I don't want the combat designed in such a way that it negatively impacts the single player experience and believe the goals of both are fundimentally opposed.OperatingWookie wrote...
Why do you guys that oppose it want less content? That does not make sense at all.
Modifié par Ziggeh, 10 août 2013 - 11:55 .
Based on ME3 mp, I would say it would improve it. MP allows the devs a place to actively experiment and improve the combate.Ziggeh wrote...
I don't want the combat designed in such a way that it negatively impacts the single player experience and believe the goals of both are fundimentally opposed.OperatingWookie wrote...
Why do you guys that oppose it want less content? That does not make sense at all.
Jorina Leto wrote...
ME3's boring Horde Mode MP? No, thanks. Also I refuse to pay with real money for health potions.
...You don't pay for health potions with real money.
But in an environment completely detached from the single player experience.leaguer of one wrote...
Based on ME3 mp, I would say it would improve it. MP allows the devs a place to actively experiment and improve the combate.
ME3's combate had a compleat overhaul due to the fact that the dev's had an active place to test things out in the mp.
Heck, the mp even allows people the chance how to learn to play the game better.
MP is basicly an active experiment of the combate systems.
Interesting? Who said anything about making it interesting? I'm taking about improvements. Learning new tactics, combos, taking the time to see which spell works the best or not in a controlable environment, making better ambushes, learning how to tank better, and etc.Ziggeh wrote...
But in an environment completely detached from the single player experience.leaguer of one wrote...
Based on ME3 mp, I would say it would improve it. MP allows the devs a place to actively experiment and improve the combate.
ME3's combate had a compleat overhaul due to the fact that the dev's had an active place to test things out in the mp.
Heck, the mp even allows people the chance how to learn to play the game better.
MP is basicly an active experiment of the combate systems.
The combat doesn't need to be interesting or even work with a single character, because it's not a single character game.
I'm betting it's going to be more popular then they expect it to be and supportit for a long time, just like ME3'S MP.Killdren88 wrote...
At this point no matter how much people protest its gonna happen. The best thing to do is to ignore it completely and hope the numbers are large enough for Bioware to see that it is not a popular system.
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.leaguer of one wrote...
Interesting? Who said anything about making it interesting? I'm taking about improvements.
Modifié par Ziggeh, 11 août 2013 - 01:37 .
And the me3 combate system, which the sp is pause and play and the mp is not, proves you wrong.Ziggeh wrote...
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.leaguer of one wrote...
Interesting? Who said anything about making it interesting? I'm taking about improvements.
But the point still stands: a party based game that's designed the be paused is incompatible with a single character game that's not. Improving the combat in one isn't relevant to the other.
Modifié par leaguer of one, 11 août 2013 - 01:40 .
Having pause and play in it is not the same as designed for pause and play. The gameplay would not have dramatically changed without it or indeed the companions, who are the only reason it exists.leaguer of one wrote...
And the me3 combate system, which the sp is pause and play and the mp is not, proves you wrong.
I completely understand. I just don't see how kicking a football makes you better at juggling. The fact that they both involve balls doesn't change the fact that they're different activities with different, opposing goals.leaguer of one wrote...
You are not getting the fact here how quickly the mp can improve and benifit the sp.
Modifié par Ziggeh, 11 août 2013 - 01:50 .
I only played through the single player campaign once and just played the multiplayer until the extended cut dlc came out months later. My second time through the s.p. I had to bump the difficulty to the max since I knew all of the various combos and what tactics to use against all the enemies. I found I enjoyed the single player even more since I wasn't pausing the combat every couple of seconds to figure out what to do. Bioware put a lot of time into the game play and it payed off. I don't think its unreasonable nowadays to expect a great story and great gameplay.leaguer of one wrote...
And the me3 combate system, which the sp is pause and play and the mp is not, proves you wrong.Ziggeh wrote...
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.leaguer of one wrote...
Interesting? Who said anything about making it interesting? I'm taking about improvements.
But the point still stands: a party based game that's designed the be paused is incompatible with a single character game that's not. Improving the combat in one isn't relevant to the other.
You are not getting the fact here how quickly the mp can improve and benifit the sp.
Modifié par BouncyFrag, 11 août 2013 - 01:51 .
1.Pause and play is irrelivent. It 'sjust there to give the player a chance to plan more. That has nothing to do with an active system not being able to improve a pause and play system. Both system have the same foundation, with that one system can improve the other. Remeber, dao and da2 can be played with out pause and play with no problems.Ziggeh wrote...
Having pause and play in it is not the same as designed for pause and play. The gameplay would not have dramatically changed without it and indeed the companions, who are the only reason it exists.leaguer of one wrote...
And the me3 combate system, which the sp is pause and play and the mp is not, proves you wrong.I completely understand. I just don't see how kicking a football makes you better at juggling. The fact that they both involve balls doesn't change the fact that they're different activities with different, opposing goals.leaguer of one wrote...
You are not getting the fact here how quickly the mp can improve and benifit the sp.
Thank you. That's my point right there.BouncyFrag wrote...
I only played through the single player campaign once and just played the multiplayer until the extended cut dlc came out months later. My second time through the s.p. I had to bump the difficulty to the max since I knew all of the various combos and what tactics to use against all the enemies. I found I enjoyed the single player even more since I wasn't pausing the combat every couple of seconds to figure out what to do. Bioware put a lot of time into the game play and it payed off. I don't think its unreasonable nowadays to expect a great story and great gameplay.leaguer of one wrote...
And the me3 combate system, which the sp is pause and play and the mp is not, proves you wrong.Ziggeh wrote...
