24 réponses à ce sujet

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Inventory management was something I didn't mind in DA:O. It wasn't particularly enjoyable, but it wasn't bad, either. I was able to determine an item's value based on what kind of material it was made from. An iron sword wasn't very desirable, but a dragonbone sword very much was. They took it a step further with the console version and made the different tiers color coded. This was a system that worked and didn't need to be fixed or changed.

Nevertheless, Bioware thought it didn't work or needed changing for one reason or another and decided to scrap materials in favor of stars. This presents all sorts of problems for the player. For one, the player can no longer determine an item's value simply by looking at the material it's made from, and now has to guess what 3/5 stars actually means in-game. This also makes finding matching sets of armor a pain in the ass and requires the player to learn an all-new system that is never even explained in the tutorial phase.

I understand that DA2 is a console game. But console gamers aren't complete idiots. They can read and don't need stars to determine an item's value. This change made inventory management painful. I couldn't distinguish high level items from the low or mid level ones, and I never knew what the hell kind of material my armor or weapons was made out of because the descriptions were removed and replaced with bronze/silver/gold pictures.

"Something that didn't need to be fixed in the first place now needs fixing."  - A Bioware Production.

[Enigmatick]

So you have a thing for Sword and Board female warriors or what?

Completely changing the inventory per sequel seems to be Bioware's thing now btw

[Wifflebottom]

I thought the stars meant how beneficial it would be for a character based on their level/stats. Like if you were level 20 or something a +5 strength ring would have fewer stars than a +20 strength ring.

[Enad]

I agree with the OP.

The whole star thing was definitely confusing in DA2. I still don't really know what they're meant to show or tell me.

I'd much prefer tiers with actual materials to determine how good an item is or not.
I feel like it's all these small little details that Bioware left out of DA2 that led to me not liking DA2 nearly as much. It's just missing so much.

I just hope DA3 at least has the 'feel' or spirit of DAO instead of DA2.

[esper]

I never saw the point of item mangement in da:o, once it reached a certain point I always forgot to upgrade amor, because there was no point.

Not that I upgraded it in da2 either.

I guess that in the end I saw no reason the armour-tier in da:o, or the stars in da2. I guess I wouold like if they just gave us the pure stats. (example: This is a defense + 5 breastplate) and then let us decide what stats are superior.

[Enad]

esper wrote...

I never saw the point of item mangement in da:o, once it reached a certain point I always forgot to upgrade amor, because there was no point.

Not that I upgraded it in da2 either.

I guess that in the end I saw no reason the armour-tier in da:o, or the stars in da2. I guess I wouold like if they just gave us the pure stats. (example: This is a defense + 5 breastplate) and then let us decide what stats are superior.

The tiers weren't only for 'upgrading'. It was a form of organization. It gave the armor or weapon and identity. 

Imagine if all the swords in Skyrim were just called 'sword'. Instead of Iron Sword, Daedric Sword and so on.

DAO does it a bit differently but it's the same in essense. There are different swords and the tiers are used to classify them.  Something being dragonbone doesn't make it automatically better than silverite or something.

Chevaliers Armor at the highest tier is better than Wades Heavy Dragonscale Armor, but I would rather use the latter because of the extra stats and buffs you get with it.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Enad wrote...

esper wrote...

I never saw the point of item mangement in da:o, once it reached a certain point I always forgot to upgrade amor, because there was no point.

Not that I upgraded it in da2 either.

I guess that in the end I saw no reason the armour-tier in da:o, or the stars in da2. I guess I wouold like if they just gave us the pure stats. (example: This is a defense + 5 breastplate) and then let us decide what stats are superior.

The tiers weren't only for 'upgrading'. It was a form of organization. It gave the armor or weapon and identity. 

Imagine if all the swords in Skyrim were just called 'sword'. Instead of Iron Sword, Daedric Sword and so on.

DAO does it a bit differently but it's the same in essense. There are different swords and the tiers are used to classify them.  Something being dragonbone doesn't make it automatically better than silverite or something.

Chevaliers Armor at the highest tier is better than Wades Heavy Dragonscale Armor, but I would rather use the latter because of the extra stats and buffs you get with it.

Correct. I would also like say that I think the UI in Origins is really nice. I wouldn't mind seeing that return, as well.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 17 mars 2013 - 10:55 .

[Enad]

Yes I really liked the UI and Inventory in DA:O.

I wouldn't object if they have a better version for DA3, but I'm hoping the UI is less like DA2. Now that I think about it...I hope just about everything is less like DA2.

Oh well. We'll see soon enough.

[Wulfram]

I don't see much difference between stars and material, except that we no longer have to put up with all the highest level items being that ugly red colour.

DA2's items had their problems - to fast turnover, far too much indistinguishable and boring jewellery - but it wasn't down to the star system.

Ideally I'd like to basically scrap the basic numerical advancement of items, so that you have more real choices as to what to equip rather than being stuck choosing between the one or two items that are highest level.

Modifié par Wulfram, 17 mars 2013 - 11:17 .

[LPPrince]

Enad wrote...

