420 réponses à ce sujet

[Demx]

slimgrin wrote...

Siradix wrote...

TurretSyndrome wrote...

Mmm... It could take 20 hits from a single Warrior or it could take 2 combination attacks from a couple or more party members. 

What happens if you are playing with nothing but warriors?

You have to find another way in.

Sounds like it would be harder to place enemies in strategic points, if there are multiple ways in.

[TurretSyndrome]

Siradix wrote...

What happens if you are playing with nothing but warriors?

Do the math, 4 Warriors bashing one gate simultaneously. It takes 20 hits to destroy the gate with one Warrior, so with 4 Warriors, it takes 5 hits each. 

[Demx]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

Siradix wrote...

What happens if you are playing with nothing but warriors?

Do the math, 4 Warriors bashing one gate simultaneously. It takes 20 hits to destroy the gate with one Warrior, so with 4 Warriors, it takes 5 hits each. 

Gah, five hits? I could make a bread sandwich in that time.

[Allan Schumacher]

So, admittedly I'm not super up on the lore.

It sounds like these keeps would've been built about 800 years earlier, for the second blight. The wiki page describes them as such:

The towers are now old and rusted.

Could the gates themselves have also been weakened when the cult took over?

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 novembre 2013 - 05:27 .

[Firky]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
So basically a tacit admission that your perspective is that, based on the PAX video, there could be no reason why this gate could be weakened at that the most reasonable understanding is that all gates, in general, can be destroyed.

Or should we take this even further and assume that not only are all gates equally ineffective, but that every warrior ever is also just as capable of taking out said gates with impunity?


Or, is this is a castle that's (from the video) been captured by a cult (do you know how long they have been in occupying the castle?) and has been the target of various schemes by the inquisitor to weaken the castle (also stated from the video) through a variety of means?

Could none of these factors, coupled with Cassandra being more than just another warrior (a Seeker, at that), while neglecting that it's a hasty playthrough of a 30 minute demo, influence stuff like this?

This was interesting to read. (I thought the PAX demo thing made it look a little gimmicky. But, this is more interesting.)

[Rawgrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

Why does the U.S. Army of the Marvel Universe continue building tanks if the Incredible Hulk can easily smash them to pieces?

Because there is only one Hulk, and tanks are useful against things other than superheroes.

Rawgrim wrote...

Question: If gates can be smashed this easily, why would you even bother to buid castles in the first place?

Because most armies aren't led by high-level adventurers like Cassandra.

Accept that your party members are fantasy superheroes and you'll sleep a lot better at night.

If the lore tell me they are superheroes, fine. But I would like an explanation on how and why they became that.

That is the thing with fantasy settings. They allways explain how it works. Apart from draons and magic etc, the reader\\player are to assume it works like our world - unless exlained otherwise.

[thats1evildude]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It sounds like these keeps would've been built about 800 years earlier, for the second blight.

Assuming said keep was built during the second Blight, then yes, the structure would be about 800 years old. And I'm willing to bet the average Tevinter cultist doesn't know squat about repairing fortifications.

[TurretSyndrome]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

think maybe the sarcasim is getting alittle too much??

No no. He's got a point too. If you want, they could easily drop a health bar on those things and let you hit at it for 15 mins, or finish it in a few seconds. He gets what you, I and others said already.

I'm just trying to get him to see my point of view as well. Instead of one character taking down these things in two seconds, why not make it in such a way that it's a team effort. This is Dragon Age after all.

[Rawgrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Question: If gates can be smashed this easily, why would you even bother to buid castles in the first place?

Is there any chance that this gate isn't the same as a regular ol' gate?

Absolutely. There could be plenty explanations for it. But given that we see a greatsword smashing the ground and "summoning" rocks, shortly after. It is easy to jump to conclusions in one particular direction.

[THEFRIGGINDOOMGUY!]

David Gaider wrote...

Um, yeah.

