This is what Skyrim has done to people..
Never thought I'd see the day where people actually want level scaling.
what features the make level grinding unneeded are bad now?
oh and it got nothing to do with skyrim got a lot more hours on da: o then skyrim.
DA :i is not difficult. It won't be. You have a party of 4 members who you can control and direct to fight in battle.
You want difficulty in today's games ? Go Dark Souls.
what features the make level grinding unneeded are bad now?
oh and it got nothing to do with skyrim got a lot more hours on da: o then skyrim.
Exactly. I for one welcome these changes to DA combat.
It is high time gamers start using their brains to think and strategize instead of "RAWR...I am going to zerg rush into a fight with all arms swinging !". Plus, no level scaling makes the game more realistic. Enemies won't just go up and level out of nowhere just because you level up. Wolves will be wolves. Bandits will be bandits and dragons will be dragons. They won't think "Damn, the Inquisition is levelling up so we have to level up too !"
I get that some people want a challenge in their games, but why do you take issue when people want the 'casual' setting to be easy? Isn't that what it's there for? You will still have your hard and nightmare modes...
Personally, I was a bit worried about the no health regen after combat because I'm a very cautious player, a little OCD, and my hand-to-eye coordination has never been very good. If I survived a battle but my health was cut down to 20% and I would have to backtrack to camp (my gameplay style is kind off like a hoarder and it's only recently that I've started using health potions at all) so I'd be able to survive the next encounter. The Devs have said that one of the reasons for no health regen is that it is supposed to make us think of the adventure not just the encounter, but for me it doesn't do that. In fact, it does the opposite: it makes me obsess about the encounters and forget the adventure. Because of this I was worried, but then I thought about ME3, it had a very similar health regen with a limited set of health potions (though in the ME world you have the advantage of cover and not having to individually heal every member of the party). That made me a lot less worried.
I get that people want a challenge (I do too) but there is a difference between challenging and frustrating for me. There's a fine line between challenging and frustrating. If I die three times in a boss encounter, that's fine and I'll try again later. If I start dying too much though, it isn't challenging to me - it's just frustrating. Even if I beat the boss eventually, once I've passed that frustration level I don't feel accomplished beating it.
That's why I like the difficulty settings. It let's the player decide just how challenging they want their game to be. I'll never want to play a game on nightmare or insanity but I don't begrudge other players that level and argue that these modes should be removed (the way some people seem like they want 'casual' removed). It doesn't change my game if other people can play on ultra-super-hard settings, just like it doesn't change the game of the people playing nightmare/insanity if I play on normal. People that happen to have the skill and time to find Nightmare mode easy should be lobbying for these to be made harder, not for casual mode to be made harder.
Exactly. I for one welcome these changes to DA combat.
It is high time gamers start using their brains to think and strategize instead of "RAWR...I am going to zerg rush into a fight with all arms swinging !". Plus, no level scaling makes the game more realistic. Enemies won't just go up and level out of nowhere just because you level up. Wolves will be wolves. Bandits will be bandits and dragons will be dragons. They won't think "Damn, the Inquisition is levelling up so we have to level up too !"
yeah, I have bad news, that not what no level scaling means... it mean player will spend 10 hours killling the lower level creature so they can steam roll over the higher level one.
encounter design, something I think alot of people forget existed, not that it was ever really a that complex, is what "forces" a player to strategize.
the reason I prefer level scaling is because it removes that. a strong enemy will be a strong enemy and you don't have to worry about "am I the right level for this or should I be looking for a side quest I missed" just go though the encounter.
p.s. to remind every one you can't force a player to think, that is a myth old school gamers and elitist spread to justify the fact alot of old game had terrible level design and no Anti-Frustration Features, as they hadn't been invented yet. I know this cause as much as it may surprise some I am a old school gamer.
Guest_Fandango_*
Yep, it seems like a lot of the concerns about this perceived ramp up in difficulty for Inquisition are actually concerns about encounter design. That's understandable I guess, but it's probably worth mentioning that level scaling is a design choice that can actually enable players to better manage the threats that face their party. I mean, if players want to avoid challenging encounters with 'aspirational' enemies like Dragons, all they have to do is scarper when they see one! At least until such time as they feel comfortable taking one on, right?
In any case, I'm right behind - what i understand to be - the encounter design decisions for Inquisition and would remind those people who want nothing more than to breeze through each and every combat encounter on casual, that not everyone who plays games on 'easy' feels the same way.
umm, actually I'm fairly that exactly what easy/casual is for.... well that and people who are too terrible or new at the game to handle the higher difficultys . other wise whats the point of hard and nightmare, or normal which is generally described as for people who want a mild challenge.
