KotOR had like the worst mechanics and certainly worst PC GUI of any Bioware game ever
A possible upside of the 8 ability limit occurs to me.
If we're expected to decide, in advance, which abilities to have available, then we'll have to know exactly what those abilities do.
I'm not desperate to defend the game, I'm desperate for people to be a little more open minded.
Also... It's people violently reacting to design decisions that push the good people out of studios... have you seen David Gaider on Twitter recently?
All the verbal abuse he's getting because as a writer he doesn't feel a certain romance is in a characters best interest.
What about Casey Hudson or the Good Doctors... Casey the lead designer on Knights of the Old Republic, torn to pieces on the Mass Effect forums.
Having criticism isn't wrong... if the game releases and its terrible I'll make my opinion heard, but I'll do it in a respectful manner.
A well designed game... is a well designed game, whether it has 50 abilities or 8 on your bar.
Or dumbing down the game to a romance simulator and requiring so little thought process probably brought in the same people that is insulting them? If you wanna dumb down the game to those levels its expected you get the same idiots who are vitriolic on mainstream games to play your games. People who care about playing a dating sim rather than a rpg, or a straight up third person shooter that requires no strategy besides spamming abilities with shooting(me3).
Maybe they should stop giving their opinion pieces over social media as well to stop inciting people who disagree with them. Just make the game, explain why certain things are the way it is and move on.
I have seen good discussion on this, ya some people are mad but thats because some of you are not giving legitimate responses besides the usual "wait for the game release" or "you don't know what you are talking about cause you aren't the dev". Some of you who disagreed made valid points but some from both sides are flinging crap at each other.
I'm hoping we can use non-combat stealth to scout ahead and ambush the enemies.Not only that but we also need to know what kind of fight we will be in so we can decide which abilities to use. The only way to know that is to play the game at least once so we know what kind of fight we will get.
We had the same problem is TW2 as we could only use potions when we meditate so it was either play the game without potions or restart before the fight and meditate so you use the correct potions.
Which is why expandable bars are better, you don't have to have any more then you want to.
Well thats a completely different debate in therms of customizability vs direction. I could be a solution but basicly an exentable bar means having them all there at once.
It might not sound cool but more freedom is not allways better for the game experience, think of the two weapons limt introduced in mordern games, they didn't do that just to annoy you.
Don't like it. Looks almost as bad as DA2 did.
I'm not desperate to defend the game, I'm desperate for people to be a little more open minded.
Also... It's people violently reacting to design decisions that push the good people out of studios... have you seen David Gaider on Twitter recently?
All the verbal abuse he's getting because as a writer he doesn't feel a certain romance is in a characters best interest.
What about Casey Hudson or the Good Doctors... Casey the lead designer on Knights of the Old Republic, torn to pieces on the Mass Effect forums.
Having criticism isn't wrong... if the game releases and its terrible I'll make my opinion heard, but I'll do it in a respectful manner.
A well designed game... is a well designed game, whether it has 50 abilities or 8 on your bar.
While I agree that being overly aggressive is bad (I am guilty of that myself sometimes - especially when gameplay and design-decisions, at least to me, are completely retarded/stupid) - but ripping them a new one for ruining (or fixing something that is not broken in any way, shape or form) a working mechanic is still not wrong IMHO
I mean, we pay for their games - so is it wrong to expect them to make something we will actually want to buy and replay (and buy DLC etc.)?
I don't think so - and we know they are able to deliver on that, too (they - IMO - just don't try anymore...at least that's how it looks like to us outsiders):
They made DAO which is still (IMO) the last really great game they made (yes: ME1 and 2 were not bad either - they are in my Top-10, too) - it's just strange (and insulting IMO) if they disregard us and insist on wrecking something that has been working very well (yes, some adjustments ok - but not taking the wrecking-ball to it) and then tell us that it's great (shouldn't we be the ones deciding that - and yes, for this UI and the artificial 8 slots for abilities we can say that it's bad without having to play the game, because artificial reductions are always bad (even more if they have no logical bases - unlike say a weapon loadout in a shooter, where carrying 10 guns (in a realistic shooter) is just not realistic because of weight, need to carry ammo etc.))
So yes, we are right to criticise (and being accused of not giving them a chance by people defending them is really insulting, too - they can defend themselfes for christs' sake, they don't need you guys to do it for them...as for defending a bad position: it makes you look like fanboys!)
greetings LAX
...
What about Casey Hudson or the Good Doctors... Casey the lead designer on Knights of the Old Republic, torn to pieces on the Mass Effect forums.
...
I got the impression that Ray and Greg left in large part because after being the bosses for so long, it was not comfortable for them to be relegated to management. I could be wrong.