This was just to demonstrate the shield bash. Why someone would jump to the conclusion that this wouldn't require something extraordinary on Cassandra's part (a special leveled-up ability, a magical shield, etc.), some kind of preparation on the Inquisition's part, or that just because Cassandra can do this that other characters/classes might not have similar abilities... I'm not really sure.

Relax, people. Considering all the abilities that various characters have (and have had throughout the DA games) this shouldn't be where all verisimilitude breaks down for you. She's strong, and this need neither be the final say in how the ability is used or what it looks like (considering the pre-alpha state). So offer feedback on that front, please do, but if the assertion is that Cassandra shouldn't be able to break down doors period... well the only response to that is "meh".

I know you're a dev but there's no need to be snide, I never said anything offensive. Anyway, I assumed this would be the case because the Inquisitor could also smash holes in the ground with his sword, which is unrealistic.  If Cassandra did something extraordinary to knock down the gate (like having a magical shield), I can understand that BUT you should also have told us to prevent such threads in the first place.

As a leveled up ability, and especially innate ability to Cassandra, it still doesn't make sense. How does a person become capable of that? Why don't people build defenses in relation to what other people are capable of? If normal people can just smash gates (yes yes, she's strong but in the end she's still a just a human) . Why build castles like in the real world, when people in Thedas are capable of smashing metal gates?

I also never said she shouldn't be able to break doors but BIG METAL FRONT GATES in two hits is a big NO. (small) Wooden doors inside a castle? Definitely! But even then, not anytime you want and should require the right skills and the right STR stats.

And YES, it DOES matter because her smashing the gate and the Inquisitor smashing holes in the ground with his sword says something about the tone of the game and I need to be able to take the game seriously, the abilities need to feel believable and plausible (notice how I'm not saying realistic?). I am not saying you should be having Witcher levels of realism, I'm really not. I like both franchises for different reasons but please try to keep a semblance of believability in your game.

Finally, I don't find your argument about the abilities of characters throughout the games convincing. I can accept the abilities because total realism would be unbalanced and not fun therefore, less realism is needed when building them but here it is absolutely not needed. Yes, abilities in games are often ridiculous but not to this level, a lot of those abilities are at least BELIEVABLE. 

My proposal would be to assign your agents to bring a battering ram or siege ladders, it would resolve this little-big problem.

P.S Please don't take this as a sign that I don't appreciate what you are doing in the game. I do this because I love BioWare games and I want this to be as good as possible.

Modifié par Octavian the Emperor, 14 novembre 2013 - 05:39 .

[thats1evildude]

Rawgrim wrote...

If the lore tell me they are superheroes, fine. But I would like an explanation on how and why they became that.

That is the thing with fantasy settings. They allways explain how it works. Apart from draons and magic etc, the readerplayer are to assume it works like our world - unless exlained otherwise.

The lore doesn't need to tell you anything; that should be evidenced by the story.

Do you need to be told exactly why Aragon, Legolas and Gimli can run for three solid days and nights and then be fresh enough to battle a horde of orcs, or can you simply accept you're watching a story about mythical heroes with abilities far beyond we mere mortals?

[Rawgrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

If the lore tell me they are superheroes, fine. But I would like an explanation on how and why they became that.

That is the thing with fantasy settings. They allways explain how it works. Apart from draons and magic etc, the readerplayer are to assume it works like our world - unless exlained otherwise.

The lore doesn't need to tell you anything; that should be evidenced by the story.

Do you need to be told exactly why Aragon, Legolas and Gimli can run for three solid days and nights and then be fresh enough to battle a horde of orcs, or can you simply accept you're watching a story about mythical heroes with abilities far beyond we mere mortals?

Aragorn has special blood. He is also a ranger. Its plausible that he has more stamina than normal humans. He is also in his 80s in the movies. big hint there too.

Elves don`t sleep, they don`t get drunk, and they have alot of other stuff. Its not that implausible that he could run alot too.

And they didn`t battle a horde of orcs right after running for three days. They spent at least a week at Edoras in between...So, yes. I think it is belivable that someone can fight orcs after several days of rest.

And where does it say that any one of the DA characters are mytthical? The only mythical one is Flemmeth. The rest are normal people caught up in war and such.

