328 réponses à ce sujet

[fchopin]

Fortunately, by implementing different difficulties, Bioware has already made a statement that any competition you feel is strictly between you and others who agree to play under specific constraints and with a level playing field. So, please, play as you want and compete with your friends about who beats the Harvester in the shortest possible time. But leave us others out of it.

I don’t think anyone cares what difficulty people play in SP but people do care that they get the rewards intended for their difficulty depending how Bioware creates combat.

[Ieldra]

Lol, kheldorin. You are up **** creek without a paddle in this discussion. Just let it go. I sympathise with your thoughts, but BioWare has adopted a design mindset that is contrary to what you are talking about. If gameplay as a concept is wholly separated from narrative and literally peddled to the player as busy work in-between the meat of the game, then it doesn't really matter.

 

I don't like such a mindset when it comes to designing RPGs, because I am a sucker for story/gameplay integration. But not everyone shares that view, and you are going to get bombarded with "BUT IT'S MY GAME, I SHOULD PLAY HOW I WANT" type posts the more you try and argue for difficulty in a game that was intentionally designed to emphasise the importance of narrative, de-emphasise the importance of gameplay, then seek to separate them into different corners.

 

Basically, if narrative and gameplay have little to do with one another, and the main draw for players is narrative, there is little grounding to argue for more complex or difficult gameplay, since it doesn't serve the main purpose of the game. 

 

Roll with the punches and get Project Eternity. 

 

Not to mention, difficulty levels are basically a slider for hp/damage values (another thing I hate). Adding one at the bottom wouldn't be that big of a deal. The only question I have is one of necessity, but if people want it and literally struggle on casual as-is, meh. BioWare wants accessibility.

Actually, I'm not for gameplay/story segregation. Read my long post upthread, I said I would like the narratively significant elements to get more prominence, including those (usually few) fights which have narrative significance. I would not want to skip those, and would actually mind if they were completely. However, they should be doable under any reasonable conditions, including being playable by players who have difficulties with hand/eye coordination and including selecting the worst possible combination of companions. That's what the proposed super-easy mode was originally about.

[kheldorin]

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.)

You don't have to have a competitive mindset to not condone "cheating". It's a matter of principle.

 

"Each dragon encounter is hand-crafted, and they are designed to kick your ass," Laidlaw said. You don't have to kill dragons, it's optional gameplay, but every time you do you'll get resources and prestige you can use to build up the Inquisition.

Hand-crafted! Developers worked hard on the combat system, enemies and all the other systems that synergize with it like the equipment and crafting system. I've heard they also have some fancy system where the dragon have different vulnerability points. It just seems wrong to bypass all this work when they're already optional. It's like ordering food from a 5-star restaurant and then asking the 5-star chef to dump a load of tomato sauce on it. Sure, it's your food, your money and you're the one eating it. But as another customer, I can't help feel that it's wrong and it has nothing to do with being competitive.

 

"It's designed to kick your ass". That's awesome. As a gamer, it'll be an honour to find a way to defeat it. I realize that some people have different gaming capabilities so having a super-duper easy mode is fine. But having an auto-win combat option for already optional bosses, feels so wrong.

[Bugsie]

You obviously lack comprehension skills if you thought I want to somehow interfere with other peoples games. If people want to play competitive sure go ahead. But this is an RPG with no official Bioware ladder or extra reward system, so you can compare 'achievements' for the single player game. I'm waiting on someone to show me where all this competition within the single player is going on. A few friends swinging their proverbials around doesn't make it a standard feature of the game. Nothing stopping them doing it amongst themselves though.

[Darth Krytie]

You don't have to have a competitive mindset to not condone "cheating". It's a matter of principle.

 

Hand-crafted! Developers worked hard on the combat system, enemies and all the other systems that synergize with it like the equipment and crafting system. I've heard they also have some fancy system where the dragon have different vulnerability points. It just seems wrong to bypass all this work when they're already optional. It's like ordering food from a 5-star restaurant and then asking the 5-star chef to dump a load of tomato sauce on it. Sure, it's your food, your money and you're the one eating it. But as another customer, I can't help feel that it's wrong and it has nothing to do with being competitive.

