They confirmed you can't change abilities/pots out unless you're in camps correct?
No, you can change abilities anytime you aren't in battle. So, for example, if you crest a hill and see a camp full of X mob, and you know you have Y ability that's totally rad against them, you can equip it.
Potions as far as I know can only be replenished in camps, but I imagine equipping them to your belt works like abilities.
I don't really understand the reasoning for the ability limitation. I mean, I saw the explanation but how can a player plan ahead if we don't know what's going to happen next? Granted, we haven't played the game so we don't know what kind of signals Bioware will put into place so you can plan ahead. I would much rather have access to all abilities/pots when I want and then use them for the situation. It seems far more limiting to just force 8 usable abilities at once. I can see myself going into situations where I don't have the right pots/abilities I want. They confirmed you can't change abilities/pots out unless you're in camps correct? If that's true then your design better put clear indicators around the player that he needs certain abilities/pots or that's just bad design.
I know I'm way behind in this conversation but it's kinda baffling. I'm reserving judgment until I actually play the game. Just seems like a rather odd gameplay decision. Perhaps it's nothing like I'm imagining in my head. I do like an emphasis on tactical gameplay but I don't like it when it strips control away from the player. Is it a compromise I'm willing to accept as I understand the gameplay mechanics? Only way to answer that is when I play it.
The major concern I have now is they stripped more active abilities in the skill trees and downsized them to progression abilities that you can level multiple times instead of having many different active abilities in your tree. In other words, a tree would only have 1-2 active abilities now but the rest of the tree is designed to progress them...
I don't know where you're getting the bolded at all. Every tree we've seen has had the same basic format of 5-6 active abilities and 4 passive abilities, with then roughly 3-6 upgrades for those active ones. Both Specializations we've seen have 3 active and 4 passive abilities, as well as 3 upgrades.
They're all in the same ladder format of:
Active Active
Passive-----Passive
Active Active
Passive-----Passive
Active Active*
*though many trees only have 9 total abilities so the last rung is just one Active, though I think we've seen at least one tree where it was an Active and Passive ability for the last rung.
situational abilities (whatever that means, imho it's something with huge cooldown and you use it maybe once in few fights regardless of the enemy class/immunity/hair colour - something like haste maybe) and their usefulness might create more game reloading - simply to change abilities, if not balanced properly.
i don't think there are many situational abilities - if they are, they most likely be class cross combos utilities. with 8 slot limit, having more than 1 situational ability is a waste/loading screen - more so if i decide to have a solo PT
A situational ability is something that's only effective against certain enemies - ie a Templar's Smite, which in theory was supposed to really hurt mages, but otherwise was useless. (In practice, there were better talents to use against mages.) If enemy resists work anything like they did in DA2, almost all of a mage's arsenal will prove to be situational.
I don't know where you're getting the bolded at all. Every tree we've seen has had the same basic format of 5-6 active abilities and 4 passive abilities, with then roughly 3-6 upgrades for those active ones. Both Specializations we've seen have 3 active and 4 passive abilities, as well as 3 upgrades.
They're all in the same ladder format of:
Active Active
Passive-----Passive
Active Active
Passive-----Passive
Active Active*
*though many trees only have 9 total abilities so the last rung is just one Active, though I think we've seen at least one tree where it was an Active and Passive ability for the last rung.
I meant it was a concern they would do that based on the design decision of only allowing 8 abilities active.
No, you can change abilities anytime you aren't in battle. So, for example, if you crest a hill and see a camp full of X mob, and you know you have Y ability that's totally rad against them, you can equip it.
Potions as far as I know can only be replenished in camps, but I imagine equipping them to your belt works like abilities.
Okay good. I can understand pots a little more than abilities. I could've swore I saw a dev say you can only switch abilities out in camps unless they spoke wrong or just changed that design decision. Thankfully we can alternate whenever we want.
A situational ability is something that's only effective against certain enemies - ie a Templar's Smite, which in theory was supposed to really hurt mages, but otherwise was useless. (In practice, there were better talents to use against mages.) If enemy resists work anything like they did in DA2, almost all of a mage's arsenal will prove to be situational.
that makes Smite a mandatory ability in mage/demon infested areas. the 'plan ahead' approach could work in such cases - you can change abilities after first fight in order to prepare yourself for future similar encounters. the same goes for mage spells - compose skillset basing on enemy vulnerabilities. and that's not something i see as an issue with this vauge combat system. it might be awkward changing skills frequently, but that's minor annoyance imho
If focus abilities don't take up an ability slot then we actually have room for 9 abilities. Which would also make sense because focus abilities cannot be used at will, so having a single focus ability set to each character (and activated via a unique button) would make sense to me.
