt the party members who easily fail the physical check, which made them a priority in battle after enemy mages who use Crushing Prison or Fireball. Bottle necking, flanking, and kiting were the norm in Origins as enemies were strategically placed on the map instead raining from the sky or popping up from the ground.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
First off, the game did not require the mashing of any buttons, that's just false. Second, Origins required no tactics of any kind either. Spamming your most powerful abilities could get you through the entire game with little difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
Reinforces what, exactly?
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
The press release promised alot of tactical combat. Think like a general and fight like a spartan, I belive the quote was. What we got was a button-mashing fest, with no need for tactics at all. They also said the story would span over a decade. Wasn`t true. It lasted for 7 years. Our choices would also affect the ending of the game. So I can understand perfectly how Babagannoosh was expecting something else than what he got.
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Sure it was. It was also going to have tactical combat + more than 1 cave, right?
Well, the tactical combat it did. Console versions had the option of auto attacking to be toggled on or off for characters.
So you could play Origins style or even Baldurs Gate style rather easily on a 360.
The Hierophant wrote...
In Origins you can't spam your most powerful abilities as their cooldowns were 40+ secs. Plus enemy archers in Origins would use Scattershot which would stun/disrupt the party members who easily fail the physical check, which made them a priority in battle after enemy mages who use Crushing Prison or Fireball. Bottle necking, flanking, and kiting were the norm in Origins as enemies were strategically placed on the map instead raining from the sky or popping up from the ground.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
First off, the game did not require the mashing of any buttons, that's just false. Second, Origins required no tactics of any kind either. Spamming your most powerful abilities could get you through the entire game with little difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Babaganoosh013 wrote...
I'm not pre-ordering because of DA 2. A game I paid waaaaay too much for IMHO. I was expecting DA Origins 2, not DA Final Fight. The Dietz ME novel, and the disapointment that was ME3 just reinforces that.
Reinforces what, exactly?
Also, how could you expect Origins 2 when they said in pre-release press info that it was a different combat system?
The press release promised alot of tactical combat. Think like a general and fight like a spartan, I belive the quote was. What we got was a button-mashing fest, with no need for tactics at all. They also said the story would span over a decade. Wasn`t true. It lasted for 7 years. Our choices would also affect the ending of the game. So I can understand perfectly how Babagannoosh was expecting something else than what he got.
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Sure it was. It was also going to have tactical combat + more than 1 cave, right?
Well, the tactical combat it did. Console versions had the option of auto attacking to be toggled on or off for characters.
So you could play Origins style or even Baldurs Gate style rather easily on a 360.
The console version did not have a toggle in the beginning, no. And there was no tactics involved when I beat the game on normal either.
Seriously? DA2 can be played as Baldur`s Gate on the 360? Have you even seen Baldur`s Gate before? Thats like saying you can play Tekken Age of Empires style, man.
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Wrong, the console version was supposed to have auto attack on release.Rawgrim wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Calling the game a button masher because of a feature that was intended to be optional is disengenuous. Da2 has friendly fire too though it is tied to difficulty.Rawgrim wrote...
Before the game got patched, you had to button mash. The game had no auto attack feature.
Origins had friendly fire. That alone made me have to position my characters and whatsnot. In DA2 enemies just rained down on me. And yes, you could spam abilities in that one too.
It wasn`t intended to be optional. They added it after they got a ton of complaints about it.
Sure it was. It was also going to have tactical combat + more than 1 cave, right?
Well, the tactical combat it did. Console versions had the option of auto attacking to be toggled on or off for characters.
So you could play Origins style or even Baldurs Gate style rather easily on a 360.
The console version did not have a toggle in the beginning, no. And there was no tactics involved when I beat the game on normal either.
Seriously? DA2 can be played as Baldur`s Gate on the 360? Have you even seen Baldur`s Gate before? Thats like saying you can play Tekken Age of Empires style, man.
I have. I played it too, in its clunky, crunch fest numbers glory.
But considering Origins plays similar to Baldur's Gate regarding the auto-attacks and tactical system, which in turn was modified from Kotor for consoles which was directly inspiried by Baldur's Gate in terms of mechanics, I feel my comparison is appropriate unlike your straw man equivalency.
Minus the number crunching to a degree. But that always pisses me off anyway.
And I guess you were playing it wrong then when you beat it on normal. But thats not really my place to say in the end. All I did was pause and shoot with powers, and set up my companions tactics as much as possible for optimization. Worked fine for me.
Rawgrim wrote...
When you compare a tactical rpg, with around 350 spells, and 30 different classes to a button mashing acton game, its not "straw man equivalency" at all. What you are doing is telling me you can play chess the same way as you play super mario.
All i did was shoot powers and mash buttons. Had no trouble beating the game at all that way. I died once, i belive, and that was vs the high dragon the first time I fought it.. DA2 didn`t require me to use any form of tactics to beat it. BG 1 and 2 however, I had to constantly use tactics. Even plan out wich spells to memorize based on what kind of enemies i might encounter in the next dungeon.
