1109 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Ziggeh wrote...

Many would have called multiplayer a needless tack on until it was done right in ME3. Many things are bad right up until the point that they're not.

Multiplayer was a needless tack on.  That it was actually quite good doesn't stop it being a needless tack on.

There are ways to do this that are deep, interesting and not at all tedious. Assuming this won't be using one of those on the basis that other games didn't is a problematic argument.

Please explain to me a way to make it deep, interesting and not at all tedious that is compatible with what we know about the game and has a reasonable chance of being implemented.  And explain why no other game I've played has done it.

[Xilizhra]

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

[Fast Jimmy]

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

This is why I'll suggest again - DA:I should default players to rhe Casual/Narrative/Easiest difficulty, then based on your aggregate success in combat, it would periodically prompt you to increase the difficulty (or retroactively drop it if you are having trouble with an area). And, of course, the difficulty could be modified manually at any time. 

That way, no one's ego gets bruised by feeling they need to drop it to Casual... because it starts out that way. 

[Wompoo]

Healer build or healer companion plus health potions plus rest... I think it is great actually.

edit
I so hope this stays, seriously games have been getting very easy over the years. To a point where normal is actually story mode beginers setting.

Modifié par Wompoo, 14 août 2013 - 12:57 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Please explain to me a way to make it deep, interesting and not at all tedious that is compatible with what we know about the game and has a reasonable chance of being implemented. And explain why no other game I've played has done it.

They could make healing potions expensive, healing magic limited, no resting mechanic and lock you in a dungeon/cave/area so you can't backtrack to town whenever you get a boo-boo, nor can you spam a save system.

That would be deep - you'd need to balance out the limited gold you have between buying upgraded equipment to let you do better in combat or spend money buying healing items, which help you survive when things don't go your way. It would be incredibly interesting - you'd be courting death on a regular basis and it would practically beg that there be much more utilitarian uses of non-combat skills and solutions. And it wouldn't be tedious - simply because there would be no work around to regenerate your health... you're stuck with what you've got. No insta-heal... NO MERCY!

But that would be far too difficult for people.

[Ziggeh]

Wulfram wrote...
Multiplayer was a needless tack on.  That it was actually quite good doesn't stop it being a needless tack on.

And that doesn't stop if being good. Which was my point.

Wulfram wrote...
Please explain to me a way to make it deep, interesting and not at all tedious that is compatible with what we know about the game and has a reasonable chance of being implemented.  And explain why no other game I've played has done it.

I could summarise 37 pages of thread for you, but it would be easier for me to tell you to read it. There have been several viable suggestions.

As to why other games haven't used them - for the most part, some have. Why have the specific ones you happen to have played not? I can't answer for all of them, but it sounds like bad luck on your part.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 14 août 2013 - 12:58 .

[Wulfram]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

Because the desire is for challenging and interesting combat?

Seriously, this line of argument is rather insulting and I wish you'd drop it.

[Xilizhra]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

This is why I'll suggest again - DA:I should default players to rhe Casual/Narrative/Easiest difficulty, then based on your aggregate success in combat, it would periodically prompt you to increase the difficulty (or retroactively drop it if you are having trouble with an area). And, of course, the difficulty could be modified manually at any time. 

That way, no one's ego gets bruised by feeling they need to drop it to Casual... because it starts out that way. 

Why not just include the bloody health regeneration? Why remove a useful feature?

[Wulfram]

Ziggeh wrote...

I could summarise 37 pages of thread for you, but it would be easier for me to tell you to read it. There have been several viable suggestions.

I've read large chunks of it.  I haven't seen any.

As to why other games haven't used them - for the most part, some have. Why have the specific ones you happen to have played not? I can't answer for all of them, but it sounds like bad luck on your part.

Well, I'm not going to list my entire playing history, but really we're talking about most major western RPGs in the last decade and a half. So "bad luck" seems unlikely.  There's always a way to refresh health, it just takes tedium, that's the problem.  This is basically unavoidable unless you make each "quest" self contained, so that the player can't leave mid mission - which is obviously incompatible with the open world stuff Bioware has talked about.

[billy the squid]

Wulfram wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

Because the desire is for challenging and interesting combat?

Seriously, this line of argument is rather insulting and I wish you'd drop it.

And no health regn doesn't provide that? Or was DA2's cannon fodder combat the ideal of challenging and interesting combat? Frankly I'd rather push my thumbs into my eyes than go through that again.

Other than a decrease in max HP there was no lasting effect and my character's hp regenerated between combat encounters, rendering lasting injury effect pointless.

No health regen, precludes the same bloating of hp and wave combat encounters because one simply can't accomodate such mechanics with finite recources. 

[Wulfram]

billy the squid wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

Because the desire is for challenging and interesting combat?

Seriously, this line of argument is rather insulting and I wish you'd drop it.

And no health regn doesn't provide that?

Not on casual/narrative difficulty, as was the suggestion I was replying to.

Mostly it provides the exact same gameplay as with health regen, just with added tedium via walking/healing spell spamming/potion guzzling/resting.

