426 réponses à ce sujet

[Paul E Dangerously]

No, the issue is with the vids of DA:I gameplay, and the "locked-in 3rd person view" talked about in this review, and how that absolutely goes against everything Dragon Age..

 

Totally unlike the console version of Origins! ..wait.

[Brogan]

Well if you really enjoy the freedom of the camera in an RPG, especially in an Dragon Age game, I can understand why removing that feature would be a bit of deal-breaker.
 

That said doesn't "Inquisition" have a tactical camera for all versions (console and PC)? I mean I'm near certain it does.

That's the whole point.... the PC versions never needed anything like that because all we had to do is zoom out a little. 

 

And I personally liked to vary the level of zoom I played at.  Sometimes I wanted to see my characters in detail as they fought, sometimes at half zoom to judge battle factors, sometimes all the way zoomed out to see better where I was going.

 

Surely you can see how ridiculous it seems to constantly be told "In DA:I you now have a button to hit for something you've always done with your scrollwheel"

[Brogan]

Even on console there's the tactical view which can be unhooked from the characters.

We also always had this in PC, it was a simple case of mousing in the direction you wanted to scan, or "unhook".

[NUM13ER]

Surely you can see how ridiculous it seems to constantly be told "In DA:I you now have a button to hit for something you've always done with your scrollwheel"

Actually having played "Origins" on a console first and then getting it a few years later on PC, I'll freely admit it's something you wouldn't like to lose once you've actually had it as an option. So yeah I understand what you're getting at.

[Morroian]

We also always had this in PC, it was a simple case of mousing in the direction you wanted to scan, or "unhook".

 

In DAO it was still centred around the focussed character, there was some range of movement around the character but it was not unhooked. So what is the issue with DAI? That it may require a button press, we haven't seen the PC interface but even if it is so what? If the important thing is having a tactical view to play more tactically well we're getting that.

[Brogan]

In DAO it was still centred around the focussed character, there was some range of movement around the character but it was not unhooked. So what is the issue with DAI? That it may require a button press, we haven't seen the PC interface but even if it is so what? If the important thing is having a tactical view to play more tactically well we're getting that.

The point is you didn't need to hit extra buttons to do it.  The scrollwheel was part of the UI, utilizing the camera as you needed it.  That was the beauty of the engine.

 

Consoles or people who play with controllers don't have scrollwheels.  Did they really change the engine to better accommodate those people?  I hope to hell not.  But until we see that tactical view un-paused and playing from it, what other conclusion is there?  Until we see a version that's not locked into 3rd person while exploring, what should make us trust that's not how we all have to play now?

[ghostzodd]

Totally unlike the console version of Origins! ..wait.

 

Fernando melo

[Morroian]

The point is you didn't need to hit extra buttons to do it.  The scrollwheel was part of the UI, utilizing the camera as you needed it.  That was the beauty of the engine.

 

Consoles or people who play with controllers don't have scrollwheels.  Did they really change the engine to better accommodate those people?  I hope to hell not.  But until we see that tactical view un-paused and playing from it, what other conclusion is there?  Until we see a version that's not locked into 3rd person while exploring, what should make us trust that's not how we all have to play now?

 

Bioware really can't win can they 

[Brogan]

Bioware really can't win can they 

They can win very easily.... MOUSE CURSOR!

[leaguer of one]

I don't blame them, it is a very depressing article. And it's not like Bioware has shown us anything interesting or very good in the demos to make the criticizers think differently.

 

.....What the heck have you been watching?

[leaguer of one]

It is not that it was slower, it is that the animation came after the skill check, not before. The game rolled the dice based on your character's stats against the enemy's before the animation began, so your stats determined if you were hit, not your reflexes. It just appeared as shuffling and slow because the game was DESIGNED to make you unable to react to something your character should not have been able to avoid.

AKA, actually being tactical instead of button mashing and constant kiting

It's a video game. the dice roll can happen in micro seconds.

[leaguer of one]

The point is you didn't need to hit extra buttons to do it.  The scrollwheel was part of the UI, utilizing the camera as you needed it.  That was the beauty of the engine.

 

Consoles or people who play with controllers don't have scrollwheels.  Did they really change the engine to better accommodate those people?  I hope to hell not.  But until we see that tactical view un-paused and playing from it, what other conclusion is there?  Until we see a version that's not locked into 3rd person while exploring, what should make us trust that's not how we all have to play now?

What? Not even DAO was locked in tactical on pc.

[leaguer of one]

LInk please?

 

Seriously, I'm not so sure right now.

It's stated and shown in every dev video.

[Fast Jimmy]

It's a video game. the dice roll can happen in micro seconds.

 

It isn't a matter of how long it takes the dice to roll, it is WHEN the dice is rolled.

 

In DA:O, it was before the animation started, meaning if you saw it coming, you still couldn't avoid it - only your character's stats could. In DA2, this was not the case - the player could see the animation coming and, in theory, move the tankiest heavy tank that ever tink-tanked right out of the way with a Dex score of 1.