I would really like BioWare to just give us some greater details on the mechanics of combat to show where this 8 ability limit fits into everything else because it's not the be all and end all of what makes up combat. There are so many aspects of the game that inform the way combat works and unfolds, but outside of this new 8 ability limit we don't know all that much definitively. I've tried to piece a lot of incomplete information, like what we've seen of the Ability Trees, level cap, crafting and various tweets and dev posts, together to try and paint a bigger picture of what the direction of combat is, and I think it's a pretty decent picture, but it's still a guess at the end of the day. I can understand why a lot of people are quite upset over this, even if I don't agree with how that dissatisfaction is often presented. So clarity and greater detail would be very useful for all involved.
Yep the reveal of this has been appallingly mishandled. A detailed explanation should have been ready for the moment this was revealed cause it was always going to be perhaps the most controversial thing about the game.
that makes Smite a mandatory ability in mage/demon infested areas. the 'plan ahead' approach could work in such cases - you can change abilities after first fight in order to prepare yourself for future similar encounters. the same goes for mage spells - compose skillset basing on enemy vulnerabilities. and that's not something i see as an issue with this vauge combat system. it might be awkward changing skills frequently, but that's minor annoyance imho
Might be awkward? I foresee it rapidly becoming a major nuisance. Having to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes passes well into the realm of tedium, and that's not something you ever want to see in a game.
Why do you presume then you'll actually see such thing in the game, as opposed to much more logical option, like encounters arranged in a way that doesn't require you to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes?Might be awkward? I foresee it rapidly becoming a major nuisance. Having to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes passes well into the realm of tedium, and that's not something you ever want to see in a game.
Because that worked out so well for ME2.
I keep seeing statements like this, and I don't get it. You guys do remember that ME2 was enormously successful, right?
Totally and completely and absolutely OT - skimming over the thread title, I thought it said "Take It"...seemed rather, um...forceful 
(yes, I will see myself out, no need to push!)
I'm happy for those people waiting for this reveal, though I question why there's only 8 active/combat abilities on the PC version considering even Dragon Age 2 had more (and of course, Dragon Age: Origins).
It seems like a somewhat weird design decision to me, a downgrade, personally. That is, unless, there is a reason for it (i.e. less active/combat abilities than DA:O and DA2).
Why do you presume then you'll actually see such thing in the game, as opposed to much more logical option, like encounters arranged in a way that doesn't require you to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes?
Because I don't expect to see a single type of enemy in any given area.
Because I don't expect to see a single type of enemy in any given area.
And it's inconceivable to you that a broad swath of land in an area may be populated by a variety of baddies who don't necessarily have opposite vulnerabilities?
Why do you presume then you'll actually see such thing in the game, as opposed to much more logical option, like encounters arranged in a way that doesn't require you to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes?
Honestly, I suspect changing abilities might only be necessary on Nightmare, and preferred on Hard. I can see BioWare overselling the tactical necessity...I can't see them making encounters unmanageable on anything other than the hardest difficulty.
I keep seeing statements like this, and I don't get it. You guys do remember that ME2 was enormously successful, right?
It was ok (best of the three - but their limiting abilities was bad even back then)
greetings LAX
And it's inconceivable to you that a broad swath of land in an area may be populated by a variety of baddies who don't necessarily have opposite vulnerabilities?
Right. Logic of the areas aside, it's easier for the level designers to work from a restricted palette for each area, especially since there's no real scaling mechanism.
Personally fighting identical enemies over and over again in the same area (which could last up to 10 hours considering the length of the game) is almost as tedious as having to change hot bars every few fights. I prefer varied fights, first you fight some heavily armored templars, then an archer trap with Behemoths, then assassins and some captive mages. Compared to fighting 'templars', then more 'templars', then even more 'templars'. Encounter design is definitely tied very closely to this issue. Hopefully Bioware did this in a smart way so it never feels tedious, but time will tell.