[Taleroth]

Strategic considerations affect tactical play. Managing resources between combats provides considerations for limiting resources within individual combats.

Modifié par Taleroth, 14 août 2013 - 01:52 .

[FDrage]

it is all a matter of a) balancing and how it is exactly implemented. in the end having "no health regen" is just on factor of a game mechanic which boils down to "cool downs" just as "health regen" is ... just that an abstract cooldown would be different.

In the end the same applies to ME1 and ME2 with changes to "ammo" both work and both work. as a limitation (i.e. cool down) just a different implementation of a cool down mechanic.

[Fast Jimmy]

Wulfram wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, I still hope that this can be changed... and that I'll be able to undo it by switching briefly to Casual so I can regenerate health there.

If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

Because the desire is for challenging and interesting combat?

Seriously, this line of argument is rather insulting and I wish you'd drop it.

I don't see why it is insulting. It is preference setting. If you'd prefer to not feel the maximum impact of the game's combat design decisions but still go through the game, it is a viable solution. I said I did so with DA2, since I found that the HP bloat and waves not engaging to my tastes, so I dropped it down to Casual to make this instances as short as possible. 

If there was an option to turn back on Health Regen and you played the game on Nightmare, despite the game being balanced for needing to do resource management and health being a source of attrition rathe than an instance of a full party wipe in one encounter, do you think you are truly beating the game on a hard difficulty? 

I'm not looking down my nose at anyone for it. Like I said - I did the exact same thing to circumvent the mechanics of DA2 I didn't like. I'm just trying to think of a way to make it more digestible for players who feel like they are struggling or not enjoying Normal but then don't want to surrender to a lower difficulty, admitting defeat. Which most people don't want to do. 

[llandwynwyn]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

This is why I'll suggest again - DA:I should default players to rhe Casual/Narrative/Easiest difficulty, then based on your aggregate success in combat, it would periodically prompt you to increase the difficulty (or retroactively drop it if you are having trouble with an area). And, of course, the difficulty could be modified manually at any time. 

Why?
DA's default - like most games - is normal. And it is easy enough for most people.

[Wulfram]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I don't see why it is insulting. It is preference setting.

It's dismissing peoples complaints by implying that their objection is to a supposed increase in difficulty.  It's denying that the complaints might value challenging combat.

It's the equivalent of me telling you to just space bar through all the dialogue since you don't like the voiced protagonist.

If there was an option to turn back on Health Regen and you played the game on Nightmare, despite the game being balanced for needing to do resource management and health being a source of attrition rathe than an instance of a full party wipe in one encounter, do you think you are truly beating the game on a hard difficulty?

The game will likely be balanced to assume you'll be fully refreshed at the tough fights anyway, at least on above normal.  All you're doing is automating a process that you'd do anyway, so that less time is wasted.

At most post combat healing + nightmare will probably be equivalent to "hard", not casual.  Which would likely suit me fairly well, actually - any game I can comfortably play on the toughest difficulty is too easy.

I'm not looking down my nose at anyone for it. Like I said - I did the exact same thing to circumvent the mechanics of DA2 I didn't like. I'm just trying to think of a way to make it more digestible for players who feel like they are struggling or not enjoying Normal but then don't want to surrender to a lower difficulty, admitting defeat. Which most people don't want to do. 

It's not about "struggling".  All putting the difficulty down is liable to do is make things even more tedious.

Modifié par Wulfram, 14 août 2013 - 02:28 .

[Fast Jimmy]

It's dismissing peoples complaints by implying that their objection is to a supposed increase in difficulty. It's denying that the complaints might value challenging combat.

Are you saying that having health regen would make combat MORE challenging? Or not having it would make it LESS? I'd highly contest those conclusions.

If the game has a system that avoids time-wasting cheats to get your health to 100% at no cost to he player besides time, then having no-health-regen is going to be many degrees harder. Assuming there will be such methods to avoid any penalty for taking extraneous damage during combat that will just waste the player's time is assuming the system won't be designed well.

Which is fair concern to have at this point... but not a fair assumption to make.

The game will likely be balanced to assume you'll be fully refreshed at the tough fights anyway, at least on above normal. All you're doing is automating a process that you'd do anyway, so that less time is wasted.

That is an assumption on your part and not in line with comments that Allan and John made earlier (although, to be more than fair, they don't design the combat system).

It's not about "struggling". All putting the difficulty down is liable to do is make things even more tedious.

Right. Which is why I put "not enjoying" in there right alongside struggling. Which is the definition, in my book, of finding something tedious.

You are taking all of these suggestions of ways to overcome the stated mechanic easily as personal insults on your comptetency, which is not the case. I'm giving suggestions on ways for you to play the game with the stated feature and not find it tedious - which is what you requested at the top of this page.

[Allan Schumacher]

Are you saying that having health regen would make combat MORE challenging? Or not having it would make it LESS? I'd highly contest those conclusions.

He is saying that he likes his difficulty to be based on the encounter, but the tedium of healing up between fights to not be present.