 

 

That's player reflexes trumping anything to do with the character.

[Sidney]

It isn't a matter of how long it takes the dice to roll, it is WHEN the dice is rolled.

 

In DA:O, it was before the animation started, meaning if you saw it coming, you still couldn't avoid it - only your character's stats could. In DA2, this was not the case - the player could see the animation coming and, in theory, move the tankiest heavy tank that ever tink-tanked right out of the way with a Dex score of 1.

 

 

That's player reflexes trumping anything to do with the character.

 

 

...of course that led to ther stupid of my character moving long way away from where the Ogre threw his rock and still getting blasted by it or hit by the intolerably slow swing of the Hurlock Alpha when I was 10 meters aways. The problem in DA2 was minimal since there were so few animations that were "avoidable".  In general I dislike twitch effects in an RPG (lockpicking in Skyrim is problematic for me, so are puzzles which test me not my PC so I understand what you are saying) but in the particular clash of problems between DA2 and DAO the DA2 solution still manages to annoy me less.

[Fast Jimmy]

...of course that led to ther stupid of my character moving long way away from where the Ogre threw his rock and still getting blasted by it or hit by the intolerably slow swing of the Hurlock Alpha when I was 10 meters aways. The problem in DA2 was minimal since there were so few animations that were "avoidable".  In general I dislike twitch effects in an RPG (lockpicking in Skyrim is problematic for me, so are puzzles which test me not my PC so I understand what you are saying) but in the particular clash of problems between DA2 and DAO the DA2 solution still manages to annoy me less.

Personal preference aside, if I were to call one tactical and one action, would it not be apparent which one is which?

[Deflagratio]

It isn't a matter of how long it takes the dice to roll, it is WHEN the dice is rolled.

 

In DA:O, it was before the animation started, meaning if you saw it coming, you still couldn't avoid it - only your character's stats could. In DA2, this was not the case - the player could see the animation coming and, in theory, move the tankiest heavy tank that ever tink-tanked right out of the way with a Dex score of 1.

 

 

That's player reflexes trumping anything to do with the character.

 

I'd argue that's more of a result of poor balance and oversight in combat design, and not necessarily a flaw in the concept itself.

 

But if the result is the same, does it really matter how attention is called to it? Even Elder Scrolls had to cope with this... Which is why Back-peddling (a form of kiting) in Skyrim isn't the "Win the game" tactic it was in Oblivion and (especially) Morrowind. Though there's still situations where it works to an extent, usually against Giants and Dragons and NPCs armed with Warhammers.

 

I can't say for sure, but it looks like you may be rooted to the ground during attack animations in DA:I. It definitely looks like that with the Dwarf Warrior Sword-Board as even the enemy lurches out of range occasionally creating a missed attack while he swings away.

[CronoDragoon]

Well I hope Inquisition's tactical view and PC interface work out for all you PC dudes. And hopefully we get some info that will lay your fears to rest. I have no reason but to want as many people as possible like this game.

 

Three things about the dodge roll, which is about the only real "twitch" gameplay I see that can't be automated:

 

1. I think they said it has to be unlocked, right? As in, it's a move? If so, it likely has a cool-down, which will prevent spammage.

 

2. Even if it has a very short/no cooldown, it seems unproductive to spam it anyway, since the animation is long and the dodge covers a pretty fair distance. It doesn't seem like a Bayonetta dodge or a Metal Gear Rising parry, where you can quickly work it in between attacks. It seems like an "oh ****" move, like when the Dragon flies over you with a flame line.

 

3. In the PC gamer article, the guy talked about how he was able to pause and move his party out of harm's way of the dragon's flying attacks. So there is a tactical alternative to the AI not being able to dodge out of the way (I assume they won't, correct me if I'm wrong).

[Deflagratio]

I said this in another thread, but I think the idea behind the Dodge Roll and Dive are to pause when you see a telegraphed ability and order anyone in range to dive or roll. They're not seemingly trying to go for Dark Souls Dodge-Everything-and-to-hell-with-armor style.

[Sidney]

Personal preference aside, if I were to call one tactical and one action, would it not be apparent which one is which?

 

No, movement is part of tactics, might be the biggest part of it so if moving doesn't avoid an insanely slow attack then I'm not sure that is tactical. It would be like a wargame that didn't sllow you to move units away from a spot you suspected was gonna fall under an artillery strike after said strike was called in even if it had not fired yet.

 

You are ascribing something "tactical" to DAO when what it actually had was friggin' awful design. Then again, I see a LOT of people overselling's DAO's terrible combat as something they liked.

[In Exile]

Personal preference aside, if I were to call one tactical and one action, would it not be apparent which one is which?

 

No, because using spacing to control combat is tactical. Moving troop formations to avoid artillery is, for example, a proper IRL tactic. I get what you mean in terms of the aRPG vs. tactical RPG distinction, but keep in mind that movement is tactical. 

