322 réponses à ce sujet

[Altima Darkspells]

My issue with the only eight attacks thing is that it's combined with a trait web, which I assume will be similar if not a carbon copy of DA2's.

Ugh, could you imagine being a mage in DA2 with only eight abilities? Granted, some abilities were so bad that they weren't ever used (Fireball, anyone?), but still.

If BioWare were going to do the eight attacks thing, then the trait system should reflect that and allow you to get the eight skills you want without having to waste levels on filler.

[Sylvius the Mad]

My issue with the only eight attacks thing is that it's combined with a trait web, which I assume will be similar if not a carbon copy of DA2's.

Ugh, could you imagine being a mage in DA2 with only eight abilities? Granted, some abilities were so bad that they weren't ever used (Fireball, anyone?), but still.

If BioWare were going to do the eight attacks thing, then the trait system should reflect that and allow you to get the eight skills you want without having to waste levels on filler.

Especially if we can't mod the game.

I think DA2 was vastly improved by modding out the attribute requirements on abilities. If Inquisition's are similarly restrictive, Inquisition might be similarly unplayable.

[Aulis Vaara]

Bad design is bad.

If there is no valid command they would just ignore the tactics that you set up?

 

I cannot stress enough that this IMHO is a terrible choice.

 

So... what would you expect them to do in this case? Random things? Perform attacks they don't actually know?

[robertthebard]

So... what would you expect them to do in this case? Random things? Perform attacks they don't actually know?

I would expect them to know skills that they have trained, maybe?

[The Baconer]

At level 16 you might still only have 7 active abilities.

 

Oh man, that would be ****ing awful.

 

So we know that consoles are not to blame for the 8 ability limit, and it isn't about multiplayer parity either (You can only map 4 in this mode, right? Not great). I guess they just wanted to try a different approach to combat, but I don't like it one bit.

[Sidney]

Oh man, that would be ****ing awful.

 

So we know that consoles are not to blame for the 8 ability limit, and it isn't about multiplayer parity either (You can only map 4 in this mode, right? Not great). I guess they just wanted to try a different approach to combat, but I don't like it one bit.

 

 

Not sure why it is awful. In Amalur, I am level god only knows and have about 6 active abilities and I don't feel limited. It is all about how the game is balanced and how many trees open up to you.

[robertthebard]

Not sure why it is awful. In Amalur, I am level god only knows and have about 6 active abilities and I don't feel limited. It is all about how the game is balanced and how many trees open up to you.

Can't I counter this argument the same way others have been dismissing this thread? This isn't Amalur.

[Sidney]

Can't I counter this argument the same way others have been dismissing this thread? This isn't Amalur.

 

It is really about how the game is balanced and built was the point.

 

Using my example, you have at lot of evolutions and buffs on powers in Amalur that suck down your skill points.  Example, you get lightning bolt and you can "level" that up 5 or 6 times and then you can add an evolution to chain it which again has 5 evolutions and on top of that you can then turn that one spells into an AoE with I think 5 levels so one "active" when mapped consumes 15 skill points. If DAI uses that sort of development of skills instead of making each new skill point spent = new spell then you are not looking at as big a limit as some people are thinking it will be. I haven't trudged through the skill tree thread to see how skills are developed but given the limit I am hoping it is more what I described and less the one point = one spells from DAO.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

Durasteel suggested that the 8 mapped abilities might be to encourage or make easier real time play. I can understand this even though I thought they said pause and play was an option but I guess that doesn't have to include access to all abilities. Anyway, in my mind this does not mean your tactics AI is similarly limited, just what you can actively/hands-on control at one time. Then, as I said before, you can make sure your mapped abilities are the ones you want to use if you take over that character but you can otherwise rely on the AI you have hopefully set up in the most beneficial manner for your builds. This way none of your abilities are 'lost' or 'disabled,' they just aren't available for hands on play. That seems reasonable enough to me. Even with the long quick slots bar on the pc I put the skills I wanted to use on the numbered slots and sustained abilities farther down the line so I could use the numpad. 

[robertthebard]

It is really about how the game is balanced and built was the point.
 
Using my example, you have at lot of evolutions and buffs on powers in Amalur that suck down your skill points.  Example, you get lightning bolt and you can "level" that up 5 or 6 times and then you can add an evolution to chain it which again has 5 evolutions and on top of that you can then turn that one spells into an AoE with I think 5 levels so one "active" when mapped consumes 15 skill points. If DAI uses that sort of development of skills instead of making each new skill point spent = new spell then you are not looking at as big a limit as some people are thinking it will be. I haven't trudged through the skill tree thread to see how skills are developed but given the limit I am hoping it is more what I described and less the one point = one spells from DAO.

That's the rub though, isn't it? We have no idea how the skill trees work, we just know we're limited by the UI. We don't know how limited because, for whatever reason, we haven't seen the actual skill trees, the specializations and their implementation. All we have to go on is what we have, and frankly, that's looking pretty bleak.