Because it's the last straw. For me it was the question of: "Is BW showing enough good things to make me believe them after DA2 and ME3?". Some news made me more interested in the game, some less, and this one is the one that put the answer strictly into "wait for mods and discounts" sector. I'm still a fan of DA-verse, but I don't want to be a battered wife, and I wish to have my voice and my reasoning heard. No better way to achieve that than post on forums and avoid buying the game.
This is 100% correct. In fact, it is the only way to have your voice heard. Money talks, bullsh%t walks.
Personally fighting identical enemies over and over again in the same area (which could last up to 10 hours considering the length of the game) is almost as tedious as having to change hot bars every few fights. I prefer varied fights, first you fight some heavily armored templars, then an archer trap with Behemoths, then assassins and some captive mages. Compared to fighting 'templars', then more 'templars', then even more 'templars'. Encounter design is definitely tied very closely to this issue. Hopefully Bioware did this in a smart way so it never feels tedious, but time will tell.
Thus far, encounter design has definitely not been Bioware's strong suit (most encounters in DA:O were overly static, DA2 suffered from a whole new level of tedium with their wave-spawn design, and there's far too much painfully obvious scripting).
Honestly, I suspect changing abilities might only be necessary on Nightmare, and preferred on Hard. I can see BioWare overselling the tactical necessity...I can't see them making encounters unmanageable on anything other than the hardest difficulty.
Personally fighting identical enemies over and over again in the same area (which could last up to 10 hours considering the length of the game) is almost as tedious as having to change hot bars every few fights. I prefer varied fights, first you fight some heavily armored templars, then an archer trap with Behemoths, then assassins and some captive mages. Compared to fighting 'templars', then more 'templars', then even more 'templars'. Encounter design is definitely tied very closely to this issue. Hopefully Bioware did this in a smart way so it never feels tedious, but time will tell.
You seem to have missed the point completely, so please read the next paragraph very slowly, then take a moment to ponder its meaning, and then read it again for good measure, before responding.
"Not having opposite vulnerabilities" is not the same as "Being identical."
I wasn't replying directly to your sentiment, I was stating I don't like fighting identical enemies for the duration of a multihour zone. Also 'Opposite Vulnerabilities' is only one possible reason to switch out skills. Maybe some abilities are great against heavily armored foes, others are great against archers (somehow), some are good against dexterous foes, others are good against opponents using natural weapons (bears, cats, wyverns). There are any number of situational abilities that are not related solely to the least imaginative form of differentiation (weak to fire, resistant to lightning, etc).
So think before you call someone else an idiot, please.
Right. Once you understand the system, Bio games are pretty easy. It'd be kind of shocking if DAI really required much of us.
I'd be shocked if Bioware designs a game where there are more than 8 comically broken abilities per class where we'd actually feel the need for a 9th slot powergaming.
I mean, I still dislike the choice because I prefer a longer hotbar with more abilities, but the reality is that Bioware games don't really need more than a little room to pick all the OP powers (e.g. mana clash).
Might be awkward? I foresee it rapidly becoming a major nuisance. Having to reconfigure the hotbars every five minutes passes well into the realm of tedium, and that's not something you ever want to see in a game.
i see your point, but i think that's a bit exaggerated.
if we stumble upon dark roads entrance, we should expect darkspawn, where is darkspawn there should be at least one or more nasty emissaries (hated those guys, crushing prison and other nasty stuff) - knowing that, i pick a Smite (knowing it will be useless against Carta or golems) and put it in the 'just in case' free slot.
if i venture into undead infested ruins, i know there will be skeletons.. so my cold magicks would be useless, but i want to balance it somehow - put one cold spell, preferably some cc or high damage one into 'just in case' free slot.
i don't know bestiary (wink-wink, a well-timed info release maybe?), have some vague idea how does it look. we don't know the level design (and i don't expect BW to show us all locations and mobs positioning; outside the actuall game)
the problem lies somewhere else, well at least for me. i cannot ditch the party, i cannot roam the ruins myself - a mage alone? with 8 abilities? with cooldowns? no healing spells and 8 potions? i mean, come on!
i don't want to play this game on easy/normal, i feel most of ppl in this thread don't want to do that either... because it's no fun
Retour en haut