 

"It's designed to kick your ass". That's awesome. As a gamer, it'll be an honour to find a way to defeat it. I realize that some people have different gaming capabilities so having a super-duper easy mode is fine. But having an auto-win combat option for already optional bosses, feels so wrong.

 

 

I still am stuck on the: I don't care because it's not my problem thing. If some guy wants to eat his tomato sauce foie gras, let him. I could not possibly care less about it.

 

If you don't like it, don't do it. Simple as that. If they offer an option around it, which many PC modders already use for multiple games as we speak, let them and never spend another second worrying about it.

[Ieldra]

I don’t think anyone cares what difficulty people play in SP but people do care that they get the rewards intended for their difficulty depending how Bioware creates combat.

I don't think about the in-game equipment in terms of effort and reward. Not in a SP game. Why? Because I don't need the awesome superweapon to win. I think about it as part of the story. If I get the weapon, it may (or may not) become a part of the story. If I make a playthrough where I need it in order to shape the story as I want it, I'd cheat if necessary to get it, if I don't need it and feel the fight isn't worth it, I leave it in the belly of the dragon with no regrets. Example: in DAO, I frequently don't kill the high dragon because it's part of the story I want to create that the dragon continues to exist to prevent people from accessing the place where I found the Sacred Ashes. I don't get the dragon hide for the armor. Well, who cares....

[TTTX]

You don't have to have a competitive mindset to not condone "cheating". It's a matter of principle.

 

Hand-crafted! Developers worked hard on the combat system, enemies and all the other systems that synergize with it like the equipment and crafting system. I've heard they also have some fancy system where the dragon have different vulnerability points. It just seems wrong to bypass all this work when they're already optional. It's like ordering food from a 5-star restaurant and then asking the 5-star chef to dump a load of tomato sauce on it. Sure, it's your food, your money and you're the one eating it. But as another customer, I can't help feel that it's wrong and it has nothing to do with being competitive.

 

"It's designed to kick your ass". That's awesome. As a gamer, it'll be an honour to find a way to defeat it. I realize that some people have different gaming capabilities so having a super-duper easy mode is fine. But having an auto-win combat option for already optional bosses, feels so wrong.

Oh brother, how other people play their singleplayer experience doesn't effect you, so give it rest already.

[Ieldra]

"It's designed to kick your ass". That's awesome. As a gamer, it'll be an honour to find a way to defeat it. I realize that some people have different gaming capabilities so having a super-duper easy mode is fine. But having an auto-win combat option for already optional bosses, feels so wrong.

OK. Fair enough. Please note I haven't asked for an auto-win option, only for a super-easy mode. Please also note that I will make a point to try those dragon fights on the standard difficulty at least, and that I'm the kind of player who has installed a Skyrim mod that makes its pathetic dragons about 10 times harder. As I said in my other posts, I do know how much satisfaction can be derived from completing a difficult gameplay challenge. Only with equal passion I feel that exclusively story-oriented players should not be forced into the same mindset. 

 

The satisfaction of having fought DAI's special dragon encounters - should I manage to complete them - is strictly my own pleasure, and that of people who feel likewise, and I don't need an in-game reward, having done it and knowing it's something designed to be special is quite enough. Getting an achievement unlocked would be nice, but otherweise if the other player gets the same "reward" with much less effort, it doesn't matter. If anything, its his loss. If he doesn't see it as a loss, that's also ok. Different mindsets. Accept them.

[fchopin]

I don't think about the in-game equipment in terms of effort and reward. Not in a SP game. Why? Because I don't need the awesome superweapon to win. I think about it as part of the story. If I get the weapon, it may (or may not) become a part of the story. If I make a playthrough where I need it in order to shape the story as I want it, I'd cheat if necessary to get it, if I don't need it and feel the fight isn't worth it, I leave it in the belly of the dragon with no regrets. Example: in DAO, I frequently don't kill the high dragon because it's part of the story I want to create that the dragon continues to exist to prevent people from accessing the place where I found the Sacred Ashes. I don't get the dragon hide for the armor. Well, who cares....

