Plaintiff wrote...
And? Poorly thought-out stat allocation was simply never possible prior to DA2?
You missed the point entirely. Obviously, wasting points is not my goal. The stat system in DA2 is made far more linear by tieing essentially everything of importance to a class to 2 given attributes. For instance, in Origins I had to consider how much strength to invest in, to be able to use certain gear. DA2 just tied gear requirements to dexterity -- a skill that already had a lot of usefulness lumped into it -- for convenience sake.
That's just one example of a factor you no longer have to consider in DA2.
You find ingredients, you make things. How is that not crafting?
You find
one ingredient,
you don't make it, and
you don't invest any skill into it. I already said why that's a problem.
You lost nothing. Nothing is preventing you from using that approach.
As I said, the gameplay isn't there.
It simply costs gold instead of materials, which you had to pay for anyway.
In DA:O? I gathered most of my materials. I didn't pay for much. Crafting in DA:O could be used to make money. That's what I'm talking about when I say an alternative approach to gameplay.
If anything, it made runes and potions much more accessible for people who like to use them.
But as I said, it did nothing to add to gameplay or differentiate characters. For that reason, it may as well have been in the form of an NPC who sells potions. That would provide essentially the same mechanic, and would make those things accessible for people who want them without dabbling in different gameplay.
If you get to work on time either way, what does it matter how you get there?
I really don't know what point you're attempting to make here. Obviously, the majority of us aren't playing a game when getting to work. When we are playing a game, the
way it's played matters.
Maybe it's because, as you admit yourself, you value story over gameplay that you don't understand this. I could try to make the same analogy by saying "if the dragon dies in the end, what does it matter who killed it or what else happened along the way"?
You'll have to reiterate them, I have no idea who you are.
Very well. Taken from my review:
...First of all, attributes are even more shallow than they were in Origins. I played a rogue, as I always do, and I was very disappointed. Essentially, there are only two attributes of use and/or interest: dexterity and cunning. Every rogue mechanic is tied to these two attributes, whether it makes sense or not. I realize this makes things convenient for people who don’t want to think about how they build their characters too much, but I find it horribly shallow. It’s even worse when you realize that dexterity is pretty much forced on you as it is a requirement for equipment (more importantly, weapons). Origins had requirements too, but they were primarily strength. This made more sense, as strength should obviously dictate whether or not you can carry/use something, and it also gave more depth to the builds as you at least had to consider how much you invested in a third attribute. Dexterity should only contribute to things like accuracy, evasion and possibly critical chance and/or speed. Having it affect damage and so many other things as well just lumps too many useful things into 1 place and makes anyone stupid not to invest heavily in it.
...skills also fall victim to this. I quickly noticed just how many skills become obsolete as a result of either similar skills, or the attribute design. This makes the depth of classes and combat even shallower than Origins. My plan was to be a purely offensive rogue, focusing on cunning to boost critical damage and high damage abilities/stealth. I planned to use the skill that grants 100% critical chance while flanking to make up for the critical chance deficit I would have from not investing as heavily in dexterity. That skill, btw, pretty much makes the similar skills that grant 100% critical chance from stealth and 100% critical chance on a stunned enemy obsolete. However, I then realized that I pretty much had to invest in dexterity if I hoped to use any decent equipment. I then also noticed that any gear I wore inevitably had the same bonuses – critical chance, critical damage, and/or physical damage. As I progressed through the game, even without focusing on dexterity I still achieved a critical chance of nearly 70%. Combined with the inherent flanking bonus, I pretty much had 100%, making all 3 of those critical passives obsolete.
I disagree. It far more offered more than Origins. The classes are more varied from each other, and offer more variation within themselves, and that's only taking the talents into account.
And I completely disagree with that. Another quote from my review:
I really enjoy playing a Rogue, scanning the battlefield looking for the shortest path to the back of the nearest enemy with the most enemies in close proximity in order to deal the greatest amount of damage in the shortest amount of time, using poisons concocted through my mastery of rare toxins I painstakingly gathered. I guess what it comes down to for me, was that I just never had this feeling in DA2. I never had to do any of the above. Backstab became an active skill that instantly teleported me through the ground to the target enemy's back. I went from target to target by pressing 1. Poisons I could just buy from a vendor, as with every other class. No more traps, pets, poison making. All of these things -- Rogue-like things -- were taken out of my hands and done for me (or no longer done at all, as the case may be). I felt like the game was playing the Rogue for me, and all I was really doing was interacting with the same interface as the other classes. Sure the animations were different, but I felt little difference between playing a Rogue and a Warrior, despite all the arbitrary restrictions intended to have the opposite effect.
Modifié par Anomaly-, 21 décembre 2012 - 09:27 .
Retour en haut
