426 réponses à ce sujet

[TurretSyndrome]

The answer to this could solve your initial question anyway, if the answer is yes.

 

Not really. I mean, how would you assign it? There's no "dragon about to crush you to pulp -> use dodge roll" level of tactics. It still would be nice though.

[Wulfram]

I don't think the dodge roll is a big deal unless it's on a ridiculously short cooldown

[CronoDragoon]

Not really. I mean, how would you assign it? There's no "dragon about to crush you to pulp -> use dodge roll" level of tactics. It still would be nice though.

 

Well if the answer is yes then clearly they would have figured some method out.

 

I suspect the answer is no, but that shouldn't be a problem since you can just pause when the dragon is about to use it and issue commands.

[Elhanan]

Not really. I mean, how would you assign it? There's no "dragon about to crush you to pulp -> use dodge roll" level of tactics. It still would be nice though.

I used something like 'Self: If opponent uses Melee attack; then use Evasion."

[Lethys1]

There's nothing wrong with having doubts.  There's nothing wrong with being cautious.  Heck, there's nothing wrong with disliking something.  What I, and the other poster seems to be, questioning is the degree to which so-called fans react to any comment or to any product from Bioware.  To me, the reactions against DAI have not been measured, cautious statements; rather, many of them have been rage-fueled, often vulgar, diatribes that overstate a perceived flaw and downplay (similar) flaws in earlier Bioware products (like BG or DAO) by comparison (or non-Bioware games, particularly Skyrim, Demon/Dark Souls, and most recently, Divinity: Original Sin).

 

What gets me is that these people actually spend as much time and emotional energy getting so riled up when they do not appear intent on buying the game anyway...  Why bother get so invested, so angry is they aren't going to buy? 

 

So, folks are entitled to their opinions.  They're also entitled to their emotions.  However, they should not feel entitled to the idea that more...  level-headed? folks are going to grow tired of their antics and call them out on it.

 

BioWare has a tendency to make very BioWare-type commentary about the things they do.  They take a path and then act as though THAT's the way to do it, THAT's the way the fans want it, when meanwhile that simply hasn't been the case for many people for their last two major releases.  It comes off as preemptive defensiveness, and I don't like seeing it.  Other companies certainly try to sell me on ideas, but this one tries to tell me my ideas.  "Gaming moved on from the BG/NWN style games."  Really?  Take a look at Kickstarter some time.  People pay millions for games that haven't even materialized yet on the promise that when they do, they'll look like older games with newer mechanics.  This preemptively defensive mentality was especially true prior to DA:2, when many doubts were raised, scoffed at, and then eventually proven to be true.

 

People (fans) get riled up because there's usually one big budget AAA RPG title released in a given year, or a few released and then none at all for a while.  This is one of those games, and it's possibly the biggest one.  BioWare makes a type of game only they make, so people want it to be good.  The format is excellent, but the material within the format can often be flawed if it goes against the format's nature.  A story-centric game is what people want, with party-based strategic combat.  Their riled up attitude shows an obvious emotional investment.  We all see the potential of these games, which is why we're here.  I criticize the game and whatnot, but the fact is that I'm getting it no matter what simply because it's the one option for this style of game.  And I've loved this kind of game for a while, and BioWare has done a great job in the past.  We sometimes just think BioWare has lost itself in the quest for 20 million copies sold and EA's pressure.  It feels like EA somehow turned the diamond back into coal.  I don't know that there are 20 million people who will ever buy a BioWare game, and trying purposefully to design content for that end seems to do a disservice every time.  Trying to please all the people is the fastest way possible to pleasing less people.  Artistic/design compromise is not enviable nor laudable.

 

I mean, make it as action-y as you want, BioWare, but to try and distance yourself from the games upon which the foundations of the entire genre are built?  Games that a version of you once made?  Try to incorporate action into that mold as best you can rather than making a comment like that one, unless you truly believe you've made something far better.  And to be honest, I'm not that worried about this one because I just know what I'm getting with it.  It's just not exactly what I want, but I'll try to like it nonetheless.