Casey, though, is a real shame. I was really hoping for the next game with him at the helm to be a great triumph and redeem him in the eyes of the fandom--it sucks that he left with ME3 still hanging around his neck. With that said, though, he really did screw the pooch on that game. For it to have so many great moments and yet still be such an overall disappointment does suggest a problem with the way he ran the project.
I could be flat out wrong, but I think David Gaider loves the scrum. He seems to bait the sharks and wait with the gaff in hand, so to speak.
Increasingly, in this era of social media and massive conventions, the developers aren't just responsible for making a product, but also for selling it well before it ever hits the shelf. They also have to represent the brand and handle PR after a product launches. I don't know if that's a good or a bad thing--it certainly seems to take its toll.
I miss Daniel Erickson at press events.
While I agree that being overly aggressive is bad (I am guilty of that myself sometimes - especially when gameplay and design-decisions, at least to me, are completely retarded/stupid) - but ripping them a new one for ruining (or fixing something that is not broken in any way, shape or form) a working mechanic is still not wrong IMHO
I mean, we pay for their games - so is it wrong to expect them to make something we will actually want to buy and replay (and buy DLC etc.)?
I don't think so - and we know they are able to deliver on that, too (they - IMO - just don't try anymore...at least that's how it looks like to us outsiders):
They made DAO which is still (IMO) the last really great game they made (yes: ME1 and 2 were not bad either - they are in my Top-10, too) - it's just strange (and insulting IMO) if they disregard us and insist on wrecking something that has been working very well (yes, some adjustments ok - but not taking the wrecking-ball to it) and then tell us that it's great (shouldn't we be the ones deciding that - and yes, for this UI and the artificial 8 slots for abilities we can say that it's bad without having to play the game, because artificial reductions are always bad (even more if they have no logical bases - unlike say a weapon loadout in a shooter, where carrying 10 guns (in a realistic shooter) is just not realistic because of weight, need to carry ammo etc.))
So yes, we are right to criticise (and being accused of not giving them a chance by people defending them is really insulting, too - they can defend themselfes for christs' sake, they don't need you guys to do it for them...as for defending a bad position: it makes you look like fanboys!)
greetings LAX
You and several million people buy their games, why are you more important than the rest?
Purchasing their game doesn't suddenly make them beholden to you... If you don't like the game then return it, why should they be expected to rework something just because you're not a fan of a particular system?
That's the kind of attitude that stifles creativity within the medium, you don't design games by fan committee. You craft something you think people will enjoy... sometimes that can go horribly wrong but hopefully learn from your mistakes and move forward.
Quality of over quantity... if the system is well designed and most importantly fun, why does it matter if there are 8 or 80 abilities?
As for defending them... if the game releases and it's not great then I'll be disappointed, but I'm not going to "rip" them apart before I even give their new combat design a chance.
...
Maybe they should stop giving their opinion pieces over social media as well to stop inciting people who disagree with them. Just make the game, explain why certain things are the way it is and move on.
...
I'm so not a fan of Twitter. I really don't think it's too much to ask for a developer to provide a paragraph or two of explanation for something important. If the only comment made is a tweet, that suggests to me that the commenter doesn't really consider the topic to be important.
Put another way: How can I take u srsly if u cant b botherd to xplain urself?
Increasingly, in this era of social media and massive conventions, the developers aren't just responsible for making a product, but also for selling it well before it ever hits the shelf. They also have to represent the brand and handle PR after a product launches. I don't know if that's a good or a bad thing--it certainly seems to take its toll.
That's the nature of modern game design, you announce a title 2 years before release and have to constantly keep people "hyped" or invested until you ship.
But with everything sometimes features are cut or don't work as intended and upon release people feel "lied" to because things aren't what they were expecting.
The devs aren't PR reps and you can see that in their interactions on Twitter, also one of the reasons you'll never see them on the forums... people just tear into them over pretty much anything and everything.
Allan is the only guy guy I ever see on the forums and back during the ME3 stuff I didn't see anyone from the ME team, I think Allan and John Epler tried in vain to put out as many fires or calm as many fears as possible.
How do you interact with a community that's literally waiting to devour you over every little detail?
I imagine it takes it's toll.
uncool bro. it wasn't worst. I played that same one on Xbox. you must have no idea how to play it on PC well before PC was designed to allow controllers to play on PC. I play KOTOR on Xbox and I also do have KOTOR for PC, which I can use my Xbox controller to play on it.
I'm not going to judge a PC UI by how it works with a controller.
Perhaps (and hear me out here,) perhaps strategy in combat requires an emphasis on overcoming limitations placed on you, positioning of units, delegation of tasks and the prioritization of threats, and enemies+encounters designed in a way that attack the weaknesses in your own strategies and force you to adapt to them.
