82 réponses à ce sujet

[Bond]

DAO warriors had a skill tree for dual wielding.....This is the third game of the franchaise. Bioware is one of the biggest developers out there. They have been making RPG  for 15 years or more. They have their hands on one of the best engines at the moment. They work for one of the biggest companies in the industry and entertainment in general. 




And you are telling me having a dual wielding warrior with a separate tiny skill tree (like DAO) and some good big swords would "take a lot of resources to balance out" and is hard to do....etc..etc...etc ? 

[Hiemoth]

DAO warriors had a skill tree for dual wielding.....This is the third game of the franchaise. Bioware is one of the biggest developers out there. They have been making RPG  for 15 years or more. They have their hands on one of the best engines at the moment. They work for one of the biggest companies in the industry and entertainment in general. 




And you are telling me having a dual wielding warrior with a separate tiny skill tree (like DAO) and some good big swords would "take a lot of resources to balance out" and is hard to do....etc..etc...etc ? 

 

DAO warriors had the exactly same skill tree for two handed warriors than the rogues did, so I am not exactly certain what your counter-argument there was. Also, they are apparently going with skill trees they used in DA2 also in DAI, not the tiny skill trees they used in DAO, which were much more complicated than the linear and relatively independent skill trees they had in DAO. Thus creating and balancing a third skill tree for two weapon warriors doesn't seem like such a small thing, especially with your insistence that it should feel slower and more powerful than the rogue system, which, to remind you once again, contained those backstabs and all the other icky stuff you didn't want for your warriors. Furthermore, if they did that, it would mean that warriors had three weapons approaches, so they would also have to expand the rogue system in order to have the two classes have as much choices and remain distinctive. Something that was large problem for DAO.

 

And yeah, Bioware is all those things you just listed, and they decided that for their purposes, the best course of actions was to limit the weapon choices for different classes and focus on creating depth and variability within those classes instead of having relatively bland linear skill trees of DAO. I'm not saying you shouldn't want to have two weapon warriors, if that is crucial for your gaming enjoyment, you should absolutely voice that opinion. My argument is that despite your continual insistence that adding this would be really simple is detrimental to the discussion, as it clearly isn't, because otherwise the only reason they wouldn't put it in would be that they are just lazy. Besides, it has been pointed out by the developers several times in this very forum that while some tasks might seem minor, they have a mountain load of such minor tasks and they have to choose from them which are worth focusing on. And, it bears repeating, what you are asking for is not a minor thing, as it is not just creating new combat animations for two new combat schools, but also creating associated skill trees, balancing those skill trees and figuring out how the supporting skill trees function effectively with those new skills. All things that don't really seem minor and easy to me.

[AlanC9]

Read some book about the roman empire or documentary on gladiators. Its not all wikipedia or google.

Weren't those gladiators using short swords? Anyway, gladiator fighting styles were about Rule of Cool rather than combat effectiveness. It's not like retiarii were a RW thing.

[tmp7704]

I refuse to believe they did not take a decision whether there is dual wielding warriors. I believe they are just afraid to give a negative answer. I would be far more satisfied if they said " No, there wont be such a feature" and be done with it. In fact, i will be grateful if they admit there are no dual wielding warriors instead of pretending they didnt hear nothing.

They haven't said there would be dual wielding for warriors, have they? As such I'd expect the class split from DA2 to be maintained, and dual wielding to remain rogue-only feature.

[Googleness]

But does the Maker even exist?

 

don't troll.... how can I play zealot if there is no maker ?!

[Mirrman70]

outside of gladiator fights dual wielding has never been super popular among the beefier, stronger warriors. you have no solid defense outside of dodging and parrying so a smaller more agile man would be better (rogue) whereas the heavy shields were favored by the physically stronger due to the high level of defense. that is not to say that they weren't as effective as killing as dual wielders though. the pride of the roman army (going to your nation of choice for examples) was the legionaries who used the tower shields and the Gladius. with a giant shield in front of them and a heavy stabbing sword they were nearly unstoppable. in terms of practicality and overall use a shield and sword is probably the best move for any warrior. the only major military power of pre-gunpowder that I can think of that didn't use a lot of shields were the japanese.