[Allan Schumacher]

Sure. What I'm saying is; say you're playing in Tactical view only, how would you be able to see when to execute the move? Couldn't the camera be somewhere else during the fight, not to mention the camera angle itself makes it harder to see the moves of your enemies precisely to execute the roll?

The game is usually paused in tactical mode. Even if you're in the real-time "engage" mode, it just means recognizing an incoming attack and pausing the game, switching to the character and issuing the command. You may miss some of they are away from your focus, though you'll still have this problem with the over the shoulder camera too.

 

In DA 2, we were stuck with Third Person view but it is because of that we were able to use Evade on our Rogue characters properly. Simply put, how do you solve the problem of the player who prefers Tactical mode gameplay when he's at a disadvantage compared to someone using third person, since the guy can't really use the skill as effectively as the TP one because of the lack of similar amount of combat visibility.

I'm not sure the tactical camera person has less combat visibility. In the over the shoulder camera, your focus is very much on the controlled player, which compromises your visibility towards the other companions. While I'm in tactical camera mode, my visibility is still typically towards one of my characters. So yes, I may miss something if a player is off camera, but I'll be missing them in the other view too.

The only place I could see it being an issue is if you had none of your party members on the screen, and didn't have the game paused. This is an unfamiliar state for me (it's definitely not how I play the game).

Seeing an ogre winding up for a powerful attack, or a spell incoming isn't something I struggle with. I may miss basic attacks, but unless a player is at ultra low health (which would have me focus my attention on them anyways) I wouldn't consider dodging those attacks to be the best use of the skill, since it incurs the resource and cooldown cost.

 

Also, can I ask if we can set the roll to tactics for characters, to make them use it on their own?

The move has some issues because picking an automatic direction can be problematic - no one wants to see their companion dodge roll right off of a cliff or into another more powerful attack. But it is something we want to deliver.

[Khavos]

What gets me is that these people actually spend as much time and emotional energy getting so riled up when they do not appear intent on buying the game anyway...  Why bother get so invested, so angry is they aren't going to buy? 

 

I don't know about "riled up," but I certainly get annoyed, despite the fact that I won't be picking up DAI on Day One, and won't be picking it up at all if it ends up being the Awesome Button SJW Crusade I think it will be.

 

As for why?  It's pretty simple.  There are a finite amount of AAA developers out there.  I'd prefer they make games I actually want to play rather than games I don't.  This has been doubly true in recent years with the steep decline of quality RPGs.  We seem to be coming out of that dark age now thanks largely to Kickstarter, but I don't know how sustainable that model is.  Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity, Age of Decadence, Torment: ToN, etc. may do a lot to keep RPG gamers satisfied, but it's be a better market if the AAA developers weren't chasing actionized Awesome Button console faceroll games.  

 

DAI may wind up surprising me.  It might have decent combat and actual RPG mechanics, and my companions might not aggressively try to push their junk in my face every chance they get.  But given that most of the info we get seems to be about the romance options, I'm not holding my breath.  

[Andraste_Reborn]

The move has some issues because picking an automatic direction can be problematic - no one wants to see their companion dodge roll right off of a cliff or into another more powerful attack. But it is something we want to deliver.

 

There are always a few abilities that are better with manual control. I certainly couldn't trust my companions to cast Blizzard or Inferno on their own. Even Cone of Cold is dicey. I swear Morrigan and Anders used it on Alistair and Fenris deliberately ... Happy to know it's something the designers are trying for, though.

 

(Also, this means that customisable tactics are definitely a thing again, yes?)

[Wulfram]

The game is usually paused in tactical mode. Even if you're in the real-time "engage" mode, it just means recognizing an incoming attack and pausing the game, switching to the character and issuing the command. You may miss some of they are away from your focus, though you'll still have this problem with the over the shoulder camera too.
 

 

Is it possible to pause/unpause in the regular way while in tactical mode?

[TurretSyndrome]

I used something like 'Self: If opponent uses Melee attack; then use Evasion."

 

I remember using Evade on Varric a lot. Self: Surrounded by atleast two enemies, Evade. Then follow it up with Stealth. But that move's purpose was to immediately back away from a harmful area rather than precisely dodge an attack, there's no Tactic for that. Like you can't have Self: Dak Souls-like-enemy about to drop the hammer to do heavy damage, execute Evade.

