34 réponses à ce sujet

[jvaz]

Saw in the the latest tidbit of coverage that health will no longer regen after encounters........Interesting.  

[Allan Schumacher]

As precaution I removed some images from the online aspect of Game Informer.

If it's just on a tumblr, there's a good chance that Game Informer didn't give permission. Sorry.

[Allan Schumacher]

Wissenschaft wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

As precaution I removed some images from the online aspect of Game Informer.

If it's just on a tumblr, there's a good chance that Game Informer didn't give permission. Sorry.

 

Its too late, if its on Tumblr its already out.

Irrelevant to whether or not we provide a tacit condoning by letting people do it, or make references to it it, on our forum.

Especially on the same day it's released.

[Allan Schumacher]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Well, I saw zero reason anyone wouldn't use implants in DE:HR. I mean, Adam Jensen never asked for this... but he was still more Radioshack than he was regular by the time the intro scene was all said and done. I can't imagine him honestly taking the postion that ONE MORE piece of hardware in his body would somehow compromise his moral integrity or humanity. 

But that is getting things way off topic here, I suppose.

I found the implants rather distasteful and manipulative, myself. I did it a couple of times, but when the option ended up sounding like sleazy blackmail or coercion, I reloaded and went through again without using it.

I think there must have been some confusion with your reference to implants (taken as meaning meaning all of them), rather than specifically the phermones that come with the CASIE implant to let you immediately win conversations.

(I didn't use the phermones either, for ethical reasons for my Jensen)

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 08 août 2013 - 07:06 .

[Allan Schumacher]

It seems we have finally been heard.

Note that a comment like this is actually comes across as patronizing. You've always been heard, and it always gets discussed during development (even DA2). The combat system is still under heavy iteration and we're looking on making sure that it's fun without being aggravating. Clearly there's two sides to the camp on this issue, and I can understand both perspectives.

As a game player, I have little invested in "health regen vs. no health regen" because to me it just means that encounters get played differently. There are advantages/disadvantages to both. If you were to force me to choose one, I probably have a slight leaning towards no health regen, because with that I make the assumption that encounters get crafted in a more interesting way. Although this is just for CRPGs. For FPS games, I have actually come to appreciate health regen more, since I like the intensity of each encounter and set piece.

I think it's a delicate balancing act between ensuring that there's a fun, strategic element to combat and general gameplay, without making the system appear aggravating.

Some advantages of health regeneration come down to reducing degenerate gameplay (i.e. various tedium). While some people like the tedium, I also don't consider it a good thing if the player can get themselves into a place where the game progress is now halted as they're effectively blocked by a situation where their party will wipe.

One advantage of no health regen is that a smaller encounter can still be meaningful. Encounters that don't threaten the entire party are no threat with health regen, and as such is also busy work for some, just a different type. With no health regen, a completely trivial encounter will exist more to literally display power (your character is now strong), while smaller encounters cannot be facerolled as there is still some level of a cost involved. For some people, they see this as "playing the game well" and they receive some level of reward for doing so (less resource consumption, both in game and outside of game).


So both "sides" of this discussion seek to ameliorate the tedious busy work that they don't like. It's just that both sides disagree on what the tedious busy work is.

We can try out some different ideas, however, because frankly I find that fun (as a developer), and while we may blow it and not satisfy people, there's also the idea that "Hey, we DID come up with something that works really well" that makes me excited. Ideally it's something that most people will gain enjoyment out of.

[Allan Schumacher]

As awesome as that sounds to me, I think if there was a rumbling about requiring characters to eat/keep rations for food, you'd see this entire forum meltdown in anti-grognard sentiment. At least, if this thread is any indication.

You'd see the people against it speak up more vocally, with the defenders of said choice speaking up in defense. Which is not uncommon on the BSN or the rest of the internet really. This board entering total meltdown is simply hyperbole, as this topic itself has a good amount of people that both support it and those that don't. (although the hyperbole does have a habit of unnecessarily escalating things).

Let them rumble, I was sufficiently butthurt after Dragon Age 2. It would be nice to see the shoe on the other foot.

Vindictiveness is so unbecoming. It sucks that you feel betrayed by DA2, but wanting others to feel the same isn't necessary. At worst DAI becomes a game you aren't interested in playing, at which point it's functionally no different than a game that doesn't exist at all.