Modifié par LinksOcarina, 13 décembre 2012 - 08:08 .
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
When you compare a tactical rpg, with around 350 spells, and 30 different classes to a button mashing acton game, its not "straw man equivalency" at all. What you are doing is telling me you can play chess the same way as you play super mario.
All i did was shoot powers and mash buttons. Had no trouble beating the game at all that way. I died once, i belive, and that was vs the high dragon the first time I fought it.. DA2 didn`t require me to use any form of tactics to beat it. BG 1 and 2 however, I had to constantly use tactics. Even plan out wich spells to memorize based on what kind of enemies i might encounter in the next dungeon.
Yeah I hated that aspect of D&D back in the day. It was bull**** micromanaging that made mages impossible to play at lower levels because the entire party had to wait for you to rest and recharge spells. But enough about memories from my past that are unimportant, much like your definition of what a tactical RPG is (which is not Baldur's Gate by any stretch of the imagination) and the amount of spells and classes available.
Maybe I played it wrong then, after all I just did what I did in Origins, which is attack, overwhelm and bottleneck groups of enemies with controlling powers, flank them when available with the rogues, long range support with missile weapons and a tank to absorb damage. That does not mean its invalid as a tactical experience at all, since you can play that way. If you didn't thats your perogative. It is a mark against the game though because of difficulty not being there, but it is not a detriment because it optional to playstyle, unlike say, Dishonored as a recent example, where the powers break the difficulty across all levels.
And as an aside most platformers are puzzle-like in nature, especially the "Nintendo Hard" variety. So you need to be fairly observant to see patterns and act accordingly, just like chess. You need to plan two moves ahead to avoid being cornered. Anyone who does a speedrun can tell you that one.
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
When you compare a tactical rpg, with around 350 spells, and 30 different classes to a button mashing acton game, its not "straw man equivalency" at all. What you are doing is telling me you can play chess the same way as you play super mario.
All i did was shoot powers and mash buttons. Had no trouble beating the game at all that way. I died once, i belive, and that was vs the high dragon the first time I fought it.. DA2 didn`t require me to use any form of tactics to beat it. BG 1 and 2 however, I had to constantly use tactics. Even plan out wich spells to memorize based on what kind of enemies i might encounter in the next dungeon.
Yeah I hated that aspect of D&D back in the day. It was bull**** micromanaging that made mages impossible to play at lower levels because the entire party had to wait for you to rest and recharge spells. But enough about memories from my past that are unimportant, much like your definition of what a tactical RPG is (which is not Baldur's Gate by any stretch of the imagination) and the amount of spells and classes available.
Maybe I played it wrong then, after all I just did what I did in Origins, which is attack, overwhelm and bottleneck groups of enemies with controlling powers, flank them when available with the rogues, long range support with missile weapons and a tank to absorb damage. That does not mean its invalid as a tactical experience at all, since you can play that way. If you didn't thats your perogative. It is a mark against the game though because of difficulty not being there, but it is not a detriment because it optional to playstyle, unlike say, Dishonored as a recent example, where the powers break the difficulty across all levels.
And as an aside most platformers are puzzle-like in nature, especially the "Nintendo Hard" variety. So you need to be fairly observant to see patterns and act accordingly, just like chess. You need to plan two moves ahead to avoid being cornered. Anyone who does a speedrun can tell you that one.
That has to do with reflexes, not actual thinking and planning.
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
When you compare a tactical rpg, with around 350 spells, and 30 different classes to a button mashing acton game, its not "straw man equivalency" at all. What you are doing is telling me you can play chess the same way as you play super mario.
All i did was shoot powers and mash buttons. Had no trouble beating the game at all that way. I died once, i belive, and that was vs the high dragon the first time I fought it.. DA2 didn`t require me to use any form of tactics to beat it. BG 1 and 2 however, I had to constantly use tactics. Even plan out wich spells to memorize based on what kind of enemies i might encounter in the next dungeon.
Yeah I hated that aspect of D&D back in the day. It was bull**** micromanaging that made mages impossible to play at lower levels because the entire party had to wait for you to rest and recharge spells. But enough about memories from my past that are unimportant, much like your definition of what a tactical RPG is (which is not Baldur's Gate by any stretch of the imagination) and the amount of spells and classes available.
Maybe I played it wrong then, after all I just did what I did in Origins, which is attack, overwhelm and bottleneck groups of enemies with controlling powers, flank them when available with the rogues, long range support with missile weapons and a tank to absorb damage. That does not mean its invalid as a tactical experience at all, since you can play that way. If you didn't thats your perogative. It is a mark against the game though because of difficulty not being there, but it is not a detriment because it optional to playstyle, unlike say, Dishonored as a recent example, where the powers break the difficulty across all levels.