 

The game is usually paused in tactical mode. Even if you're in the real-time "engage" mode, it just means recognizing an incoming attack and pausing the game, switching to the character and issuing the command. You may miss some of they are away from your focus, though you'll still have this problem with the over the shoulder camera too.

 I'm not sure the tactical camera person has less combat visibility. In the over the shoulder camera, your focus is very much on the controlled player, which compromises your visibility towards the other companions. While I'm in tactical camera mode, my visibility is still typically towards one of my characters. So yes, I may miss something if a player is off camera, but I'll be missing them in the other view too. The only place I could see it being an issue is if you had none of your party members on the screen, and didn't have the game paused. This is an unfamiliar state for me (it's definitely not how I play the game).

 The move has some issues because picking an automatic direction can be problematic - no one wants to see their companion dodge roll right off of a cliff or into another more powerful attack. But it is something we want to deliver.

 

Okay, so it's Engage mode if it's real time top-down view? Anyway, if you're in "Engage" mode, you are still controlling the melee character but the visibility of the enemy that is directly in front of your character is lowered because you're in that top-down view. I wasn't talking about the overall visibility. So say the  enemy directly in front of your melee character uses a power move, you might not be able to see it in time therefore not use the pause function to activate the ability. Yes, you may not be able to dodge in TP view sometimes as well, but this is more likely to happen in top-down since you're not clearly able to see what your melee character's enemy is doing. Just saying that the problem is still there despite your character being on screen.

 

As for dodge direction problems. Maybe you guys can set it in such a way that the character dodges towards the nearest companion? You did have the Blood Magic spell tactic set in DA:O so that the character takes blood from the nearest character. Maybe you can design it similarly. It's not perfect but it's something.

[Lady Shayna]

I was going to quote some of Allan's posts to respond, but there's nothing in particular I want to respond to.  Just a general, "Thanks for the info", because I appreciate it.  I'm going to ignore the suppositions of the author of this article and go back to waiting hopefully for videos of the described play style (Soon!  Heh). Appreciate your time, Allan.

[Fast Jimmy]

The move has some issues because picking an automatic direction can be problematic - no one wants to see their companion dodge roll right off of a cliff or into another more powerful attack. But it is something we want to deliver.

That would be my concern, personally, but it is good to know you can map it to the tactics screen.

As someone else said... is that confirmation the Tactics screen is returning? One would assume, but we've seen so little about actual mechanics, it leaves the question wide open.

[Allan Schumacher]

Okay, so it's Engage mode if it's real time top-down view? Anyway, if you're in "Engage" mode, you are still controlling the melee character but the visibility of the enemy that is directly in front of your character is lowered because you're in that top-down view. I wasn't talking about the overall visibility. So say the enemy directly in front of your melee character uses a power move, you might not be able to see it in time therefore not use the pause function to activate the ability. Yes, you may not be able to dodge in TP view sometimes as well, but this is more likely to happen in top-down since you're not clearly able to see what your melee character's enemy is doing. Just saying that the problem is still there despite your character being on screen.

I don't think that this will be a concern because I don't think the characters will be that small that this type of detail will be missing.

I understand your concern but it hasn't been an issue in my experience.  It may come down to personal player experience as to whether or not it's an issue.

[The Serge777]

BioWare has a tendency to make very BioWare-type commentary about the things they do.  They take a path and then act as though THAT's the way to do it, THAT's the way the fans want it, when meanwhile that simply hasn't been the case for many people for their last two major releases.  It comes off as preemptive defensiveness, and I don't like seeing it.  Other companies certainly try to sell me on ideas, but this one tries to tell me my ideas.  "Gaming moved on from the BG/NWN style games."  Really?  Take a look at Kickstarter some time.  People pay millions for games that haven't even materialized yet on the promise that when they do, they'll look like older games with newer mechanics.  This preemptively defensive mentality was especially true prior to DA:2, when many doubts were raised, scoffed at, and then eventually proven to be true.