Guest_Fandango_*
umm, actually I'm fairly that exactly what easy/casual is for.... well that and people who are too terrible or new at the game to handle the higher difficultys . other wise whats the point of hard and nightmare, or normal which is generally described as for people who want a mild challenge.
Exactly. I for one welcome these changes to DA combat.
It is high time gamers start using their brains to think and strategize instead of "RAWR...I am going to zerg rush into a fight with all arms swinging !". Plus, no level scaling makes the game more realistic. Enemies won't just go up and level out of nowhere just because you level up. Wolves will be wolves. Bandits will be bandits and dragons will be dragons. They won't think "Damn, the Inquisition is levelling up so we have to level up too !"
Making Bilbo go back to the Misty Mountains to grind goblins so he can rescue his friends from the spiders, because Mirkwood is a higher level area, doesn't make things more realistic to me.
Levelling is unrealistic. Level scaling makes the world more coherent by effectively removing levelling as a plot element.
And going by every other game I can thing of, there's always going to be some sort of de facto level scaling. It'll just be a case of giving enemies in areas the player is expected to arrive in later an arbitrary 10 level bump or something similar - which means that your supposed epic hero who has triumphed over mighty enemies will end up getting splattered by Joe Random Bandit if they step off the intended route.
Why do people who consider themselves 'casual' always get so defensive towards players who prefer a challenge? Before anyone has even said lolL2Pnoob they are throwing their flameshields up.
I personally don't get the mindset that games these days are too difficult. Most of them play themselves. Even that is too much for most people, as a vast majority of players never finish games like DA/ME/Fallout because... well who knows.
What devs need to do is learn to appease casuals without undermining those who prefer a more in-depth roleplaying/challenging combat experience. Just look at ME3's "insanity" difficulty. Insanely easy maybe.
It is high time gamers start using their brains to think and strategize instead of "RAWR...I am going to zerg rush into a fight with all arms swinging !". Plus, no level scaling makes the game more realistic. Enemies won't just go up and level out of nowhere just because you level up. Wolves will be wolves. Bandits will be bandits and dragons will be dragons. They won't think "Damn, the Inquisition is levelling up so we have to level up too !"
RPG combat has never been about actually using your brain in combat. It's been about using your brain in designing builds, which turns combat into a joke.
DA:O/DA2 on nightmare aren't challenging because of encounter design (except for Corypheus, and that's because the pathfinding is horrible). They're challenging (or a total joke) depending on whether you have the right build or not. The same with BG2, and IWD1-2, and even action-RPGs like Dark Souls, though that has a high level of player skill. But a good build is the difference between absolutely pathetic failure and frustration and a good fighting chance in DS.
Making Bilbo go back to the Misty Mountains to grind goblins so he can rescue his friends from the spiders, because Mirkwood is a higher level area, doesn't make things more realistic to me.
Levelling is unrealistic. Level scaling makes the world more coherent by effectively removing levelling as a plot element.
I have found that, as I have less and less time to game, the last thing that I want out of a game is the requirement that I spend hours of my life grinding in order to reach a high enough level to move onto the "next area" in a game. I used to have a ton of patience for that. Games like Dragon Warrior and Ultima and Phantasy Star all used this mechanism and it never bothered me. Now that I'm lucky if I can squeeze in 3-4 hours/week gaming, I don't want to spend half of that time walking in a circle and battling random enemies with no plot or story connection just so that I can move on. Grinding, to me, feels like a cheap mechanism to prolong gameplay hours at an incredibly superficial and meaningless level.
I have found that, as I have less and less time to game, the last thing that I want out of a game is the requirement that I spend hours of my life grinding in order to reach a high enough level to move onto the "next area" in a game. I used to have a ton of patience for that. Games like Dragon Warrior and Ultima and Phantasy Star all used this mechanism and it never bothered me. Now that I'm lucky if I can squeeze in 3-4 hours/week gaming, I don't want to spend half of that time walking in a circle and battling random enemies with no plot or story connection just so that I can move on. Grinding, to me, feels like a cheap mechanism to prolong gameplay hours at an incredibly superficial and meaningless level.
People are having an issue separating "Grinding" from organic walling. If enemies are too powerful for you in a certain area, it's probably because you don't belong there yet. You can either A) Grind to access it early, or 
Go someplace else for the moment.
And going by every other game I can thing of, there's always going to be some sort of de facto level scaling. It'll just be a case of giving enemies in areas the player is expected to arrive in later an arbitrary 10 level bump or something similar - which means that your supposed epic hero who has triumphed over mighty enemies will end up getting splattered by Joe Random Bandit if they step off the intended route.
Guest_Fandango_*
People are having an issue separating "Grinding" from organic walling. If enemies are too powerful for you in a certain area, it's probably because you don't belong there yet. You can either A) Grind to access it early, or
Right. Those ankhegs meant that your level 2 characters should be heading to Nashkel, where they belonged.