Perhaps it is those things that are essential to making combat more than a mindless hack and slash, and it is in no way effected by increasing the number of magical spells you can lob out over the course of 30 seconds.
I can already imagine fighting a bunch of Rage Demons and realising I have mostly Fire Spells in my bar.
Better quickload to the last save and fix that, knowing I will deal with fire-immune enemies! Oh yes, that's great gameplay.
Or fighting the High Dragon/Qunari in DA2 with 8 spells and realising they're immune to fire. Awesome.
At least in DA2 you could switch to other spells. Here? Nope. Quicksave it is.
My English is really bad, but hope you understand anyway. SO here i go.
Do the limet of 8 Abilities have inpackt on the 150 game playe time? Like 50 of those to change Abilities for you and your companions .?
And the map on the left side,,i tryed to play another game (Tera) and i put the map on left side,,man i got a headage.
Im almoste 60 now so my brain got small like a nut, and im right handed dont know if its only me that has problem whit the map thing though,
I just went Down and payed for my Collector Edition.i really want this game i have been waiting for it so loooooong:))
Even if i dont like all of the thing about the UI..its not that big that it will keep me from getting in the World i had so fun in and love.
Sorry for the bad bad English.
ok im ready for the response on my funny letter:D
My English is really bad, but hope you understand anyway. SO here i go.
Do the limet of 8 Abilities have inpackt on the 150 game playe time? Like 50 of those to change Abilities for you and your companions .?
And the map on the left side,,i tryed to play another game (Tera) and i put the map on left side,,man i got a headage.
Im almoste 60 now so my brain got small like a nut, and im right handed dont know if its only me that has problem whit the map thing though,
I just went Down and payed for my Collector Edition.i really want this game i have been waiting for it so loooooong:))
Even if i dont like all of the thing about the UI..its not that big that it will keep me from getting in the World i had so fun in and love.
Sorry for the bad bad English.
ok im ready for the response on my funny letter:D
I doubt the ability limit has any impact on the game length.
No, swapping out abilities won't add on 50 hours of play time... unless you're moving at a snails pace. 
I think even with 8 abilities they can just fix the whole mess by allowing us to change the 8 during combat as well. Kind of keeps both sides of the argument happy.
I can already imagine fighting a bunch of Rage Demons and realising I have mostly Fire Spells in my bar.
Better quickload to the last save and fix that, knowing I will deal with fire-immune enemies! Oh yes, that's great gameplay.
Or fighting the High Dragon/Qunari in DA2 with 8 spells and realising they're immune to fire. Awesome.
At least in DA2 you could switch to other spells. Here? Nope. Quicksave it is.
What about the 24 abilities your party have?
Why can't your companions compensate for the poor build in this situation?
What about the 24 abilities your party have?
Why can't your companions compensate for the poor build in this situation?
You basically have 1 character that is completely useless. That never happened in past games.
Oh i do:)) I whis i had the Strength and brain to get a good Snail Picture up here:))
What about the 24 abilities your party have?
Why can't your companions compensate for the poor build in this situation?
As the below posted said, you should -NEVER- and I really mean -NEVER- have deadweight in a party based game.
When a team is made of 4 and one is utterly useless, something is seriously wrong.
It reminds me of Vanilla WoW when hybrid classes were just buff droids and had no role in the raid other than spamming buffs and making sure they don't fall off. Horrible days.
Also being limited to 8 abilities pretty much means, in my eyes, that you can't solo which was another challenging and rewarding thing to do.
You basically have 1 character that is completely useless. That never happened in past games.
... because of this your specialization was pointless.
Now perhaps your ability spec will have more meaning and the composition of your party more thought-out.
... because of this your specialization was pointless.
Now perhaps your ability spec will have more meaning and the composition of your party more thought-out.
So having useless characters during 1 fight to another is a good thing in a party based game? Wtf are you people smoking?
I doubt that this is even possible. At best, there is probably only two or three fire active abilities.
So having useless characters during 1 fight to another is a good thing in a party based game? Wtf are you people smoking?
Who said you would keep the same abilities once realizing the area you're in requires a different approach?
What's wrong with getting through a tough fight... taking a moment to reassess your abilities, making some adjustments and continuing on...?
Who said you would keep the same abilities once realizing the area you're in requires a different approach?
What's wrong with getting through a tough fight... taking a moment to reassess your abilities, making some adjustments and continuing on...?
That it is - artificially - stretching the game itself (!)...as if we didn't have enough of those kinds of mechanics already (no healing spells, no regenerating health, having to farm for potions etc.)
greetings LAX
Retour en haut