[upsettingshorts]

If anyone should ask me if the BSN was as thick with people drawing the most specious and illogical conclusions - in direct contradiction of the facts - as ever, I will simply provide them with a link to this thread.

To quote myself from a thread I was responding to during PAX itself:

There was a lot of talk in the panels about how they bumped up the abilities of the party to make difficult fights end faster. In the demo shown, Cassandra's shield bash does something like 15000 damage, and the AOE at the end that Vivienne (I think) lays down does something like 100000. Because they needed to move on from those things and show other stuff. Obviously they wont be that OP in the main game, and fights wont be designed around demonstrating certain features, or powers be buffed to facilitate a short demonstration

As a consequence: Drawing conclusions as to how quickly things happen, how easy things appear, and/or the relative balance of party members and abilities makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But by all means, continue to do so. After all, it's the tradition around here.

Ten pages.  

Ten.

Pages.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 novembre 2013 - 05:49 .

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Rawgrim wrote...

Aragorn has special blood. He is also a ranger. Its plausible that he has more stamina than normal humans. He is also in his 80s in the movies. big hint there too.

by that logic "she has seeker training" and even "comes from a family of dragon hunters" or any number of things should be sufficient explanation for gate-smashing strength.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 14 novembre 2013 - 05:49 .

[Melca36]

Octavian the Emperor wrote...

So I really like most of the things I saw in the video but there are some things that really ****** me off:

1. So as the title says, why can Cassandra knock down the gate with her shield? If Vivienne blasted it with a spell I would have understood but THIS?

2. How does the Inquisitor sometimes make huge holes in the ground  with his sword?

Before any of you come and say "it's fantasy so it doesn't matter", I say it DOES matter because while the game is fantasy, it also has to be believable.

Anyway, I really like most of the other things I see. Keep up the good work!

Would be asking this same question if Cassandra was "CASS" a male seeker warrior? <_<

[Rawgrim]

Pseudocognition wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Aragorn
has special blood. He is also a ranger. Its plausible that he has more
stamina than normal humans. He is also in his 80s in the movies. big
hint there too.

going by that "she has seeker training" should be sufficient explanation for gate-smashing strength.

Then why do the seekers have catapults?

[Rawgrim]

Melca36 wrote...

Octavian the Emperor wrote...

So I really like most of the things I saw in the video but there are some things that really ****** me off:

1. So as the title says, why can Cassandra knock down the gate with her shield? If Vivienne blasted it with a spell I would have understood but THIS?

2. How does the Inquisitor sometimes make huge holes in the ground  with his sword?

Before any of you come and say "it's fantasy so it doesn't matter", I say it DOES matter because while the game is fantasy, it also has to be believable.

Anyway, I really like most of the other things I see. Keep up the good work!

Notice how people also bring up the male inquisitor smashing the ground with his greatsword?


Would be asking this same question if Cassandra was "CASS" a male seeker warrior? <_<

[Allan Schumacher]

TurretSyndrome wrote...

I'm just trying to get him to see my point of view as well. Instead of one character taking down these things in two seconds, why not make it in such a way that it's a team effort. This is Dragon Age after all.

I do understand your point of view.

It could easily be a team effort.  Individual classes could also bring other elements to the table as well (whether as a team effort or through their own individual means).


If it seems like I'm defensive, it's because I do feel that way.  It doesn't appear to be a discussion, but rather very pointed and aggressive commentary towards a video that strips out a lot of context (always a huge issue for RPGs I find... including playable demos) by the nature of showing it.

Now, I suppose we could have shown nothing (though this would've denying the people that loved what they saw the exposure they received, so it's not a decision that would be free).  There was also "I know we said this game is to be out for 2013, but here's some stuff just to show you that the game is, in fact, coming along."

[Fredward]

Oy vey people. Who cares? It's a game.

[Rawgrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

TurretSyndrome wrote...

I'm just trying to get him to see my point of view as well. Instead of one character taking down these things in two seconds, why not make it in such a way that it's a team effort. This is Dragon Age after all.