If you play the game on very easy then you don’t need most of the weapons but if you play the game on hard then you do need the good weapons and also experience so you can get through the game.
In TW2 you can get good weapons depending on the difficulty the gamers plays and they are in the game to make it easier for the gamer if they wish to get them.

What you are saying is you don’t want anyone else to get weapons or experience or anything else that very east difficulty cannot get as it is not fair on you and i cannot agree with this.

[Bugsie]

If you don't like it, don't do it. Simple as that. If they offer an option around it, which many PC modders already use for multiple games as we speak, let them and never spend another second worrying about it.

Woah woah you're asking far too much. We can't have people ignoring a feature that doesn't affect them, or their gameplay, that they'll likely never use and if the DAO and DA2 systems for rewards remain the same will continue to ignore the level of difficulty that they play.

Outrageous.

[Ieldra]

If you play the game on very easy then you don’t need most of the weapons but if you play the game on hard then you do need the good weapons and also experience so you can get through the game.
In TW2 you can get good weapons depending on the difficulty the gamers plays and they are in the game to make it easier for the gamer if they wish to get them.

What you are saying is you don’t want anyone else to get weapons or experience or anything else that very east difficulty cannot get as it is not fair on you and i cannot agree with this.

Actually, I wouldn't mind too much if I couldn't get every single weapon, since weapons are rarely narratively signficant and if I want to make them so, I can as easily use one that's easier to get. But consider if you could only get Morrigan's ring if you fought Flemeth on Hard or higher in DAO. That would bug me immensely, and yes, in that case I would argue this should be possible for anyone to get regardless of their player's skill in rpg combat. I also take the role-playing seriously: ideally it should be your character's skills that win the battle, not yours. That doesn't work so well in a video game, but I think that yes, the game should adjust for different levels of player skill with no change in the possible outcomes. Difficult "bonus" bosses are called bonus bosses because they and the equipment they're carrying are not narratively significant. Those are the only ones where I'd accept a difficulty-driven in-game reward system. 

[fchopin]

I also take the role-playing seriously: ideally it should be your character's skills that win the battle, not yours.

Yes but my characters skills depend how i build my character up and how i use my character.
It also depends on levelling and in DAI levelling will be very important.
I am a thinker and role playing is very important to me but combat is also important as you will need to be a fighter to complete the game. I want to strive in the game and don’t want things handed to me so i consider combat very, very, and very important and also romance i consider important as i don’t want girls wanting to bed me with the first hi from the Inquisitor.

So Bioware can do what they like as long as they do not mess up the normal difficulty levels.

[Bugsie]

Whilst I can see the arguments for rewards on higher difficulty settings if the game was structured that way. But it isn't. It never has been and unless Bioware change this will likely only ever be part of multiplayer versions of their games. My interest in having available a super easy narrative setting may be a selfish one, as I may need it at some point in the future (not yet fortunately) but it will likely benefit many others too, at no detriment to others who wish to play on harder levels of the single player game. Why should I stop playing a series of games by a developer I like because I am no longer capable of combat due to failing dexterity? 'Because you shouldn't be rewarded for skipping combat' is an irrelevant argument in a story driven single player game that currently already operates on different difficulties, doesn't restrict rewards based on that difficulty and has the narrative level gameplay as optional.

This is a great feature for the physically limited, or like me, may be in the future. Or even if you are none of these and simple want a run through of the game to examine the story in more detail.

[fchopin]

Whilst I can see the arguments for rewards on higher difficulty settings if the game was structured that way. But it isn't.

You do not know this as there is no level scaling in DAI according to what BioWare said unless they change their mind so this changes how they made combat the last few years.

As I said I have no problem with very easy mode and hope BioWare does it.

[Ieldra]

So Bioware can do what they like as long as they do not mess up the normal difficulty levels.

Nobody here has suggested anything to change the existing settings. At least not that I'm aware of.

 

@Bugsie:

There are, in fact, difficulty-dependent rewards in DAO's "Golems of Amgarrak" DLC. If you defeat the Harvester at Hard or higher, you'll get the Grim Reaper achievement and a more powerful variant of the Reaper's Cudgel appears in all your other games. IIRC, there was also a weapon you couldn't get in one of the ME games unless you played on Hardcore or higher. Rare occurrences though, and definitely narratively insignificant and not in any way necessary for any outcome.

