1109 réponses à ce sujet

[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).

[devSin]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I openly acknowledge my own hypocrisy.

Still, as a gamer

Allan, no.

Please, no.

It's bad enough from everyone else.

[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.

[AlanC9]

EvilChani wrote...
Maybe then they'd be happy and the rest of us could play the game in a reasonable amount of time instead of spending three fricking hours to get through a battle that should take thirty seconds. Gaming is fun, and it's a recreational activity...I have a job and a life and don't have 1000 hours to play a game that should only take me 20, tops, but is drawn out because I'm constantly dropping dead or being forced to spend half an hour positioning my companions in a way that will keep me from dying and having to reload a save from an hour earlier. Blah!

Wow -- that''s your experience on the lowest difficulty setting?

It does raise the question of how well this feature will work for everyone. ME3's Narrative difficulty got lots of grief here, but from what I've seen it filled a real need.

Modifié par AlanC9, 09 août 2013 - 06:20 .

[AresKeith]

Whoever sells health potions in this game is gonna be filthy rich lol

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

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?

[Paul E Dangerously]

On one hand, it makes it more D&D-like and that's great.

On the other, DA is already really entrenched in the (awful) MMO tank/dps/heal mode, and this just makes that more necessary.

[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.

[AlanC9]

Realmzmaster wrote...

You mean that you have never played Bard's Tale I,II and III? The original Wizardry? Roguelikes? If someone will design the game you are suggesting I think I could find the time to play it!

Not everyone here's as old as us.

[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 <.<)

[devSin]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

That's not the term I was referring to, sorry.

I deleted that part of your post because I don't want to perpetuate it, let alone attribute it to a developer.

Feel free to speak "as a gamer". I wasn't challenging your qualifications. ;-)

Modifié par devSin, 09 août 2013 - 06:27 .

[TheBlackBaron]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

That was, fundamentally, Origins' system, was it not? Now, I never played on Nightmare difficulty, but from what I understand it could be quite difficult (not saying Dark Souls levels here, but not something you're going to breezily solo through without serious planning), but once combat was done everybody just stood back up and got all their health back just like on the other difficulty levels. 

I'd say that balancing it for that and then allowing turning on more punitive punishments for NPC death (to go back to Neverwinter, some sort of camp ressurrection method) and no regeneration out of combat would allow people to tune their combat experience as needed. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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 <.<)

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.

[Realmzmaster]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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).

You pose an interesting question. Most of the crpgs I have played had no health regen and no mana regen. Basically DAO, DA2 and The Last Remnant ( which allows me to command 5 squads of characters) are the only ones I have played with health regen. I guess I would balance the game for people who want health regen. The no regen would be in the Hardcore mode which would be available for Normal, Hard and Nightmare levels if possible.

I know you cannot guarntee anything nor would I want you to do so. The fact that the suggestion gets passed along is more than enough for me.

[zMataxa]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

______

Good point.
As a gamer who also enjoys the "push to the edge" (I am a Dark Souls player) - I could accept the "price" for playing Nightmare is more health management.  And when I'm not in the mood i flip back to Casual.
I would accept that as a reasonable compromise given limited resources.
Given DAI is so story driven - that seems like a SERIOUSLY reasonable compromise....to me.

[EvilChani]

CrustyBot wrote...

EvilChani wrote...

General Slotts wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

I'm not sure I like this. I always plays casual, I love the godlike power.

Yeah. More developers need to follow Fallout: New Vegas, in how they incorporated an optional Hardcore mode. 

Agreed. I think that would pacify all of the people who want the game to be nothing but constant and practically impossible battles where your character is handicapped to the point where even the lowest level enemies provide a challenge. Bioware should make hardcore/insanity levels like that in all of their games, though, if I had to bet, people would still complain that they were only dying every ten minutes and that it was too 'easy'...plus, they will never be happy as long as there is a casual/easy level where people aren't constantly dying and frustrated by the difficulty. 