I do understand your point of view.

It could easily be a team effort.  Individual classes could also bring other elements to the table as well (whether as a team effort or through their own individual means).


If it seems like I'm defensive, it's because I do feel that way.  It doesn't appear to be a discussion, but rather very pointed and aggressive commentary towards a video that strips out a lot of context (always a huge issue for RPGs I find... including playable demos) by the nature of showing it.

Now, I suppose we could have shown nothing (though this would've denying the people that loved what they saw the exposure they received, so it's not a decision that would be free).  There was also "I know we said this game is to be out for 2013, but here's some stuff just to show you that the game is, in fact, coming along."

Pretty much everything that has been shown about this game has been fantastic. I have some hopes that it might swap top spot with BG2, actually.

[THEFRIGGINDOOMGUY!]

Melca36 wrote...

Octavian the Emperor wrote...

So I really like most of the things I saw in the video but there are some things that really ****** me off:

1. So as the title says, why can Cassandra knock down the gate with her shield? If Vivienne blasted it with a spell I would have understood but THIS?

2. How does the Inquisitor sometimes make huge holes in the ground  with his sword?

Before any of you come and say "it's fantasy so it doesn't matter", I say it DOES matter because while the game is fantasy, it also has to be believable.

Anyway, I really like most of the other things I see. Keep up the good work!

Would be asking this same question if Cassandra was "CASS" a male seeker warrior? <_<

Of course I would! What kind of question is that?

[Firky]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

If anyone should ask me if the BSN was as thick with people drawing the most specious and illogical conclusions - in direct contradiction of the facts - as ever, I will simply provide them with a link to this thread.

To quote myself from a thread I was responding to during PAX itself:

There was a lot of talk in the panels about how they bumped up the abilities of the party to make difficult fights end faster. In the demo shown, Cassandra's shield bash does something like 15000 damage, and the AOE at the end that Vivienne (I think) lays down does something like 100000. Because they needed to move on from those things and show other stuff. Obviously they wont be that OP in the main game, and fights wont be designed around demonstrating certain features, or powers be buffed to facilitate a short demonstration

As a consequence: Drawing conclusions as to how quickly things happen, how easy things appear, and/or the relative balance of party members and abilities makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But by all means, continue to do so. After all, it's the tradition around here.

Ten pages.  

Ten.

Pages.

Why would anyone (who didn't attend PAX etc) be expected to know any of this .... ?

But, I find what developers choose to show of their game really interesting and how that influences perception.

[Allan Schumacher]

Rawgrim wrote...

Pseudocognition wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Aragorn
has special blood. He is also a ranger. Its plausible that he has more
stamina than normal humans. He is also in his 80s in the movies. big
hint there too.

going by that "she has seeker training" should be sufficient explanation for gate-smashing strength.

Then why do the seekers have catapults?

I think it's clear at this point it's exclusively to frustrate you.

Seriously, I will simply conclude you as being obstinate if you cannot POSSIBLY come up with reason for this.  Which is wholly uninteresting and certainly not worthy of me wasting any more of my time.  Definitively, I feel there is no point in answering because there's no point as nothing will convince you and I'm just getting angry.


I'm of the opinion that games are about developers and players meeting somewhere in the middle in terms of suspending disbelief and allowing the players to have fun.  Evidently, this will be something that you won't like, so hopefully other parts of the game will still be enjoyable for you.  Sorry.


EDIT: Doubly so after the excuses you make for different settings.  Literally, seething, now...

At this point it's probably safest to simply say:  it exists like this because we have differing requirements for attempting to enable players to have fun with their characters and to do exceptional things in their playthroughs, and how mandated it must be for the lore to be flawlessly consistent.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 novembre 2013 - 06:00 .

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Firky wrote...

Why would anyone (who didn't attend PAX etc) be expected to know any of this .... ?

I think the point is more that those who did not attend PAX should acknowledge there is context that they are missing.

[thats1evildude]

Cassandra is a Pentaghast. "Special blood" requirement met.