 

People (fans) get riled up because there's usually one big budget AAA RPG title released in a given year, or a few released and then none at all for a while.  This is one of those games, and it's possibly the biggest one.  BioWare makes a type of game only they make, so people want it to be good.  The format is excellent, but the material within the format can often be flawed if it goes against the format's nature.  A story-centric game is what people want, with party-based strategic combat.  Their riled up attitude shows an obvious emotional investment.  We all see the potential of these games, which is why we're here.  I criticize the game and whatnot, but the fact is that I'm getting it no matter what simply because it's the one option for this style of game.  And I've loved this kind of game for a while, and BioWare has done a great job in the past.  We sometimes just think BioWare has lost itself in the quest for 20 million copies sold and EA's pressure.  It feels like EA somehow turned the diamond back into coal.  I don't know that there are 20 million people who will ever buy a BioWare game, and trying purposefully to design content for that end seems to do a disservice every time.  Trying to please all the people is the fastest way possible to pleasing less people.  Artistic/design compromise is not enviable nor laudable.

 

I mean, make it as action-y as you want, BioWare, but to try and distance yourself from the games upon which the foundations of the entire genre are built?  Games that a version of you once made?  Try to incorporate action into that mold as best you can rather than making a comment like that one, unless you truly believe you've made something far better.  And to be honest, I'm not that worried about this one because I just know what I'm getting with it.  It's just not exactly what I want, but I'll try to like it nonetheless.

While some people want the elements you mention (me among them), other people want more immediate, responsive play and combat (me among them).  There need not be a single option here.  Bioware may well have compromised their more "tactical" combat approach for something more "action-oriented" in DA2; however, I really believe the problem with DA2 was a rushed release and that not only impacted the combat, but the level of player agency and the breadth of locations.  To be candid, I think that if DA2 was given three to four years' worth of development, tightened what is a superior story, and offered more locations, the negative reaction to the combat (and the game overall) would not have been as pronounced as it was.

 

As for the last two major Bioware games, while I get the dissatisfaction that resulted from DA2 (again, which I chalk up to a rushed release), I will never fully understand the reaction to ME3.  Sure I disliked the endings, but the overall experience (save the somewhat lame package-quests) was great.  Indeed, I recall the earlier posts folks made about ME3 and they were incredibly positive.  It wasn't until we reached the end that the internet exploded and people acted as though their families were murdered.  In short, the most vulgar critics tend to overstate matters and froth emotionally without the ability to compartmentalize, and in turn infect other similarly minded people. 

 

I still believe that the DA franchise is the spiritual successor to BG games from the Bioware perspective.  This does not mean they should be expected to be identical or even visually similar.  They offer a gaming experience that is close to BG and (especially) BG2 for a less RPG-limited, console-oriented audience.  We see similarly-engrossing story and character driven escapades in which (particularly in DAO) the PC's agency had an impact.  Are there other games out there that seem more directly influenced by BG?  Sure, but they're more targeted, less accessible, and (arguably) less innovative.  Are there people who want them. Absolutely and I respect that (I'd be a hypocrite otherwise); however, expecting Bioware to carbon copy what they did almost 20 years ago is a little unreasonable.  And I do think that gaming has moved forward for a lot of folks who may not otherwise play RPGs.  Having more "realistically" rendered characters, greater control over character movements (like rolling or jumping), voiced protagonists, and a more cinematic experience are important elements to a lot of RPG fans (like me!) and to those who have been playing RPG-like Action titles (Assassin's Creed or the Batman Arkham games) who might be brought to the fold.  In my own experience, I sold two people who never played RPGs on both DAO and, later DA2.  They both preferred DA2's game play and DAO's level of agency.  Clearly, Bioware knows a little of what they're talking about here, even if we don't always like it. 