[Allan Schumacher]

I openly acknowledge my own hypocrisy.

Still, as a gamer I don't wish anyone to feel "butthurt" over a game, so my point still stands

[Allan Schumacher]

Wanna go stab some maps, might cheer you up some

While I had some terse responses, I'm actually in a relatively decent mood. (I have certainly been on the BSN in a worse mood!)


Slight mod comment: I deleted a plethora of posts. And yes, I know what a plethora is.

[Allan Schumacher]

I agree with you that others may see it as tedium whereas I do not. I would be equally happy with a hardcore mode like Fallout: New Vegas. I await further information on the game over the next year.

I only ever played FONV in hardcore mode, because the idea really appealed to me. Although I actually found the implementation to be too conservative. Sawyer's mod was more along the lines of what I was expecting (and eventually received).

There's opportunity costs too. Especially if we try to balance the game for different playstyles (I do not feel that Obsidian attempted to balance for hardcore mode, which wasn't really an issue IMO).

Initially I was thinking "If I were to allow for a toggle, I'd probably just balance for no health regen." But then I wondered "If someone likes no health regen, would they be more open to the game being more balanced towards health regen?" I actually don't think that the combat encounters would be too different, but the various attrition like mechanics would be felt more severely in the latter case.

Which would you prefer? (Disclaimer : I'll pass the idea along, but certainly don't take further discussion like this as any sort of guarantee).

[Allan Schumacher]

Assuming it isn't a "big " investment for the studio resource-wise - that would certainly cater to the 2 different levels. I totatlly agree with the idea - if resources allow and if it's a priority ?! well time will tell.
Depends who Bioware is targeting for an audience.

There'd still be issues with people that like every fight to "push them to the edge" but then not have to do all the between fight healing type stuff.

Which is still a tactical experience, and certainly doesn't mean the system is 'dumbed down." It just means that the game's encounters are designed differently.

[Allan Schumacher]

devSin wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I openly acknowledge my own hypocrisy.

Still, as a gamer

Allan, no.

Please, no.

It's bad enough from everyone else.

I use the term "as a gamer" pretty deliberately.  As I'm not speaking as a developer with that comment, nor as a moderator.  I qualify my statement as being more "as peers" rather than "As a developer who is privy to the ways the industry works that many people outside the industry can only make assumptions about" for instance.

As a gamer (and a developer, for that matter), I think it's good for people to find enjoyment with games, and games that I do not enjoy are games that I stop playing and move on from.

[Allan Schumacher]

CrustyBot wrote...

So Allan, seeing as you are here and totes not in a bad mood, what are your thoughts on the camp mechanic I described a few pages back? Perhaps not for Inquisition (bit late for that), but in general or for future Dragon Age games?

I digested a lot of posts in this thread so I may have skimmed over it.  Can you link it for me since I'm also doing various things while reading said forum (i.e. brushing my teeth <.<)

[Allan Schumacher]

this and this

Another reason why I believe such a system would be good is because it gives an opportunity to make party members who are left behind more useful and/or give them prominence through encounters and events that can be tied back to their roles at camp, as opposed to a F/R mechanic.

The largest barrier to it would be determining whether or not we can come up with an implementation for it with our plan as scheduled, because we'd also need to account for potential iteration time in case execution proves a bit of a challenge.

But I do agree that the ideal is always that your in between combat actions (regardless of what they may be) still be something engaging. I think it'd still have to be something somewhat "minimalist" as the action would still be somewhat repetitive. But that's the type of thing that iteration is great for.

[Allan Schumacher]

Bottom line, I have no problem giving the elitists/masochists their cake, and think they should...but those of us who just want to have fun, enjoy the story, and get some stress relief by wiping the floor with our enemies and watching their heads come off in a big bloody splash (without having to plan or risk being forced to limp back to some town and collapse for three game days before we can venture out again, only to have our asses kicked again) should be able to enjoy some cake, too.

I would be surprised if this will not be possible in our game, regardless of our combat health mechanics. I get the impression (and I support) that BioWare looks to have difficulty levels that are more attuned to the "I really just like your stories" type of people, who are perfectly okay with their combat being heroic with a bunch of ultimate badasses.