Though I absolutely love the Elder Scrolls games, Oblivion and Skyrim's level scaling created a certain entitlement mentality that the world revolves around the player. Which from a design perspective makes sense, but if your goal is to be a world-build and have the player inhabit the realm, it hardly makes sense. The safety net of "I'll never encounter an enemy too powerful" takes something away from exploration if you ask me. It's certainly less pronounced in Skyrim (Since you can run into Dragon Priests at level 1), but the world is still heavily stacked in the Player's favor. Mind you this comes from someone who only plays on Master -> Legendary (When it was patched in)
Compared to the first widely recognized ES game, Morrowind, though it had scaling, every NPC in the game was a unique entity with a pre-defined skill set. This somewhat accidently made exploring refreshingly dangerous. You didn't know if you'd run into a level 2 skooma addict, or a Master Battlemage in full Ebony until weapons were drawn. It gave the illusion that the World existed before you character, with people who have clearly mastered their trade when you were still figuring the whole WASD thing out.
I like the idea of having the option to grind if I find a specific part to difficult at least. That being said the idea of grinding in a series where you would typically only get to around level 25 in a given play through seems weird.
I would highly recommend the folks in this thread watch this Extra Credits episode. It touches on "difficult games versus punishing games." It's related to much of what has come up.
True dat. Anyone else remember going north from the Friendly Arm and running into ankhegs at level 2?
That's an example I don't find too bad, actually. At least Ankhegs are legitimately tough, and the PC is supposed to be distinctly noobish at the time, even if Khalid and Jaheira aren't. I mean, I don't think it enhances realism all that much, since the PC will turn into a steamroller of death in a few weeks, but it's at least got some logic going on there.
The worst I've encountered is in MMOs, like SW:tOR. I mean, here I am, a Jedi Master and defeater of a fair few dark lords, yet if I let my level drop too far behind where they're supposed to be or stray into the wrong area some random street tough will obliterate me in a few seconds.
Compared to the first widely recognized ES game, Morrowind, though it had scaling, every NPC in the game was a unique entity with a pre-defined skill set. This somewhat accidently made exploring refreshingly dangerous. You didn't know if you'd run into a level 2 skooma addict, or a Master Battlemage in full Ebony until weapons were drawn. It gave the illusion that the World existed before you character, with people who have clearly mastered their trade when you were still figuring the whole WASD thing out.
Right. Morrowind had one scaling problem -- common thugs with glass armor and high levels in the endgame -- but it avoided the problem of supposedly powerful characters turning out to be weak in the overall scheme of things.
If you could exploit your way around one of those tough enemies, of course, you'd get some great stuff early. But I'm firmly in the camp saying that TES games are there to be exploited.
Though I absolutely love the Elder Scrolls games, Oblivion and Skyrim's level scaling created a certain entitlement mentality that the world revolves around the player. Which from a design perspective makes sense, but if your goal is to be a world-build and have the player inhabit the realm, it hardly makes sense. The safety net of "I'll never encounter an enemy too powerful" takes something away from exploration if you ask me. It's certainly less pronounced in Skyrim (Since you can run into Dragon Priests at level 1), but the world is still heavily stacked in the Player's favor. Mind you this comes from someone who only plays on Master -> Legendary (When it was patched in)
Compared to the first widely recognized ES game, Morrowind, though it had scaling, every NPC in the game was a unique entity with a pre-defined skill set. This somewhat accidently made exploring refreshingly dangerous. You didn't know if you'd run into a level 2 skooma addict, or a Master Battlemage in full Ebony until weapons were drawn. It gave the illusion that the World existed before you character, with people who have clearly mastered their trade when you were still figuring the whole WASD thing out.
There are two wholly separate issues here: the verisimilitude of the world and the challenges in an RPG. I dislike level scaling because it punishes leveling - it basically forces you to wholesale replace gear, items, etc. every single level or risk falling behind the power-curve. Like in DA2, level-up makes you worse at dodging unless you dump points into cunning. That's bad. But I completely disagree with you that the absence of level scaling makes it feel like there's a world beside the player.
The player, firstly, goes from pushover garbage to demi-god of death. The player - and companions - are the only people in the world who, in less than a few months, go from being threatened by particularly angry cats to (sometimes) literally killing actual gods. But no one else in the world is on any such power-curve. So that hurts the world. Secondly, if the developers don't use the proper epic-scale of enemies as gating encounters, we just wind up with the guards in area E being so OP that they could enslave everything and everyone in areas A-D.
Heres' the thing with "free" exploration without level scaling - it's not actually free. You're pretty much on rails, except the rails are OP enemies in the form of a gating encounter.
Retour en haut