 

If there was anything wrong with what the Bioware representative said during the interview, it was suggesting that he didn't appreciate the fans' affection for BG and NWN (and I don't think that was his intention.).  Was he being defensive?  Perhaps.  I didn't read it that way, but I can see why you reached that conclusion.  Yet, I don't see you behaving like a foul-mouthed child throwing a temper tantrum.  I don't see you inciting others to do the same.  I don't see you insulting those who disagree with you.  But these "fans"...  No, I have a hard respecting them or their attitudes.  They seem hell-bent on ruining an opportunity to see this next game do well because of one (and it's really only one, IMO, and even that's a stretch because DA2 wasn't as bad as people make it out to be) bad experience.  If they're so unhappy, they should stop posting.  They should stop following.  They should stop complaining because they're not doing anything to make the situation better.  They're just out lower the tone and I have difficulty seeing how their behavior contributes to anything positive in Bioware's future.

[Cameron Lee]

Hey all.

Thought I'd clear up some things for anyone who hasn't had the time to read the whole article yet.

My comment about moving on from BG and NWN was part of a conversation about camera perspective, movement and the immersion of the worlds we play in. What I was saying is that BG is 16 years old, that gaming and tech have moved on and evolved over those years to the point where you can get lost in a massive 3D worlds.

That's all. I wasn't distancing us from our games. In fact the article has me explicitly talking about the RPG system similarities of DAI to BG.

But headline grabs are always interesting right. Inquisition is probably the deepest RPG we've ever made, it's certainly the largest. Story, party, tactical and real-time combat, quests, tons of equipment, crafting, more stats than you can poke a stick at, alchemy, your own castle to control... I could go on and on about RPG systems in DAI.

Hope that puts some people's mind at easy.


Cam

[The Serge777]

I don't know about "riled up," but I certainly get annoyed, despite the fact that I won't be picking up DAI on Day One, and won't be picking it up at all if it ends up being the Awesome Button SJW Crusade I think it will be.

 

As for why?  It's pretty simple.  There are a finite amount of AAA developers out there.  I'd prefer they make games I actually want to play rather than games I don't.  This has been doubly true in recent years with the steep decline of quality RPGs.  We seem to be coming out of that dark age now thanks largely to Kickstarter, but I don't know how sustainable that model is.  Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity, Age of Decadence, Torment: ToN, etc. may do a lot to keep RPG gamers satisfied, but it's be a better market if the AAA developers weren't chasing actionized Awesome Button console faceroll games.  

 

DAI may wind up surprising me.  It might have decent combat and actual RPG mechanics, and my companions might not aggressively try to push their junk in my face every chance they get.  But given that most of the info we get seems to be about the romance options, I'm not holding my breath.  

I love the recent games you mention.  However, how likely is it that these games are going to draw a wider audience.  Are these games that are likely to bring other gamers who may have RPG tendencies into the fold?  By your own admission, you fear that the Kickstarter model will have limited returns.  If that's the case, we're not experiencing a renaissance of "old-school" isometric RPGs, just a dying gasp.  What happens then?  I think that those of us who love RPGs need to temper our expectations about what we "want."  I want great storytelling, great characters, and fun combat.  What do you want and what is it that you fear Bioware is lacking in offering?

 

And, again, I'm not saying folks can't be cautious.  I'm not saying folks have to like the direction Bioware has gone in the past few years.  I am saying that too many folks aren't doing anything to help the cause.  I am saying that folks are complaining not only in a vulgar fashion, but in a selective one; for example, the combat experiences between DAO and DA2 are far more similar than the combat experiences between BG and DAO, but I don't hear that.  Instead, I hear how horrible DAI is because it looks so much like DA2 which was such a ****** game and how anyone who likes it is going to burn in the depths of the Ninth Hell and how Bioware has sold its soul because DAO was the last good game they did.  These aren't the arguments (or even opinions) of thoughtful people intent on being constructive. 

[CronoDragoon]

The game is usually paused in tactical mode. Even if you're in the real-time "engage" mode, it just means recognizing an incoming attack and pausing the game, switching to the character and issuing the command. You may miss some of they are away from your focus, though you'll still have this problem with the over the shoulder camera too.

Is engage mode the only way to play real-time in tactical view even on PC?

If so, do you still have to hold a key down for engage mode on PC?