[Bugsie]

You do not know this as there is no level scaling in DAI according to what BioWare said unless they change their mind so this changes how they made combat the last few years.As I said I have no problem with very easy mode and hope BioWare does it.

I guess we'll have to wait and see. I doubt they'll mess with difficulty settings. As for rewards, I'm not convinced they'll start handing out trophies for playing on harder difficulty levels, but I could be wrong.

[kheldorin]

I also take the role-playing seriously: ideally it should be your character's skills that win the battle, not yours.

That's more Bethesda than Bioware. Bioware's combat has always been way more strategic than Bethesda's which is more about role-playing. Baldur's Gate, X-Com. These games are more in the spirit of Bioware's games.

 

In Bioware games, bosses are special because they require specific strategies to beat them and it is player skill to recognize what that strategy is. That's why they're "hand-crafted". The game designers are giving you a puzzle and you have to use the appropriate game mechanics to solve it. The satisfaction doesn't come from the difficulty but from learning new game mechanics. You may have ignored runes from the past but a specific boss may encourage you to experiment with runes. You may not know that enemies have weak points but a boss may teach you that. When you defeat a boss, it's basically the game designer confirming that you've learned or mastered a new game mechanic. Combat is the vehicle in which they encourage the player to explore and try out different game mechanics. You shouldn't be able to defeat the boss just because your character have powerful stats. People will complain that boss fights and too "video gamey" and unrealistic but that has always been Bioware's philosophy and I hope they don't change that.

[Ieldra]

That was a side issue, kheldorin. What followed was the core of the matter:
 

"That doesn't work so well in a video game, but I think that yes, the game should adjust for different levels of player skill with no change in the possible outcomes. Difficult "bonus" bosses are called bonus bosses because they and the equipment they're carrying are not narratively significant. Those are the only ones where I'd accept a difficulty-driven in-game reward system."

[Milan92]

I'm personally fine with Easy, but I'm happy to support this for those that want it

[jtav]

I have legitimate difficulty with DAO's combat on some playthroughs, even on Easy. To the point where I just don't want to play the game because I make plot and party decisions based on whether I can afford to lose Wynne or Morrigan. Since DAI is supposedly more tactical, I want a narrative mode so I can actually RP the RPG.

[Rosey]

Okay, breath guys. Breath.

 

First, I don't believe people are asking for a setting below the already established Casual. What they're asking for is for the casual setting to BE a Narative type setting, where combat is a mostly non-issue. And honestly it really is already. At least for DA2.

 

And there's nothing wrong with that. Because not everyone has the physical ability, the time, or the drive to want to play in the more challanging modes. Having this less-then-normal mode, something that's already been established in several of Bioware's games, detracts from nothing. They aren't going to suddenly stop creating nightmare mode because they now have a mode with the AI and health of monsters turned down.

 

It also isn't a resorce hog some folks might claim it to be. Tuning down the AI and the health % is by far LESS difficult then tuning them UP. Because tuning them UP in the more difficult modes requires extra work to make sure player spells, abilities, and weapons ballance out to meet the challange. Tuning the difficulty down to Casual or Narative does not require them to retool gear, spells, or area effects.  It just takes tuning down the AI and health pools of monsters. Leaving abilties and spells at normal levels and tuning down monster AI -- or even leaving monster AI and healthpools the same and throwing a 5% modifyer on all abilities.

 

And let's not forget what we already know about how the game will work.

 

From what we've been told up until this point, most combat encounters that happen outside the main story are almost all optional. Sure some may effect what happens DURRING the story (Aka: Leaving the high dragon in the zone where your keep and towns may be might be a bad thing) but the random roving pack of wolves probably aren't going to cause to much of an issue if you chose not to engage them. Of course not engaging them may reduce your amount of mats for armorcrafting... but that's on the player, and not really a detraction of the story what so ever.