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.leaguer of one wrote...
Interesting? Who said anything about making it interesting? I'm taking about improvements.
But the point still stands: a party based game that's designed the be paused is incompatible with a single character game that's not. Improving the combat in one isn't relevant to the other.
You are not getting the fact here how quickly the mp can improve and benifit the sp.
Only if in one of those you play one guy and in the other you play a whole team. It's the difference between catching a ball and throwing a ball, catching it, and blocking the guy who was intercepting, all in the same instance.leaguer of one wrote...
2.It 's not a completly different system. It not juggling compared to foobell. It's more american flag football compared to amarican tackle football.
You have multiple interacting elements. Pause and play is used in DA because you literally cannot do two things at the same time without it. Doing multiple things in the same instance is important to the party dynamic - it impacts the bot the difficulty and complexity.leaguer of one wrote...
1.Pause and play is irrelivent. It 'sjust there to give the player a chance to plan more. That has nothing to do with an active system not being able to improve a pause and play system. Both system have the same foundation, with that one system can improve the other. Remeber, dao and da2 can be played with out pause and play with no problems.
Modifié par Ziggeh, 11 août 2013 - 01:57 .
On normal difficulty, neither DA:O or DA II is designed to be regularly paused. With the tactics screen, you can play the majority of fights in RT, only controlling the PC.Ziggeh wrote...
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.
But the point still stands: a party based game that's designed the be paused is incompatible with a single character game that's not. Improving the combat in one isn't relevant to the other.
Modifié par Maria Caliban, 11 août 2013 - 02:03 .
And that's no different then what was going on with ME3. Guess what it helped impore the system. The difference is that you don't have direct control over everyone. That does not make the sp and mp incompatible.Ziggeh wrote...
Only if in one of those you play one guy and in the other you play a whole team. It's the difference between catching a ball and throwing a ball, catching it, and blocking the guy who was intercepting, all in the same instance.leaguer of one wrote...
2.It 's not a completly different system. It not juggling compared to foobell. It's more american flag football compared to amarican tackle football.You have multiple interacting elements. Pause and play is used in DA because you literally cannot do two things at the same time without it. Doing multiple things in the same instance is important to the party dynamic - it impacts the bot the difficulty and complexity.leaguer of one wrote...
1.Pause and play is irrelivent. It 'sjust there to give the player a chance to plan more. That has nothing to do with an active system not being able to improve a pause and play system. Both system have the same foundation, with that one system can improve the other. Remeber, dao and da2 can be played with out pause and play with no problems.
It could be played without pausing. It was not designed to played without pausing.
You can play hard and nightmare with out pausing. It just helps you more if you use it like in any mode.Maria Caliban wrote...
On normal difficulty, neither DA:O or DA II is designed to be regularly paused. With the tactics screen, you can play the majority of fights in RT, only controlling the PC.Ziggeh wrote...
I'm not sure how an improvement would not be of interest.
But the point still stands: a party based game that's designed the be paused is incompatible with a single character game that's not. Improving the combat in one isn't relevant to the other.
On Hard and Nightmare difficulty, the game is designed to require pausing.
That's more that it gives you enough latitude that it's not required, though I'll concede that was part of it's design.Maria Caliban wrote...
On normal difficulty, neither DA:O or DA II is designed to be regularly paused. With the tactics screen, you can play the majority of fights in RT, only controlling the PC.
Firstly, that right there is two distinct operations. That planning is done in both doesn't make them the same.leaguer of one wrote...
That does not make a differance being that you as an indivisual or a team have to do the same planning.
1.Ofcousre it won't be 100% the same. It just has the same end. Based on who you are with it can be no different , a hinderance or an improvement. The point is you still get the same veriaty of results you would get in the sp, sucess or failure.Ziggeh wrote...
Firstly, that right there is two distinct operations. That planning is done in both doesn't make them the same.leaguer of one wrote...
That does not make a differance being that you as an indivisual or a team have to do the same planning.
Secondly, you're talking about coordinating multiple elements that can happen in an instant versus coordinating multiple elements that requires discussion.
Thirdly and most importantly, unless they make the whole system invite only, unlike the ME3 multiplayer, you cannot assume people will be communicating at all which means it needs to work without planning. You, individually planning and executing multiple commands is a different operating from no planning and executing one.
Those are not the only possible results, especially without health regeneration. And the result isn't relevant. With multiple characters you are being asked to consider and enact X, Y and Z. With just one, Y and Z are something other people do, so you just need to do X. That's a completely different experience. The thought, the control, the speed, the order of usage and the complexity of each task are all dependant on whether you're being asked to do one thing or multiple.leaguer of one wrote...
1.Ofcousre it won't be 100% the same. It just has the same end. Based on who you are with it can be no different , a hinderance or an improvement. The point is you still get the same veriaty of results you would get in the sp, sucess or failure.
Sucess and Failure are not the results that will happen? Funny, there is somrthing other then that?Ziggeh wrote...
Those are not the only possible results, especially without health regeneration. And the result isn't relevant. With multiple characters you are being asked to consider and enact X, Y and Z. With just one, Y and Z are something other people do, so you just need to do X. That's a completely different experience. The thought, the control, the speed, the order of usage and the complexity of each task are all dependant on whether you're being asked to do one thing or multiple.leaguer of one wrote...
1.Ofcousre it won't be 100% the same. It just has the same end. Based on who you are with it can be no different , a hinderance or an improvement. The point is you still get the same veriaty of results you would get in the sp, sucess or failure.
Retour en haut