It gives the enemy a head start at doing damage. They can hit you, but you can't hit them.Giving enemies favorable positions doesn't really increase difficulty though, it only makes the player believe it does.
It gives the enemy a head start at doing damage. They can hit you, but you can't hit them.
Personally, I'd like symmetrical mechanics. If I can oneshot my enemies, they should be able to oneshot me. I didn't like how the enemies in DAO couldn't shatter the PC, or wouldn't use abilities like Mana Clash. The closest they came was Scattershot and Overwhelm.
I understand where you're coming from here, but you'd be surprised just how frustrating this would become, especially with the apparent action delay that DA: I has.
I could see certain movies in the game that one-shot after a cast timer counts down though, and the player has to interrupt them or move out of the way or face death, but not just flat out one-shotting without the ability to react.
Then I shouldn't be able to oneshot them.I understand where you're coming from here, but you'd be surprised just how frustrating this would become, especially with the apparent action delay that DA: I has.
I could see certain movies in the game that one-shot after a cast timer counts down though, and the player has to interrupt them or move out of the way or face death, but not just flat out one-shotting without the ability to react.
Then I shouldn't be able to oneshot them.
Yeah... But BioWare likes that heroic feeling in their games, and they like it when you can take on 3 to 5 enemies down at a time in 2 to 3 hits each (we call this fodder). 
I'd like to see an XCOM style system where being flanked tends to mean you'll die. Though that might be frustrating in real time.
Any and all games are made for hardcore, and casual players, sorry to bust your bubble @Fidite Nemini.
The point of saves and checkpoints is for part of that reason, so dont have to repeat too much when getting back to the game from pausing due to kids or dog wanting out. I consider myself casual and hardcore, I can spend 24 hours on a game or more if I wished too, I don't though, I break it down. Casual players can get an hour or two within a game pretty easily. It's not like its that difficult for anyone to do any of the games. Yes, I play Bioware games for the STORY not the actual gameplay. Its nice to have the gameplay but story and characters is whats important to me, been that way since the first BW game. Also, mind you, save anywhere was intended cause people have families. I dont so, I have no reason to defend them do I? Cause I have a dog that needs attention, or a cat that knocks something over to get away from the dog, does require attention. Some relative or friend showing up and knocking on the door, a stranger could too, need to stop and save. Thereby doing exactly the same thing a Casual player would do in some instances. Am I growling when I say all of this, nope.
I'm just pointing out that all games are made for anyone to play in that ESRB setting, not hardcore or casual.
I didn't represent my point accurately, I apologize:
"Casual" gaming is not about how much time you spend ingame. "Casual" gaming, at least to me, is about how much time you spend outside the game. That is not how many hours you play the game, it's how much time you spend understanding the game, attuning yourself with character builds, planning strategies, power/ability rotations and character/build synergy.
DA is not "casual" in the way that you're not supposed to just play and win. There's builds to decide on, do you want to focus your build on single target abilities, or AoE? How do you set up your party to deal with that build, do you micro manage them to get away from AoE casts, or do you build them to survive the hits (assuming friendly fire). If friendly fire is disabled for you, how do you build your party to synergize? DO you have a guy that can pull aggro so that a DPSer can do his work without having to kite enemies all the time? Is that aggro draw a tank so he can survive it, or do you have to create a sufficiently synergized group to be able to reduce the enemies fast for the aggro draw to get through the fight? Do you have a healer or do you focus on just wasting every enemy with overwhelming force before they can really hurt your party?
If a game goes to the extent to including all those mechanics and the decisions, the trade-offs that come with those, it should be easy enough to just beat without any consideration into dealing with those mechanics. You shouldn't be able to just pick something and go with it and it will get you through the game.
What I define as "hardcore" opposed to "casual" is that a player has to understand the game and master it to some degree. To actively overcome a challenge and not just play without any real resistance. That's the line I draw between those two terms.
A "casual" game, you just jump into, you play and you win. Sure, you can do better than just win, you can crack highscores if you work to improve yourself, but it isn't required to just win.
A "hardcore" game, you jump into and if you don't make the effort to understand it, it will hand you your ass after beating your character bloody and showing you the game over screen.
DAO was "hardcore". That Ogre in the Tower of Ishal was the game over point if you didn't understand the kiting and party mechanics. Some might say it was too hard and I can agree with that to some extent.
DAII was "hardcore". If you didn't synergize your team, the enemy hordes would just whittle you down.