 

So from what we already know, gameplay is already different then it has been up till this point. There will be "scripted" combat that is story-linked, and "non-scripted" combat that is optional. So at the very best all some folks are asking is IF there are difficulty sliders/settings, that the non-optional "Scrpited" story combat have a level that you can choose to make it be less difficult so that it doesn't feel like a slog to them. That it doesn't detract from the story. Any optional combat outside of the story is optional and if they chose not to do it, that's something that they themselves have to deal with (via the concequences of leaving a high dragon to roam or not having those shiny nug pelts for their boots)

 

All in all, I have no issues with folks who can't or don't play in the higher difficulties. When I play the higher difficulties, I feel challanged. And I enjoy that. But I'm not other people, and I have no right to force them to play a single player game the same way I would. If they add a Casual/Narative combat level, I'm not hurt by it. It just enables folks -- like my disabled brother -- to enjoy the world I've fallen in love with. And being able to share the overall experience with him and others like him is a good thing, not a bad one.

[Ryzaki]

I have legitimate difficulty with DAO's combat on some playthroughs, even on Easy. To the point where I just don't want to play the game because I make plot and party decisions based on whether I can afford to lose Wynne or Morrigan. Since DAI is supposedly more tactical, I want a narrative mode so I can actually RP the RPG.

 

 

Don't you play on PC jtav? I have a few LOL weapon mods I could direct you towards if you're interested.

 

That's what I usually do. Oddly ME3 wasn't an issue for me because lol biotic explosions. I had difficulty in 2 but I just abused the hell out of tactical cloak. (Though I hate the first part in Citadel. I have to change my adept to a infiltrator to get through that first section.)

[Bugsie]

Nobody here has suggested anything to change the existing settings. At least not that I'm aware of.
 
@Bugsie:
There are, in fact, difficulty-dependent rewards in DAO's "Golems of Amgarrak" DLC. If you defeat the Harvester at Hard or higher, you'll get the Grim Reaper achievement and a more powerful variant of the Reaper's Cudgel appears in all your other games. IIRC, there was also a weapon you couldn't get in one of the ME games unless you played on Hardcore or higher. Rare occurrences though, and definitely narratively insignificant and not in any way necessary for any outcome.

I was unaware of that Ieldra, as I haven't played that DLC (even if I did I would still likely not have noticed!). And I haven't played an ME game on the highest difficulty setting as yet. I can see rewards being offered for DLC gameplay because that is also optional content, but I don't play games these kinds of games for achievements, although I appreciate others do, the fact they got that achievement in their own sp game, isn't really important to me or probably a lot of other people for that matter.

I guess what irks me most about the bite back on this sort of request is the underlying current of 'those who prefer playing on lower difficulty settings aren't real gamers, come at me bro I'll show you a real gamer' and the notion that developers are playing to some sort of lowest common denominator by allowing a feature such as narrative gameplay. Also that we don't 'deserve' things when the majority of rewards (with the exceptions you've mentioned) aren't even difficulty dependent. Here I was thinking they're actually trying to support and encourage accessible gameplay for everyone at no expense to so called 'reeeel gamerz'.

[Sylvius the Mad]

That's more Bethesda than Bioware. Bioware's combat has always been way more strategic than Bethesda's which is more about role-playing.

Except that Bethesda's games use real-time action combat.  That's all about player skill.

[AlanC9]

In Bioware games, bosses are special because they require specific strategies to beat them and it is player skill to recognize what that strategy is. That's why they're "hand-crafted". The game designers are giving you a puzzle and you have to use the appropriate game mechanics to solve it. The satisfaction doesn't come from the difficulty but from learning new game mechanics. You may have ignored runes from the past but a specific boss may encourage you to experiment with runes. You may not know that enemies have weak points but a boss may teach you that. When you defeat a boss, it's basically the game designer confirming that you've learned or mastered a new game mechanic. Combat is the vehicle in which they encourage the player to explore and try out different game mechanics. You shouldn't be able to defeat the boss just because your character have powerful stats. People will complain that boss fights and too "video gamey" and unrealistic but that has always been Bioware's philosophy and I hope they don't change that.

 

Wait, what? The only thing I learned from the Arishok fight is that DA2 is actually an action game where you win the fight by manually dodging his attacks and watching his animations. Or is that the game mechanic that the fight was supposed to teach me? Ancient Rock Wraith too, come to think of it.