328 réponses à ce sujet

[Divine Justinia V]

Why does it matter, as long as you're not using it? Shut the hell up and play how you want to play. Jesus. That's my biggest problem with people, especially with DA. Why do you care if there's a certain game mode that you don't particularly like? No one's forcing it on you, no one's taking away the option you prefer.

[kheldorin]

How someone else plays cheapens the experience for you? That sounds a bit... well... silly. Given also that the 'rewards' in Bioware games aren't even combat dependent. Who cares how others play their game or what difficulty, or by what means they get an achievement? I sure as hell don't care. By the same argument you could say those who played at easy difficulty in DAO or DA2 didn't deserve the same ending as those who played at higher levels. What difficulty you play at is irrelevant to how the story generally plays out. If it were combat dependent and only on higher difficulties I doubt it would have the kind of fan base that it does.

Oh and that high dragon in DA2 #%^*\ you! LOL

The loot is combat dependant. If you didn't beat the high dragon and skipped the combat, you shouldn't be able to loot him and the game should not acknowledge that you killed the dragon. The dragon is a bonus. It is not a requirement for you to complete the story.

 

Of course it matters how you get the achievement. Atheletes will be pissed if someone could get the same gold medal they got for winning an olympic sport just by paying $10 for it.

[Bugsie]

No it doesn't matter to me.

Why are you worried about it not mattering to me?

More strawman arguments. Games aren't athletics.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

This really highlights the dilemma in BioWare games, that the cinematic storytelling is the point of the game, and that the character system is designed around the notion that virtually all of the gameplay is merely filler to pad out game length.

As for the topic, meh. I don't see the problem, but in DA 2, the game almost played itself on casual. Not sure there is a real need for it.

[Darth Krytie]

The loot is combat dependant. If you didn't beat the high dragon and skipped the combat, you shouldn't be able to loot him and the game should not acknowledge that you killed the dragon. The dragon is a bonus. It is not a requirement for you to complete the story.

 

Of course it matters how you get the achievement. Atheletes will be pissed if someone could get the same gold medal they got for winning an olympic sport just by paying $10 for it.

 

Well, if the Olympics were a single player experience, then that argument would be relevant. They are not.

[Ieldra]

@kheldorin:

Yet again you are approaching the game as a competition where you compare your achievements with others (you put the finger on it with your analogy). Given that (1) this is a story for you to shape, with no character being quite like the other's, and (2) that there are difficulty settings at all, this is an inappropriate mindset towards a typical Bioware game.

[Bugsie]

This really highlights the dilemma in BioWare games, that the cinematic storytelling is the point of the game, and that the character system is designed around the notion that virtually all of the gameplay is merely filler to pad out game length.

As for the topic, meh. I don't see the problem, but in DA 2, the game almost played itself on casual. Not sure there is a real need for it.

That's how I've always seen it. The gameplay to me is enjoyable diversion, or a frustrating mess (it teeters between the two) and I enjoy the challenge. But ultimately I play for the story and characters. If I was more interested in achievements or rewards based on level difficulty I'd play multiplayer or a different game. How someone plays a sp game is irrelevant to my own enjoyment, dislike or whatever I feel about it.

But that high dragon! I tried so many times, even on easy. Blergh.

[kheldorin]

Why does it matter, as long as you're not using it? Shut the hell up and play how you want to play. Jesus. That's my biggest problem with people, especially with DA. Why do you care if there's a certain game mode that you don't particularly like? No one's forcing it on you, no one's taking away the option you prefer.

Because it ruins the whole point of bonus and optional bosses. You're already given the option to not fight it. Why push it further and demand that you get to kill it without actually fighting it?

[TTTX]

Personally how other people play their game is their business is fine by me as long as it's not illegal or ruin a mulitiplayer experience for someone else.

 

Why should I care how some other gamer earn something, when it's not me playing or use mods?

 

 

This really highlights the dilemma in BioWare games, that the cinematic storytelling is the point of the game, and that the character system is designed around the notion that virtually all of the gameplay is merely filler to pad out game length.