[Stelae]

But does the Maker even exist?

She does, but She doesn't want to make a big deal about it. 

[Swagger7]

But does the Maker even exist?

Trollish Allan strikes again!

[In Exile]

Weren't those gladiators using short swords? Anyway, gladiator fighting styles were about Rule of Cool rather than combat effectiveness. It's not like retiarii were a RW thing.

They involved things like warriors being fat (say some scholars) so they could be cut and bleed easier, so... not the best example. 

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Bioware for the love a of god - let us have dual - wielding swords Inquisitor who swing the swords in slow and powerful way. Like a gladiator. I doubt rogues will provide this, as they tend to be very acrobatic and be all over the place. I do not enjoy these exaggereted twists and turns and strikes, so i am already considering archer playthrough, unless you surprise me by announcing the dual wielding big weapons, not puny daggers. If this feature is present, cant see why not telling us. If it is not, just reveal it is not an option and be done with it. No one will kill a nug or sth.

Dark Souls 2 improved upon the sequel by adding fully functional dual wielding, Dragon Age should too. 

Dual wielding is already a slightly absurd concept, but you want BOTH of the weapons to be massive?

[Bond]

By massive i mean normal sized sword and not a little knife. Dual wield absurd ? Guess Bethesda and From Software are insane. I am sure there were billions of people complaining of skyrim  dual wielding. Such a bad feature that almost all players do it. So having sword in each hand is absurd, not practical and useless and 120 pound elf carying 140 pound sword which is taller than him is practical, useful, amazing and history proven ? I am giving example with gladiators, because their fights are considered the most interesting battles with cold weapons and they often used dual wielding. It is pretty epic and will work great in computer game, but ofc there are people who will start talking nonsense about whether it is practical, how hard it is for the dev team and stuff like that. 

Maybe Dark Souls and TES games don't know what they are doing....Oh wait the latter is the most successful RPG to date......

[AlanC9]

By massive i mean normal sized sword and not a little knife. Dual wield absurd ? Guess Bethesda and From Software are insane. I am sure there were billions of people complaining of skyrim  dual wielding. Such a bad feature that almost all players do it. So having sword in each hand is absurd, not practical and useless and 120 pound elf carying 140 pound sword which is taller than him is practical, useful, amazing and history proven ? I am giving example with gladiators, because their fights are considered the most interesting battles with cold weapons and they often used dual wielding. It is pretty epic and will work great in computer game, but ofc there are people who will start talking nonsense about whether it is practical, how hard it is for the dev team and stuff like that. 

Maybe Dark Souls and TES games don't know what they are doing....Oh wait the latter is the most successful RPG to date......

 

It's a silly game thing that other games do, so you want DAI to do it too. OK, now at least the argument makes sense. 

[Bond]

So silly that almost every game does it. The latest being Assassins Creed 4, which many consider one of the best in the franchaise if not the best one. Silly game thing....Ubisoft must be so silly to do it...

But then again....you were the guy who claimed that it was not "combat effective" and this being your strongest argument. Off to the 10ft long swords with ya. I am sure you will be much more effective with a weapon, which is more heavy than school bus.

[tmp7704]

But then again....you were the guy who claimed that it was not "combat effective" and this being your strongest argument.

Simply put, what's "combat effective" has been tested in actual combat for literally thousands of years. If it was dual wielding, you can bet that's what people would be fighting with, because only idiots go into fights to the death handicapped if they can avoid it. And the armies utilizing such advantage should defeat their opponents easily.

A few computer games romanticizing the gimmick few hundred years after melee combat went out of use don't change that.

edit: incidentally, two handers would rarely exceed 6-8 pounds. "More heavy than school bus" indeed.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

It would be a great idea. Dual wielding sword warriors are the only warrior archetype that I enjoy playing...Just the whirlwind of damage and destruction....