The issue would be more along the lines of the people that prefer the encounter design of a game with regenerating health, and the challenge that comes with it. (I actually shared a video of me doing COD4's bonus mission on the hardest difficulty, and it was exhilarating to complete it with my adrenaline cranked to the max when I successfully did complete it. Even though I almost bought it twice. No health regen would've had me fail more sure, but that doesn't mean that the level itself isn't still challenging especially given the timer).

[Allan Schumacher]

You never played KotOR or The Witcher? Of course, TW's regen is s slow that it maybe doesn't count; in many zones you end up playing as if Geralt doesn't regenerate because a wandering monster will come along before the regen gets you anywhere.

Although KOTOR only has Force regen.

[Allan Schumacher]

Personally, I'm still wondering how this works with non-level scaled monsters...

I'm not sure how the health mechanic affects this. In both cases, it means that if you've bit off more than you can chew, you disengage from the combat.

[Allan Schumacher]

But, out of curiosity, did you ever play the Star Trek game? It was a
DOS game (I can't remember the name) and you went into quadrants,
praying you didn't get attacked by the bloody Romulans. I loved that
game. Wish I could find it, but it was on floppy and I don't even have a
floppy drive anymore!

Star Trek 25th Anniversary.

My own hypocrisy aside (deal with it DevSin!), we are probably sliding too far off topic now.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 août 2013 - 07:22 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Assuming disengagement works.

Indeed.

[Allan Schumacher]

Argahawk wrote...

Allan don't say You thinking about there should be health regen in DA:I, as I said in my previous post game without it will be more interesting and more rewarding as there is nothing like be proud from ourselves when we be able to defeat that boss without loose any party member.

I'm a bit confused.  I'm not actually sure I stated any direction that DAI would go in, in this thread specifically, but rather talked about the various implications of the different systems.

[Allan Schumacher]

For a game like DAI, from a gamer perspective I'd probably prefer no health regen.

From a developer perspective I'm more indifferent. I can see advantages and disadvantages to both, and there seems to be a divide as shown in this thread.

[Allan Schumacher]

If you want instant health regen as a matter of course, frankly stick it on easy and be done with it. The effect is the same, you roll through every encounter with little difficulty.

I disagree with the notion that health regen means rolling through every encounter with little difficulty.

I didn't realize I was talking to a fourteen year old.

[John Epler]

Every time someone suggests that we just add a toggle for a feature they aren't entirely on board with, a kitten bursts into flame.

[John Epler]

As to what games are balanced around their health mechanics, Dark Souls/Demon's Souls comes to mind (more the former than the latter). You could acquire limited health regeneration, of course, but as with most things in that game it was a fairly significant trade-off.

I don't think it's any more difficult to balance a game around a lack of health regeneration as opposed to around health regeneration - it simply requires a different mindset. You shift your focus on the 'average' number of resources a party will have at that point as opposed to always assuming everyone's at full strength.

Personally, I dig it. One of the things that always drew me to the STALKER games (take a shot) is the feeling of going on expeditions out into the uncharted wastelands. You had your stash, and you'd take what you thought you might need - and hope that was enough. It made for some excellent emergent storytelling and kept things interesting, even in the earlier areas.

[Allan Schumacher]

As I have said previously, as long as it is very hard for a person to paint themselves into a corner in this regard i am fine with it. You can't let the player get in a spot where they have saved the game and not realized they were about to be in a really bad spot resource wise and have to go back hours and hours for a save long ago.

This would definitely be my top concern as well.

[Allan Schumacher]

I have to disagree that No Health Regen is not connected to difficulty.
A game with health regen, can have really hard fights, but they would be nearly impossible with no health regen and fighting several before that. A great player can win eventually, dying a bit more, many casual players won't be able to finish

This is true, but the point I was making is that "If you have a game with health regen, you can design things differently."

That is, a game with health regen doesn't need to be easy. Yes, if you take the exact same game and remove health regen, it will be harder, but if the game doesn't have health regenerating health, the encounters may be designed differently to accommodate that.


EDIT: In retrospect you seem to be saying the same thing upon further reading your post >.>

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 août 2013 - 10:11 .