As for the topic, meh. I don't see the problem, but in DA 2, the game almost played itself on casual. Not sure there is a real need for it.

Indeed when you play on easy it's not easy to die, expect for a few battles that are harder then rest others battles of the game.

[Ieldra]

Because it ruins the whole point of bonus and optional bosses. You're already given the option to not fight it. Why push it further and demand that you get to kill it without actually fighting it?

You already don't have a level playing field by having difficulty settings at all. The concept of effort and reward is already pretty much irrelevant. Also, yet again: this is not a competition.

 

Edit:

And while I'm at it: In DAO you got this weapon for having beaten the Harvester on Hard or Nightmare which sells for 350gold. That was nice, but if I wanted more gold, I could always cheat or mod, so what did it matter? It was symbolic only in the end, and as long as that's the case, my knowledge that I got it legitimately is enough for my satisfaction. It's not as if I could tell how others got it anyway. If the developers designed their games with competition in mind, they'd enforce a level playing field. They didn't. Case closed.

[TTTX]

That's how I've always seen it. The gameplay to me is enjoyable diversion, or a frustrating mess (it teeters between the two) and I enjoy the challenge. But ultimately I play for the story and characters. If I was more interested in achievements or rewards based on level difficulty I'd play multiplayer or a different game. How someone plays a sp game is irrelevant to my own enjoyment, dislike or whatever I feel about it.

But that high dragon! I tried so many times, even on easy. Blergh.

You need a healer, lots of potions and the party has to be mostly warriors in order to win over the high dragon and even then it's a challenge even on easy

[Divine Justinia V]

Because it ruins the whole point of bonus and optional bosses. You're already given the option to not fight it. Why push it further and demand that you get to kill it without actually fighting it?

 

Are you going to be forced to play that? No. So why does it matter? Please, I'm dying to know, seriously, why does it matter if you're not playing in that mode?

Not to mention, I don't think anyone is asking to walk around without killing anything.

[KaiserShep]

Oh and that high dragon in DA2 #%^*\ you! LOL

 

Personally I found the high dragon to be more difficult in DA:O than 2, and that was because the team is much slower to move around, and the dragon in DA:O has those damn magical fireballs that follow you, not to mention that it frequently blows everyone back, and characters take a long enough time to get up that they can get hit by fire again before they're on their feet. The high dragon in DA2 relied on the same tactic as the archdemon: escaping to an elevated position, requiring ranged team members while the minions swarmed you from all directions. ( Apparently, the Rogue's vendetta talent allows you to instantly zip up to that platform, but you have to use it again to get down)

[TTTX]

Because it ruins the whole point of bonus and optional bosses. You're already given the option to not fight it. Why push it further and demand that you get to kill it without actually fighting it?

Why does it matter to you what other people want and do in games when it is singleplayer?

 

How does it ruin your gameplay experience, when no one is forcing you to do the same?

[Mister Gusty]

 

The loot is combat dependant. If you didn't beat the high dragon and skipped the combat, you shouldn't be able to loot him and the game should not acknowledge that you killed the dragon. The dragon is a bonus. It is not a requirement for you to complete the story.

 

Of course it matters how you get the achievement. Atheletes will be pissed if someone could get the same gold medal they got for winning an olympic sport just by paying $10 for it.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that a player who played this "narrative" difficulty would just automatically get all achievements and loot for turning on the game, they would still have to actually kill that dragon for the loot but the difference would be that it is significantly easier to beat the battle, assuming they even bother to fight it, also if there are difficulty achievements like the previous 2 games then the player wouldn't just get the achievement, they would still have to meet the requirements to get it.

 

It cannot cheapen your experience unless you allow it to, it is just a difficulty setting.

[kheldorin]

@kheldorin:

Yet again you are approaching the game as a competition where you compare your achievements with others (you put the finger on it with your analogy). Given that (1) this is a story for you to shape, with no character being quite like the other's, and (2) that there are difficulty settings at all, this is an inappropriate mindset towards a typical Bioware game.

It's not a competitive mindset. It's an acknowledgement  that I figured out how to beat the optional boss that the game designer have painstakingly worked on. Why would you want to be rewarded for something you didn't earn?