[Mirrman70]

the most combat effective means of melee fighting will always involve a shield. Greek hoplites, Roman Legionnaires, Vikings, Knights, even the african tribes had shields made from hides.

[Dedepp86]

Simply put, what's "combat effective" has been tested in actual combat for literally thousands of years. If it was dual wielding, you can bet that's what people would be fighting with, because only idiots go into fights to the death handicapped if they can avoid it. And the armies utilizing such advantage should defeat their opponents easily.

A few computer games romanticizing the gimmick few hundred years after melee combat went out of use don't change that.

edit: incidentally, two handers would rarely exceed 6-8 pounds. "More heavy than school bus" indeed.

You are talking about real life two handers, the Dragon Age two handers look impossible to lift, not only for elves, but also for humans and dwarves...

I love dual wielding two weapons (longswords, axes) not because it is effective in any way in real life but because it is fun and it Looks great. Also as Warden, Hawk, Inquisitor you are supposed to be special and might be able to do things that no one else can.

Also, dual wielding daggers, Legolas style, wasn't actually used by anyone in real combat because the Gladiators used their shortswords in a complete different way compared to DA II rogues

[Mockingword]

The Maker is a fictional entity, created by Bioware, that may not exist within the universe it supposedly inhabits and doesn't exist in any meaningful way.

 

So I can't see that this will compel them to do much.

[Eralrik]

I broke out my LARPing gear I have a 2 handed axe and a greatsword, I'm 6' 2, 268 lbs and I find it unfeasible that anyone would walk into combat this way and not have their heads handed to them.

 

I did try 2 longswords but I prefer 1 longsword and 1 shortsword to being combat effective a friend has 2 bastard swords and even those are difficult to manage swinging and blocking with.

 

Guess the Wardens and Hawke really are special!

[Realmzmaster]

It seems that this is a continuing theme with gamers wanting realistic weapons and armor, but not realistic combat to go with it. As it has been pointed out in real life (real life had a lot of special warriors) no warrior is going to handicap himself/herself in a battle. Using two longswords or larger weapons in battle was simply not practical.

 

Now if you want to chuck realistic combat that is fine, but some gamers would still want the combat to look somewhat realistic or believable.

DAI is leaning somewhat to unrealistic combat to make it "fun" by including the harpoon (for lack of a better word) technique for warriors and rogues with the blink for mages. 

[Bond]

People are talking in combat effectivness and realism in a game with Dragons, Wizards and Demons.....This is unbelievable....

It is not worth it to waste my words with people who can not read. I will show you a picture for the second time, hence you start understanding the whole point:

There are two options. You want Realism -  - this should not be in the game. And half of the other 2h swords cause they are ridicilously big and unnatural defying the physics laws.

Or you want fantasy game with variety of ways to play it and defying realism - you can wield two swords at the same time.....It is far less ridicilous than having taller weapon the tallest character in DAII. 

I think you pretend you do not get the whole point, cause i have never met people who read the same thing 3+ times and still dont get it at all. And i have met people  that can make stupidity olympic sport and win the gold medal.


OR you should start talking BS and look videos of people who devoted their life to the fighting techniques 

You could use google to find many more. And also....Ainstein was right all along......

[Mockingword]

Who's Ainstein?

[Eralrik]

I watched the video he stated using 2 weapons of the same size were used in Dueling and classroom in Europe, Swords like the Rapier and dagger were commonly used in the battlefield with Swords and shields. Too use 2 weapons of the same size as in long swords would take a person of extreme skill to use on the battlefield but not unheard of just not many documented.

[Bond]

I watched the video he stated using 2 weapons of the same size were used in Dueling and classroom in Europe, Swords like the Rapier and dagger were commonly used in the battlefield with Swords and shields. Too use 2 weapons of the same size as in long swords would take a person of extreme skill to use on the battlefield but not unheard of just not many documented.

You would think slayer of dragons would classify as "extremely skilled".

[Eralrik]

If we follow the example of this video it takes a party of 4 to take down a dragon and I wish my Warden had cool glowing eyes, hehe.