Putting the game to narrative/casual means that you can autoattack the combat and win without much effort. Playing something like DA2 on Nightmare still has challenging combat that requires you to use skills and so forth, but still has health regen between fights.

He wants the fights to require him to pay attention and to be tactical and all that, and downing the difficulty will remove that.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 août 2013 - 04:17 .

[Wulfram]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Are you saying that having health regen would make combat MORE challenging? Or not having it would make it LESS? I'd highly contest those conclusions.

I'm saying that desiring health regen doesn't mean you don't want challenging combat. Which means that putting the difficulty down to casual is no solution at all.  It's only a way of dismissing peoples concerns.

edit:  I should say I'm sure there's no ill intent on your part.  But it's really getting on my nerves

Modifié par Wulfram, 14 août 2013 - 04:23 .

[AlanC9]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
If you just stayed on Casual/Narrative, you wouldn't suffer enough damage to make it a big deal...? There would be no need to manage resources/inventory if you never get below half your health. 

Because the desire is for challenging and interesting combat?

Seriously, this line of argument is rather insulting and I wish you'd drop it.

I don't see why it is insulting. It is preference setting. If you'd prefer to not feel the maximum impact of the game's combat design decisions but still go through the game, it is a viable solution. I said I did so with DA2, since I found that the HP bloat and waves not engaging to my tastes, so I dropped it down to Casual to make this instances as short as possible. 

The insulting part, I think, is that your proposed solution equates not liking resource management with not liking difficult combat, even if you're not equating those things yourself. If someone likes the combat but doesn't like resource management, he's screwed by this design decision. Reducing difficulty won't make things better; it'll make them even worse.

And it's OK for him to be screwed; sometimes you just lose. But let's not pretend that it isn't happening.

Modifié par AlanC9, 14 août 2013 - 04:20 .

[Allan Schumacher]

I think it's important to note that combat difficulty and health regen aren't as related as some think.

Yes, taking the *same* set of encounters and removing health regen will more than likely make those sequence of encounters more difficult. But simply saying "Game X has health regen and Game Y does not" doesn't actually tell you "Game X is easier than game Y." It depends on the encounter design.

Health regen takes into account more of the strategic elements of combat, rather than the tactical. For someone that highly values tactical but is indifferent towards strategic, they'll prefer a game with challenging combat encounters but health regen.

If someone does like no health regen, they see each encounter has managing towards a bigger picture. It's just a different focus/goal out of gaming.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Allan's entirely correct. Some players value being challenged in every encounter, and those players would probably prefer health regen. That allows each encounter to be balanced carefully, with the designers knowing that you'll have full health when you get there.

Without health regen (to design I prefer), each encounter needs to be designed with the knowledge that the party might be at full health, but also might not, and also that whatever health level the party has after the encounter needs to be acceptable for the following encounter (unless there's some opportunity to heal between them).

No health regen makes the design significantly more complicated, and each individual encounter generally easier, but the whole dungeon altogether becomes a very different puzzle to solve.

[The Hierophant]

Wulfram wrote...

Well, in this case it's a player who's remembering what a pointless waste of time it was in BG2 and every other game which had it.

How is no free health regen pointless when health depletion is the only means of defeat? DA's unearned auto regen trivialized resource management outside of the higher difficulties, negated one of the dangers of consecutive combat encounters, while the damage earned from traps in DA2 were redundant.

Like i said before, if the devs are introducing environmental hazards, free health regen from the get go could render the dangers moot.

[Wulfram]

The Hierophant wrote...

How is no free health regen pointless when health depletion is the only means of defeat?

Because there's always some means of health regen, it's just about how inconvenient it's going to be.

Unless you're prepared to make every quest/mission into it's own contained thing, like XCom, which is inconsistent with what we've been told about the game.  And make a whole bunch of other gameplay changes, some of which are liable to be drastically unpopular.

[Fast Jimmy]

Wulfram wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Are you saying that having health regen would make combat MORE challenging? Or not having it would make it LESS? I'd highly contest those conclusions.

I'm saying that desiring health regen doesn't mean you don't want challenging combat. Which means that putting the difficulty down to casual is no solution at all.  It's only a way of dismissing peoples concerns.

edit:  I should say I'm sure there's no ill intent on your part.  But it's really getting on my nerves

Okay, maybe I should try framing my suggestion in a different light. And get away from saying "Casual" or "narative", as the ideal difficulty may indeed be Easy (or even Normal) depending on how the game is balanced.

Let's say that on the ideal difficulty level for this, you are able to have fairly normal combat - enemies don't drop dead if you breath on them, but who also don't take down huge swaths of your health in each encounter. Then, by the time you reach the end of the dungeon/area, your party is a little worn down (maybe halfway from your total health). Not wanting to be bogged down with a rest or healing of whatever, you take on the boss fight. With your lower health, the fight is difficult (you come close to failing, some party members fall, etc.) but more often than not, you can succeed, all without having to go back to town, or rest before every fight or carry around 100 potions.

Does that not sound like a decent enough compromise to enjoy combat while dealing with a mechanic you don't like?