[robertthebard]

Durasteel suggested that the 8 mapped abilities might be to encourage or make easier real time play. I can understand this even though I thought they said pause and play was an option but I guess that doesn't have to include access to all abilities. Anyway, in my mind this does not mean your tactics AI is similarly limited, just what you can actively/hands-on control at one time. Then, as I said before, you can make sure your mapped abilities are the ones you want to use if you take over that character but you can otherwise rely on the AI you have hopefully set up in the most beneficial manner for your builds. This way none of your abilities are 'lost' or 'disabled,' they just aren't available for hands on play. That seems reasonable enough to me. Even with the long quick slots bar on the pc I put the skills I wanted to use on the numbered slots and sustained abilities farther down the line so I could use the numpad.

For which build? The one I need in section 3, or the one I may need in section 4, which may be something completely different? If tactics don't function if the skills aren't on the hotbar, then those builds can be different.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

For which build? The one I need in section 3, or the one I may need in section 4, which may be something completely different? If tactics don't function if the skills aren't on the hotbar, then those builds can be different.

My premise was that the abilities don't have to be non-functional in the tactics screen if they aren't mapped to the hot keys. By builds I mean how I've developed Blackwall, for example, over the course of the game. I might have 12 abilities in a certain tactical order, all of which will fire in turn unless I decide to control him directly, in which case I better have mapped the ones I think will be most useful for the upcoming battle. 

I do not mean build as in which abilities are hot-keyed at any point in time.

[robertthebard]

My premise was that the abilities don't have to be non-functional in the tactics screen if they aren't mapped to the hot keys. By builds I mean how I've developed Blackwall, for example, over the course of the game. I might have 12 abilities in a certain tactical order, all of which will fire in turn unless I decide to control him directly, in which case I better have mapped the ones I think will be most useful for the upcoming battle. 
I do not mean build as in which abilities are hot-keyed at any point in time.

Then that completely removes the need to limit the number of available skills, doesn't it, since you can just by pass it via tactics?

[The Baconer]

Using my example, you have at lot of evolutions and buffs on powers in Amalur that suck down your skill points.  Example, you get lightning bolt and you can "level" that up 5 or 6 times and then you can add an evolution to chain it which again has 5 evolutions and on top of that you can then turn that one spells into an AoE with I think 5 levels so one "active" when mapped consumes 15 skill points.

 

At the rate we tend to level in DA games? Yeah, that would be awful. It wouldn't even promote a different play style or a new tactical approach, it's just giving us less toys to play with while padding out the time it takes to get new rewards from leveling up.

[durasteel]

Oh man, that would be ****ing awful.

 

So we know that consoles are not to blame for the 8 ability limit, and it isn't about multiplayer parity either (You can only map 4 in this mode, right? Not great). I guess they just wanted to try a different approach to combat, but I don't like it one bit.

 

We know that consolers insist that it has nothing to do with dinky little controllers. In multiplayer, you still have 8 slots, but 4 are locked up by potions, apparently, leaving only 4 for active abilities.

 

If you think there would only be 8 abilities available if this were a PC only game, I have a bridge to sell you.

[CronoDragoon]

This game emphasises real-time action.

 

With the return of tactical camera, it emphasizes real-time action far less than DA2 did, and DA2 allowed you to use all your abilities.

 

The reasoning is flawed, and the persecution complex some PC users are displaying by blaming consoles is flawed.

[The Baconer]

We know that consolers insist that it has nothing to do with dinky little controllers. In multiplayer, you still have 8 slots, but 4 are locked up by potions, apparently, leaving only 4 for active abilities.

 

If you think there would only be 8 abilities available if this were a PC only game, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

Even though said dinky controllers didn't stop console players from having access to every skill in their repertoire before? Console players aren't the ones to blame for this.

[durasteel]

With the return of tactical camera, it emphasizes real-time action far less than DA2 did, and DA2 allowed you to use all your abilities.

 

The reasoning is flawed, and the persecution complex some PC users are displaying by blaming consoles is flawed.

 

We've been over this already. Sure, they brought back the tactical camera for those who want to play the game pausing to give orders. They've also taken active abilities out of the radial menu for consoles so that if you want to play the game as a third person shooter without pauses, you can do that too. They're trying to retain "legacy" play styles while empowering new ones.

 

I'm not "blaming consoles." There is no fault (of which I am aware) on the part of the console designers. It is, however, an inescapable fact that a gaming PC has more capability than a gaming console, and therefore if a developer commits to providing the same experience across all platforms that experience will necessarily be less than the PC is capable of delivering.

 

You are clinging to the concept that accommodating a game controller had no part in limiting your action bar to 8 slots. I do not feel that yours is a reasonable belief. 

[durasteel]

Even though said dinky controllers didn't stop console players from having access to every skill in their repertoire before? Console players aren't the ones to blame for this.

 

That access in previous games required accessing a radial menu, which paused the game. While they have restored full "pause and issue orders" tactical gameplay with an isometric-style camera, they are also clearly accommodating hyperkinetic third-person shooter-style pauseless gameplay.