[kheldorin]

 

 

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that a player who played this "narrative" difficulty would just automatically get all achievements and loot for turning on the game, they would still have to actually kill that dragon for the loot but the difference would be that it is significantly easier to beat the battle, assuming they even bother to fight it, also if there are difficulty achievements like the previous 2 games then the player wouldn't just get the achievement, they would still have to meet the requirements to get it.

 

It cannot cheapen your experience unless you allow it to, it is just a difficulty setting.

 

Maybe people have misunderstood me as I'm fine with that. I'm just not fine with people using the "narrative skip combat option" on optional bosses.

[Bugsie]

Because it ruins the whole point of bonus and optional bosses. You're already given the option to not fight it. Why push it further and demand that you get to kill it without actually fighting it?

You keep saying it ruins the whole point of bonuses is daft given that you can play against an optional boss and beat it on ALL levels of play that currently exist (the level playing field that Ieldra refers too). If you only got rewards if you beat it on nightmare you would have a point, but that's not the case and Bioware have never done this for any of their games as far as I'm aware. How I or anyone else achieves bonuses should be absolutely irrelevant to you as how you play is irrelevant to me. If you want to look over peoples shoulders and tell them they're playing it wrong, well be prepared for some strong language telling you where to go.

[Divine Justinia V]

Maybe people have misunderstood me as I'm fine with that. I'm just not fine with people using the "narrative skip combat option" on optional bosses.

 

lmfao but WHY?

 

It's none of your business how other people play.

[TTTX]

It's not a competitive mindset. It's an acknowledgement  that I figured out how to beat the optional boss that the game designer have painstakingly worked on. Why would you want to be rewarded for something you didn't earn?

As we say in the real world, "that's life."

 

Some people have to work hard to earn their place in the world, while others pretty much get it handed it to them without much work.

 

So do what we other people deal with it and move on.

[Ieldra]

It's not a competitive mindset. It's an acknowledgement  that I figured out how to beat the optional boss that the game designer have painstakingly worked on. Why would you want to be rewarded for something you didn't earn?

You figured it out, and that the fact that others didn't with no disadvantage matters to you shows that you are in a competitive mindset. For you it's a matter of fairness, of the same rules applying to everyone. Well, first, it shouldn't be, because if the other player cheats his way into this you don't have any disadvantage from it. And second, the same rules do apply: you can also cheat. That you don't is your own pleasure and preference.

 

(Meanwhile, I wouldn't actually insist on a skip combat option for optional bosses. This is a matter of principle: consequent application of the live-and-let-live mentality to SP video gaming. How others play their SP game Should. Not. Matter. To. You. Period.)

[Zazzerka]

This is one of those "it's only an option, how can you oppose an option" kind of arguments. Anyone disagreeing is immediately met with "it only effects me" which is absolutely true, but it makes one wonder what sort of conversation was meant to happen here.

[Mockingword]

It's not a competitive mindset. It's an acknowledgement  that I figured out how to beat the optional boss that the game designer have painstakingly worked on. Why would you want to be rewarded for something you didn't earn?

If all you care about is the bragging rights, then the devs can just give you a 'Trophy' that other players don't get.

[Mister Gusty]

 

Maybe people have misunderstood me as I'm fine with that. I'm just not fine with people using the "narrative skip combat option" on optional bosses.

 

Well considering how the game isn't out yet, we have no real details on how anyone would react to an optional boss or if it would ever be referenced by any npc's,

so I can't really see the problem with a skip combat option for those who don't want to fight, I would think the game would go under the assumption that you just didn't kill the optional boss and you wouldn't receive any loot.

 

Also virtually all loot is combat centered, be it potions or armour or weapons so they couldn't benefit from these items anyway as they wouldn't be fighting anything so the loot becomes a moot point

[TTTX]

This is one of those "it's only an option, how can you oppose an option" kind of arguments. Anyone disagreeing is immediately met with "it only effects me" which is absolutely true, but it makes one wonder what sort of conversation was meant to happen here.

It's the BSN, which says everything really.