Edit: I see Sidney made the same point and I got ninja'd by 40 minutes (teach me not to read to the end), so instead I will elaborate on the issue. 

 

The problem IMO isn't that you can move, it's how fast you have to move and react to dodge and avoid attacks. An action game requires fast decision making, no opportunity to pause and consider, and reflexes are highly valued. Reflexes are a huge part of RTS games, especially in competitive MP. A game based on reflexes doesn't avoid tactics - it just prizes other physical traits beside your intellectual capacity to plan. 

 

An RPG that's fully 3D with real time (even with pause) should use realistic collision detection based on when the animation finishes. But movement of units should not be so fast that you have to react in real time using a controller to dodge. That's the problem. 

[deuce985]

I've noticed Bioware has went to great pains and effort to identify their weaknesses with not just DA2 but Bioware games in general with DAI. Exploration is a good example. Outside BG and ME1, exploration has never been a huge emphasis for their games. It's mostly because they designed their levels very tightly packed for story purposes. It's not necessarily a bad thing but it was never a strength, IMO. Their level design looks amazing in DAI. It was always something I really wanted a Bioware game to show me. Do your story/characters but make a huge world I can dabble and explore in. When I played through ME1 I just imagined in my head how amazing the Mako missions would be with polish and content. DAI is finally bringing that dream come true. I could not ask for a better vision in a Bioware game.

 

It's hard to imagine DAI will be anything but an awesome experience at this point. One of which only comes around every few years for games and if we're lucky, once in a decade. I feel almost spoiled at this point and it will be a privilege to play through DAI.

[Brogan]

What? Not even DAO was locked in tactical on pc.

DAO or DA2 did not have "tactical view".  It was called 'zooming out a little bit' with the scrollwheel and you didn't need to "enter" it like whatever they are showing in these demos.  This tells us this is either 1) a console only feature and won't be part of the PC version, or 2) they really f'ed up the pc version.  Again, insofar as what we've been shown.

 

It's stated and shown in every dev video.

What, freedom of camera movement?  No it absolutely is not.  You rarely ever see the front of your controlled character!

 

As for the combat, no matter what system it's closer to in style, it still comes down to the Pause feature. That aspect alone should remove any twitch factor and emphasize pre- and mid- fight tactics, which include everything from movement and spacing to spells and ammo type, just like it always has. 

 

The dodging should be procedural, the hitting or missing should be procedural, the damage effects should all be procedural, that is what works about a good aRPG and why this series in particular has always been so much fun.  Otherwise you could simply abuse the numbers and pause-click your way to victory (don't ask me to explain how, I'm just making a point).  It very much harkens back to Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale and Torment in it's simplicity.  Why?  Because those systems worked.

 

I'm not nearly as worried about them screwing the combat up as I am about seeing the real PC UI.

[dlux]

I've noticed Bioware has went to great pains and effort to identify their weaknesses with not just DA2 but Bioware games in general with DAI. Exploration is a good example. Outside BG and ME1, exploration has never been a huge emphasis for their games.

Dragon Age had enough exploration, i.e. you visited the optional areas. Like the sacred ashes quest (whatever it was called). Absolutely awesome. Sure, the areas could have possibly been a bit more open, but it was still perfectly fine the way it was done DA:O.

Anyway, what you mean is hiking. Dragon Age didn't have enough hiking like in Skyrim, which now seems to have been fixed. Now we can all climb that mountain. Hooray.

 

Spoiler

 

Honestly if that's the type of game you want to play then old school style games like Project Eternity can scratch that itch. There's plenty of room for different kinds of RPG's in the world.

This BS argument is getting old. DA:O's combat was absolutely fine and I wouldn't consider it to be old-school. Old-school combat is even more ambitious and sophisticated.
 

You are ascribing something "tactical" to DAO when what it actually had was friggin' awful design. Then again, I see a LOT of people overselling's DAO's terrible combat as something they liked.

DA:O's combat was great, that is why people have been asking for more DA:O. That is also why DA:O is Bioware's best selling game to date.
 
Bioware knows that most of the fans were very disappointed in DA2, so they decided to fix that problem by moving even farther away from what made DA:O's combat great by making the game even more action oriented (that is at least the feeling I am getting at the moment). Makes sense, right?

[leaguer of one]

It isn't a matter of how long it takes the dice to roll, it is WHEN the dice is rolled.

 

In DA:O, it was before the animation started, meaning if you saw it coming, you still couldn't avoid it - only your character's stats could. In DA2, this was not the case - the player could see the animation coming and, in theory, move the tankiest heavy tank that ever tink-tanked right out of the way with a Dex score of 1.

 

 

That's player reflexes trumping anything to do with the character.

And that makes no difference it happen at a mirco second. That's not enough to delay anything. And it not the same thing in da2.

We did not telegraph with tanks unless it was an aoe attack that was spelled out for us. Everything was still depended on via states. Heck, Isabella had a defensive skill all about not having her hit during standard melee.