I like posts like this. Teeming with enough seething hate in the form of passive aggressive potshots, strawmen and flamebait, but docile and non-specific enough that it doesn't warrant a warning from the mods.

Congrats, you might be crap at playing games, but you certainly are skilled at playing the BSN.

I salute you.

I'm sure that salute was of the one-fingered variety, but it was not meant to be quite as....****y...as it apparently seemed. 

I honestly get the impression - from all of the 'suggestions' on how to make things 'better' (one of which included the idea that taking health potions would all but poison you if you used too many) - that some people really would not be happy unless the game is all but impossible and takes a ridiculous amount of time to play because you are forced to 'manage' your resources to death and if you have your character place one foot wrong, you'll be dead and have to reload a save and lose an hour's worth of play. That's just not my thing. It's like someone else said, though...one person's minutae is another person's gold in a game. Some people like the survival aspect (much like in NV hardcore mode, where you're forced to eat and drink and sleep, and you can die if you fast travel too far away at once) and others like the character management aspects (inventory management, collecting items and building wealth, the relationships, etc). Please one group entirely, and the other will be hacked off. That's why I think having a level that is set to almost impossibility, with permanent death for companions and very little tolerance for 'error' might satisfy the group dead set on feeling like a survivalist. 

And, for the record, I'm not 'crap' at playing games. I played ME1 and ME2 on insanity and managed without destroying too many things in my house, but I did not consider it 'fun'. It was something I did to get an achievement and, in truth, was not complete and utter torture. But it took me longer to get through the games than playing at a lower level would have, was very annoying at times, and too way to much of my time and patience...and that is my point: some of us can't waste enormous amounts of time having our character eat and drink and crap and sit around waiting for a broken arm to heal before moving forward unless it turns into the freaking Sims and we can walk off and leave our characters a couple of real world hours to go through physical therapy so they can walk again, playing the game will be filled with more annoyance than enjoyment. Also, once I've played a game all the way through, doing every single mission and side mission, I want to be able to replay it for the story (provided the story doesn't suck), without having to worry about the battles so much. I'm all for god-moding on subsequent playthroughs, which is flat out impossible in the scenarios some people here have painted. 

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.

[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.

[Argahawk]

If they want to bring back health regen back into DA:I then its no buy for me (or will really think twice before buy it) as in my personal opinion game without it could be more interesting and more rewarding after you accomplish/finish almost impossible to win fight.

I don't want to have again DA game when You no need to think in most fight and just rush with everything you got as in other DA games, as in previous titles it was so hard to die in a fight
(ok, I had problems when fight flemeth but that's all)

[TheBlackBaron]

EvilChani wrote...

I honestly get the impression - from all of the 'suggestions' on how to make things 'better' (one of which included the idea that taking health potions would all but poison you if you used too many) - that some people really would not be happy unless the game is all but impossible and takes a ridiculous amount of time to play because you are forced to 'manage' your resources to death and if you have your character place one foot wrong, you'll be dead and have to reload a save and lose an hour's worth of play. That's just not my thing. 

The solution is to save early and save often (and make note of what key the quick save feature is bound to). 

That has certainly saved my butt in more than a few strategy games when I was being a filthy casual and not Ironman-ing it like a boss.

[Realmzmaster]

AlanC9 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

You mean that you have never played Bard's Tale I,II and III? The original Wizardry? Roguelikes? If someone will design the game you are suggesting I think I could find the time to play it!

Not everyone here's as old as us.

True, but there is GOG and it has Bard's Tale: A quest for Coin and Clevage which includes Bard's Tale I,II,III and you can get  Ultima IV for free! There are also a host of other earlier crpgs!

[EvilChani]

Realmzmaster wrote...

EvilChani wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

ArenCordial wrote...

Well I think this means everyone will have 1 party slot reserved for mage.