[phantomrachie]

Hey all.
Thought I'd clear up some things for anyone who hasn't had the time to read the whole article yet.
My comment about moving on from BG and NWN was part of a conversation about camera perspective, movement and the immersion of the worlds we play in. What I was saying is that BG is 16 years old, that gaming and tech have moved on and evolved over those years to the point where you can get lost in a massive 3D worlds.
That's all. I wasn't distancing us from our games. In fact the article has me explicitly talking about the RPG system similarities of DAI to BG.
But headline grabs are always interesting right. Inquisition is probably the deepest RPG we've ever made, it's certainly the largest. Story, party, tactical and real-time combat, quests, tons of equipment, crafting, more stats than you can poke a stick at, alchemy, your own castle to control... I could go on and on about RPG systems in DAI.
Hope that puts some people's mind at easy.
Cam

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your comments in the interview. Personally, I think the author confused things due to his writing style as the whole thing felt like it was full of contradictions.

[Lady Shayna]

Hey all.

Thought I'd clear up some things for anyone who hasn't had the time to read the whole article yet.

My comment about moving on from BG and NWN was part of a conversation about camera perspective, movement and the immersion of the worlds we play in. What I was saying is that BG is 16 years old, that gaming and tech have moved on and evolved over those years to the point where you can get lost in a massive 3D worlds.

That's all. I wasn't distancing us from our games. In fact the article has me explicitly talking about the RPG system similarities of DAI to BG.

But headline grabs are always interesting right. Inquisition is probably the deepest RPG we've ever made, it's certainly the largest. Story, party, tactical and real-time combat, quests, tons of equipment, crafting, more stats than you can poke a stick at, alchemy, your own castle to control... I could go on and on about RPG systems in DAI.

Hope that puts some people's mind at easy.
 

 

It does.  Thanks!

[Amaror]

But headline grabs are always interesting right. Inquisition is probably the deepest RPG we've ever made, it's certainly the largest. Story, party, tactical and real-time combat, quests, tons of equipment, crafting, more stats than you can poke a stick at, alchemy, your own castle to control... I could go on and on about RPG systems in DAI.

 

Please do.

We have next to no information about the all stuff that's really really deep according to you guys.

We have no detail on our Castle, no Information about the Stats or Skill Trees, no Information about crafting, no Information about alchemy and so on. 

We want to believe that DA:I is going to be awesome and deep and a really cool rpg, but we don't have anything to work with.

Besides that one leaked video, all the marketing just keeps showing action and cool dragon fight and badass inquisitor walking away from a conversation without even looking back. We haven't really seen anything deep so far.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Is engage mode the only way to play real-time in tactical view even on PC?

If so, do you still have to hold a key down for engage mode on PC?

This is a very important question. I'd rathet not have to hold down a key in order to have time advance. Especially during exploration. They've said we could "play the whole game" using the tactical camera, but then we keep hearing about how the tactical camera pauses the game.

I'd like to toggle pause on and off (with the spacebar) regardless of my camera mode. I love that the tactical camera appears to be free-roaming, but I still want pause to be a toggle.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I do wonder about the decision to only show the low-angle camera in the hands-on demos. Unless the tactical camera isn't ready yet..

[Enigmatick]

I do wonder about the decision to only show the low-angle camera in the hands-on demos. Unless the tactical camera isn't ready yet..

http://youtu.be/f8xJMWRI-cA?t=18m21s

 

As high as I saw it go so far. This also answers your real time question I guess.

[Deflagratio]

I do wonder about the decision to only show the low-angle camera in the hands-on demos. Unless the tactical camera isn't ready yet..

 

They actually went over this on a panel and described this as a very "Unintuitive" way to play, but because they're "Showing" the game and not "Playing" The game, they have to take a low angle to show off the visuals.

[Il Divo]

Exactly, feels like we are being told 'oh you liked BG and NWN? Well sod off then'

 

 

 

 

People using weapons in a credible way, (admittedly a touch slow) No ninja rolling crap, a decent action queue would have been nice, I far prefer giving characters orders as in : cast this, then this, then move here, then queue up 3-4 actions on the next guy while paused, so that a plan goes off, and I watch it, controlling no one directly,

 

You're a bit generous to DA:O, me thinks. In the time it would actually take any DA:O character to actually swing their weapon, I've have probably shoved a blade down their throat. 

 

DA:O also had plenty of non-credible action animations.