And as an aside most platformers are puzzle-like in nature, especially the "Nintendo Hard" variety. So you need to be fairly observant to see patterns and act accordingly, just like chess. You need to plan two moves ahead to avoid being cornered. Anyone who does a speedrun can tell you that one.
That has to do with reflexes, not actual thinking and planning.
Oh really?
When one of the best strategies in a platformer is patience to time jumps and wait for the oppertune moment to strike, you're not planning your actions then by just simply waiting for the opening? Or are you just going by rote and jumping wantonly to each floating island?
This is where I ask the condesending question of did you even play any platformers out there? That is like comparing Mario to Guitar Hero.
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
Rawgrim wrote...
When you compare a tactical rpg, with around 350 spells, and 30 different classes to a button mashing acton game, its not "straw man equivalency" at all. What you are doing is telling me you can play chess the same way as you play super mario.
All i did was shoot powers and mash buttons. Had no trouble beating the game at all that way. I died once, i belive, and that was vs the high dragon the first time I fought it.. DA2 didn`t require me to use any form of tactics to beat it. BG 1 and 2 however, I had to constantly use tactics. Even plan out wich spells to memorize based on what kind of enemies i might encounter in the next dungeon.
Yeah I hated that aspect of D&D back in the day. It was bull**** micromanaging that made mages impossible to play at lower levels because the entire party had to wait for you to rest and recharge spells. But enough about memories from my past that are unimportant, much like your definition of what a tactical RPG is (which is not Baldur's Gate by any stretch of the imagination) and the amount of spells and classes available.
Maybe I played it wrong then, after all I just did what I did in Origins, which is attack, overwhelm and bottleneck groups of enemies with controlling powers, flank them when available with the rogues, long range support with missile weapons and a tank to absorb damage. That does not mean its invalid as a tactical experience at all, since you can play that way. If you didn't thats your perogative. It is a mark against the game though because of difficulty not being there, but it is not a detriment because it optional to playstyle, unlike say, Dishonored as a recent example, where the powers break the difficulty across all levels.
And as an aside most platformers are puzzle-like in nature, especially the "Nintendo Hard" variety. So you need to be fairly observant to see patterns and act accordingly, just like chess. You need to plan two moves ahead to avoid being cornered. Anyone who does a speedrun can tell you that one.
That has to do with reflexes, not actual thinking and planning.
Oh really?
When one of the best strategies in a platformer is patience to time jumps and wait for the oppertune moment to strike, you're not planning your actions then by just simply waiting for the opening? Or are you just going by rote and jumping wantonly to each floating island?
This is where I ask the condesending question of did you even play any platformers out there? That is like comparing Mario to Guitar Hero.
Yep. Played plenty platformers. Beat loads of them too. None of them felt like playing chess, to be honest. Must be why Super Mario is not classified as one of the great strategy games out there.
Actually, comparing Mario to Guitar Hero is pretty apt. Both only require you to press the right button at the right time.
TCBC_Freak wrote...
7isMagic wrote...
tishyw wrote...
"Bioware's behaviour in regards to SP players not having access to enough points to get one of the endings was appalling, denial, misleading stickys, insulting posts, locking/moving/hiding threads about the problem, sulky silence and then finally, and very quietly, fixing it in the EC 6 months after it had initially been reported!
This treatment of it's fans is the main reason why I won't be pre-ordering another Bioware game again, I'm going to wait for player feedback before giving them my money.
Ditto. Pre-ordering Bioware games is a thing of the past for me. Will be waiting for player feedback too when DA3 is released.
You know, that's like saying I'll never eat at Taco Bell because KFC treats its customers poorly. They are owned by the same people, they operate under the same umbrella but the crews and the people who head up there QA and customer interactions are completely different. The Mass Effect people are not the same as the Dragon Age people. And also, even if you consider the two inseparable because they both work for Bioware, to ignore their full game history of great customer service and base all future interaction on one game and a poorly handled situation out of such a long history is kind of childish in my opinion. I have a friend who refuses to eat at any Taco Bell, Denny's Dinner, or Burger King in the entire country (the whole USA) because he got food poisoning at a Dallas, Texas Taco Bell, got food poisoning at a Flagstaff, Arizona Denny's and got food poisoning at a El Paso, Texas Burger King. He will not set foot in any of their establishments any more; to me, that's just childish, and so is this kind of attitude. If you like the way the game looks and the insensitive for pre-ordering or you want to be sure and get a collector's edition then get it, if you don't like that stuff then don't. You should decide these things on a case-by-case basis, not based on a completely different game that was made and handled by different people some two+ years before. Judge DA3 on it's advertising and own merit; if you want to wait for fan feedback, that's okay; but do that for a legitimate reason, like you don't pre-order any game or you aren't really intrigued just from advertising or the like; not just because of what happened with ME3.
Edit: I would like to note this is not a personal attack. We can all be childish at times, I myself have been guilty of it, here on these very forums no less.
Retour en haut