+ 1 for rogues because you need them to open doors/find traps/pick locks.

Next, they'll add in a giant fist that appears beside you and punches you in the gonads every 5-10 minutes or so unless you have a warrior.

ROTFLMAO! I don't think you're too far from the truth.

As I said in another post, I wish Bioware would make the insanity level so damned impossible that whoever plays it, no matter how awesome they think they are, suffers a forced death in every single damned battle. I'm sure they'd love it....they could make it so that their health potions poison them, they are only allowed to fight with a twig they spend five hours tracking down in a forest, their PC is so weak that he/she gets dropped if someone even farts near them, and they only have a 1 in 100 chance of surviving every battle. Oh, and all of their companions die permanently if they get hit. Maybe then they'd be happy and the rest of us could play the game in a reasonable amount of time instead of spending three fricking hours to get through a battle that should take thirty seconds. Gaming is fun, and it's a recreational activity...I have a job and a life and don't have 1000 hours to play a game that should only take me 20, tops, but is drawn out because I'm constantly dropping dead or being forced to spend half an hour positioning my companions in a way that will keep me from dying and having to reload a save from an hour earlier. Blah!

You mean that you have never played Bard's Tale I,II and III? The original Wizardry? Roguelikes? If someone will design the game you are suggesting I think I could find the time to play it!

LOL! Masochist! 

No, I've never played those. And, if they are anything like what I described, I won't touch them with someone else's ten foot pole!

At the moment, I'm playing Dishonored....and I freaking hate it. The story is cool, but all this sneaking around crap is not my style. I keep getting caught and dying. I hate dying in games, it pisses me off! And the sneaking around crap reminds of the Mark of the Assassin DLC for DA2...to get the stupid achievement, I chose the sneaking option. Once. Never again. God, was that annoying...I'm more of a walk in and slaughter everything kinda girl. 

[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).

[AlanC9]

Realmzmaster wrote...
You pose an interesting question. Most of the crpgs I have played had no health regen and no mana regen. Basically DAO, DA2 and The Last Remnant ( which allows me to command 5 squads of characters) are the only ones I have played with health regen. I guess I would balance the game for people who want health regen. The no regen would be in the Hardcore mode which would be available for Normal, Hard and Nightmare levels if possible. 

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.

Modifié par AlanC9, 09 août 2013 - 06:50 .

[EvilChani]

AlanC9 wrote...

EvilChani wrote...
Maybe then they'd be happy and the rest of us could play the game in a reasonable amount of time instead of spending three fricking hours to get through a battle that should take thirty seconds. Gaming is fun, and it's a recreational activity...I have a job and a life and don't have 1000 hours to play a game that should only take me 20, tops, but is drawn out because I'm constantly dropping dead or being forced to spend half an hour positioning my companions in a way that will keep me from dying and having to reload a save from an hour earlier. Blah!

Wow -- that''s your experience on the lowest difficulty setting?

It does raise the question of how well this feature will work for everyone. ME3's Narrative difficulty got lots of grief here, but from what I've seen it filled a real need.

No, that was my experience on insanity for ME2 (ME1 on insanity just required patience, not planning), minus the 'positioning' part. It didn't take me a 1000 hours, but it took too long to get through battles for me to really enjoy the playthrough. And I did die quite a bit before my nephew introduced me to cover (and the battle when you get Archangel was beyond annoying, really). The easy levels are easy, and with the exception of when I decided to take on Flemeth alone (dumbest decision ever), I really didn't die in the DA series, save for DA2 when I fought the Arishok - and that was because I didn't realize that running away like a pansy was actually the strategy I was supposed to be using but avoided it because it made me feel like a wuss. 

As for ME3's narrative difficulty, it did fulfill a need. My niece loved it. Personally, I like the battles, though, so don't want to skip them altogether or have them over before they start. But I do love the feeling of slaughtering everything in sight without breaking too much of a sweat, especially after my initial playthrough.