ME1 was only "hardcore" on the aptly named Hardcore difficulty and above. If you played Veteran or below, you could just run and gun through the game without any consideration to build, party synergy or even bothering to use the cover system.
ME2 was "hardcore". It required you to use the cover system and the correct weapon for the correct type of enemy defense even on low difficulty unless you were really good at aiming (which usually means the player isn't much of a "casual" to begin with).
ME3 was only "hardcore" on the highest difficulty pretty much like ME1. On lower difficulties, you didn't need to understand the different possible pathways through the maps, didn't need to understand gunplay or even use the cover mechanics.
Give that you could aim while paused (something I did for nearly every shot), I question your definition.ME2 was "hardcore". It required you to use the cover system and the correct weapon for the correct type of enemy defense even on low difficulty unless you were really good at aiming (which usually means the player isn't much of a "casual" to begin with).
Give that you could aim while paused (something I did for nearly every shot), I question your definition.
I said "usually", not "always" and if you're exploiting the pause screen for aiming, then you at least mastered the pause screen mechanic to a sufficient degree to exploit it's benefits, didn't you?
I get bored easily if the combat is not fun even if many other aspects of the game are enjoyable ( story, characters, atmosphere, music,graphics, etc). A big part of "fun" for me is challenging combat; but if it is too difficult for too long i tend to get frustrated and quit.I enjoyed Orgin's combat in part because i was able to find a difficulty setting to my liking and because i much prefer the tactical combat options that it offered. I also enjoyed DA2's combat to some extent. Starting to get excited about the new DA.
@Fidite Nemini That does alter and clarify a bit more. 
I never really had no issue with kiting enemies. But then unlike some people, I played and ran tabletop games before CRPGs, so knowing group builds was something I understood. A fighter, a rogue, a mage and then either an archer or another mage was normal builds, which I don't need to get more detailed on. 
I know I'm not casual but have play styled casual time to time, but majority of the time, hardcore. Building their AI to work around players repetitive strategy will be interesting to look at. As in, how in depth will that go, most basic strategies of what I listed usually isn't something to worry about. Enemies focusing on mage or rogue despite the fighter, that is something to wonder about.
A game Im part of, the storyteller/gamemaster decided to have a sniper take out the summoner of a giant red dragon in our game. Smart move, bypass us defending her, and taken her out of the picture temporarily. Curious if AIs will think in lines like that or not. Mostly unlikely, but me, I'd shoot the mages first, screw the fighter, get them later. Then the rogue has to go as its just as annoying as the mage, fighters are pretty much weak no matter what to me, but not rogues or mages. A fighter to taunt me away from a mage or rogue that does far more dps will never work.
I said "usually", not "always" and if you're exploiting the pause screen for aiming, then you at least mastered the pause screen mechanic to a sufficient degree to exploit it's benefits, didn't you?
agreed; the level of deliberation and caution exhibited by pausing and aiming before every shot seems pretty hardcore to me.
at the same time, directly calling a game "hardcore" or casual based on perceived difficulty may be an over-generalization.
the player's arsenal is extraordinarily imbalanced in the sense that the fundamentally superior strategy/skill build does not rely on interactive elements and far outclasses the second place.
DAO blood mage was such; in virtually all encounters outside of the Gundam dlc, blood wound would be the end of it.
DA2: rogues' obscure allow you nearly disregard enemy standard attacks.
I think the difficulty settings will allow enough flexibility to accommodate most players. Ones who really aren't into combat or who have limited experience will be able to play on easy/casual and if you're into the combat there will be more chance to test your tactics than ever on nightmare. I guess if nightmare is still too easy a player could try playing without armor or solo. I wouldn't enjoy getting killed all the time but coming out of a tough fight with most of the body parts I started with is a real rush.
More difficulty but how? in DA2 all they did was throw mobs at you.
In DAO all they did was throw mobs at you 95% of the time. In DAI they will throw trash mobs at you 90+% of the time.
There are no tactics required to beat an overwhelming number of fights in either game. On normal you can run two AI scripts: Health < 25% Potion and Enemy:Nearest > Attack. For modes above that you might actually have to add in a few lines to use actual skills/spells and sustainables but actual human thought is 100% optional in almost every fight. Given the vast array of potions you had in DAO any thinking was truely optional.
Man that title isn't a attention grab AT ALL. 
Retour en haut