[GipsyDangeresque]

We know that consolers insist that it has nothing to do with dinky little controllers. In multiplayer, you still have 8 slots, but 4 are locked up by potions, apparently, leaving only 4 for active abilities.

 

If you think there would only be 8 abilities available if this were a PC only game, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

Really? You never played Guild Wars? PC only, baby. Hundreds upon hundreds of spells and abilities in the game.

 

You get 8. No more. End of story.

[EnduinRaylene]

Oh man, that would be ****ing awful.

 

So we know that consoles are not to blame for the 8 ability limit, and it isn't about multiplayer parity either (You can only map 4 in this mode, right? Not great). I guess they just wanted to try a different approach to combat, but I don't like it one bit.

Lets look at this way. Say you're a mage. Level one you might get 2 starting spells say in the Spirit and Winter schools. I think thats hows DA2 starts with 2 abilities. So you stick with Spirit and Winter schools, both have 9 abilities, 5 spells, 4 passive, as last we saw. So if you're dedicated to those two schools only, by level 16 you would have 15 ability points to spend on them and you would have 8 spells and 8 passive abilities, without spending any points on the 6 upgrades to the spells that are also available in those two trees. If you continued to stick to just those two trees you would have to reach level 24 to max them both out, getting the remaining two spells and buying up all the upgrades available to them. That's a possible endgame level depending on how much of the side missions you've wish to complete. 

 

Now if you wanted to be a jack of all trades mage. You could technically have 12 spells by level 11 if you simply chose the first line of each tree since so far we've seen each tree goes two active, two passive, two active, two passive, and one or two active again for the most part. But that would leave you no passive abilities which usually confer a pretty hefty bonus to magic attacks or defense of some kind.

 

I don't know that doesn't seem like a big issue to me. If the abilities, both active and passive, are designed correctly and the rest of the enemies and combat encounters are done right and everything is balanced as well as it can I think that will be more than enough. But I'm also someone who is constantly switching from one party member to another, setting up combos and what not. So I'm not really going to be limited to just 8 abilities since I'll be actively utilizing all 4 party members skill sets. 

 

 

That's the rub though, isn't it? We have no idea how the skill trees work, we just know we're limited by the UI. We don't know how limited because, for whatever reason, we haven't seen the actual skill trees, the specializations and their implementation. All we have to go on is what we have, and frankly, that's looking pretty bleak.

We do know though. There's a 34 page thread with a dozen or more screenshots of the abilities screens for all three classes from the last few demos. We know the general layout, a ladder design, and number of skills per tree. They go in a 2x2x2x2x1 or 2 fashion active/passive/active/passive/active format, for the most part. Each tree has either 9 or 10 total abilities. Specializations seem to only be 7 abilities so far with what we've seen of Reaver and Knight Enchanter trees. Most trees also have at least a 3 upgrades for the active abilities, some have upwards of 6.

[durasteel]

Really? You never played Guild Wars? PC only, baby. Hundreds upon hundreds of spells and abilities in the game.

 

You get 8. No more. End of story.

 

Never played Guild Wars, no, but I'm slightly familiar with it--the original, anyway. As I understand it, that was a completely different system designed for different leveled characters to be able to play together, and where new abilities would render your old ones obsolete. In addition, I believe the selection of 8 abilities for your character (out of the hundreds upon hundreds you could choose from) defined your character for the instance in much the same way that character class defines your avatar in other games. You could have a different role from one instance to the next, as if you had changed class.

 

Again, I didn't play the game, I only read about it. Perhaps you could correct my misperceptions.

 

In Inquisition, you select a class, you select a spec tree, you pick your abilities. Then, it seems, you have to pick a few abilities to leave behind, as if you hadn't ever learned them. It seems to me that's one step too many. If we are going to be limited to 8 abilities, then what do we need role-defining classes for? We're not picking 8 abilities from among hundreds to define our character, we're just crossing off 4 - 6 abilities from our list because of a limitation which most seem willing to accept is completely arbitrary and not at all based on the number of buttons on an X Box controller, no not at all.

[Rawgrim]

So...Vivienne is one of the most powerful enchanters in Thedas, and she is only capable of using 8 spells. that just feels odd.

 

The design actually affects the story in this case.

[In Exile]

So...Vivienne is one of the most powerful enchanters in Thedas, and she is only capable of using 8 spells. that just feels odd.

 

The design actually affects the story in this case.

You really need to let go of this complaint. It's nonsense. Might as well complain that Alistair and Morrigan are fireproof because they can survive dragon fire breath without even a burnt hai

[Rawgrim]

You really need to let go of this complaint. It's nonsense. Might as well complain that Alistair and Morrigan are fireproof because they can survive dragon fire breath without even a burnt hai

 

Completely different. Told you that earlier. They can't have a separate character model for every injury possibe in the game. They do, however, add injuries you need to heal if you get knocked out by a firespell or dragon's breath. You seem to ignore this bit every time.

 

One of the most powerful mages, according to he lore, only being able to use 8 spells is ridicilous. especially since every mage in the previous games can cast plenty more.