Yes I really liked the UI and Inventory in DA:O.

I wouldn't object if they have a better version for DA3, but I'm hoping the UI is less like DA2. Now that I think about it...I hope just about everything is less like DA2.

Oh well. We'll see soon enough.

I feel you on that one.

[Rawgrim]

Microsoft Points.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Filament wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Enad wrote...
The tiers weren't only for 'upgrading'. It was a form of organization. It gave the armor or weapon and identity. 
Imagine if all the swords in Skyrim were just called 'sword'. Instead of Iron Sword, Daedric Sword and so on.
DAO does it a bit differently but it's the same in essense. There are different swords and the tiers are used to classify them.  Something being dragonbone doesn't make it automatically better than silverite or something.
Chevaliers Armor at the highest tier is better than Wades Heavy Dragonscale Armor, but I would rather use the latter because of the extra stats and buffs you get with it.

Correct. I would also like say that I think the UI in Origins is really nice. I wouldn't mind seeing that return, as well.

Incorrect actually, Dragonbone is inherently better than Silverite in DAO. Whether other enchantments factor in to make an individual Silverite armor piece more attractive than a Dragonbone one doesn't change that.

And I think you are confusing the size tiers with the material tiers. Wade's Heavy Dragonscale is still Dragonbone, the highest material tier (in DAO). It is simply heavy plate as opposed to massive plate, so a "lower tier" in size. Though hypothetically, size tiers should not be vertical tiers, but lateral depending on your character's build. I think material tiers should also be lateral.

If there need to be vertical tiers to preserve the sort of item progression we're used to in RPGs, I think the appropriate measure to use would be level of craftsmanship. Rough, sturdy, masterwork, etc.

Yes, you're right. Thanks for the correction.

[Plaintiff]

They've told us virtually nothing about the setting, story or characters, and you're asking for specific details about the inventory?

[Rawgrim]

Very hard to say. The prices in Thedas are abit quirky. In Ferelden a backpack costs more than a pretty good plate armour, after all.

[Enad]

Rawgrim wrote...

Very hard to say. The prices in Thedas are abit quirky. In Ferelden a backpack costs more than a pretty good plate armour, after all.

But without that backpack you wouldn't be able to carry 10 other sets of plate armor!

Priorities.

[MKDAWUSS]

Rawgrim wrote...

Very hard to say. The prices in Thedas are abit quirky. In Ferelden a backpack costs more than a pretty good plate armour, after all.

And everyone takes the same form of currency!

[Solmanian]

The DA:O inventory system was attrocious. After ostagar it was a serious chore trying to keep my inventory under 100. I'd much prefer moving to a ME2&ME3 style inventory: There's only a finite number of weapon/armor designs; might aswell make those designs matter. As in unique, like weapons that behave very differently, and fullfill different roles, for example scimitars and rapiars as quick weapons used for raw DPS, falchions used for armor penetration, etc...

[TEWR]

MKDAWUSS wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Very hard to say. The prices in Thedas are abit quirky. In Ferelden a backpack costs more than a pretty good plate armour, after all.

And everyone takes the same form of currency!

IIRC, the system derives itself from the Dwarves when they first began trading with the Imperium. The DAII Collector's Edition also states that while each country has different appearances for their coins and terms, ultimately the system is the same.

EDIT: Which incidentally, is something I thought was original for my novel I'm writing. But DAMN BIOWARE DID IT BEFORE ME. 

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 18 mars 2013 - 06:50 .

[Solmanian]

If you use "material" as indication, with some material inherently better than others, while a nice and realistic concept, you'll get the "elders scrolls effect": all/most high end gear will look basicly the same.. like in skyrim where the majority high level players (atleast those using heavy armor) are walking in deadric armor, which I personaly realy hate the way it looks. Ebony, IMO, looks way better, but is inherently inferior... I prefer the maximum amount of variety. Again, this is where I prefer the ME inventory way, where the armors are reletively of equal power with different utility (or atleast to the point that it doesn't penalize you heavily for not choosing the "optimal" armor and going for the "pretty" armor).

[Direwolf0294]

I didn't find material as a good indicator of an items value in DA:O. There were so many uniquely named items, I almost never used material to determine whether I should use an item or not. I much prefered DA2's way of doing things. It needed some work, but it was a lot better than what Origins did.

[Blazomancer]

The funny thing about the starred system was that two amulets(or rings) having exactly the same bonuses would have different star ratings, thereby different monetary values depending on what levels you found them. Simply a retarded system. Inventory management in Origins was much much better.

[fchopin]

I haven’t got the faintest idea what a +5 or 2% does in DA2 or DAO so i hope they get rid of this and put something that makes sense.

[Elfseeker]

nevermind that 'quality' in regards to what your chars already wore could mean one of a nearly endless variation of things. Taste not being equal, judging the quality of equipment compared to what is actually worn is only useful in a limited fashion. say, if you wear something worth 10 armor and the other thing gives 12, for instance. but with bonuses and that nonsense, the stars are rendered perfectly pointless. I never even looked at them as anything other than decoration.