2061 réponses à ce sujet

[WillieStyle]

I don't even recognize this series anymore...

All I've wanted for the last 5 years is a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins -- that's it, you can stop re-imagining the core concepts of the game...just give me another Archdemon to slay and I'm good.

I gave Bioware a pass on Dragon Age: II -- because hey, we all make mistakes, but now comes insult-to-injury in the form of Dragon Age: Inquisition; with all of these changes that only serve to give the illusion of difficulty...and I Just. Don't. Have. It. In. Me this time...

Maybe this is going too far, but I honestly feel like the removal of the Spirit Healer is a Bioware's way of giving a large middle-finger to me as an individual.

Like, Bioware is upset that I clown-stomped both of their games on Nightmare as a dedicated healer -- so they removed the entire class to show me whose boss.

You've shown me whose boss, alright -- you couldn't make a game that challenged good healers so you had to eliminate us from the series. I can't reward this design decision with a first-week purchase...but I'll hold my nose and get the game at some point in the future, hopefully by then, the PC modders would have corrected some of these mistakes.

Three things:

1) Despite "not having it in him" this is someone who admits he will buy DA:I. The love/hate is strong in this one.
2) How can someone take game design changes so personally (punishing you for beating nightmare)?!
3) Some enterprising psychology grad student could write an amazing thesis on the abnormal psychology of gamers.

[Steelcan]

so? become better! it aint no rocket science.
 

This is just about the worst argument anyone could think up for this issue

 

Of course its not an issue if you can breeze through Nightmare with your eyes half closed, the rest of us who can't are going to have a rougher go of it.

[Reaverwind]

This is just about the worst argument anyone could think up for this issue

 

Of course its not an issue if you can breeze through Nightmare with your eyes half closed, the rest of us who can't are going to have a rougher go of it.

 

Being able to breeze through nightmare means encounters were so poorly designed that 1) they follow an utterly predictable pattern and 2) game is too gear-centriic - meaning once you have the appropriate gear and know the boss's pattern, the challenge disappears, and higher "difficulty" becomes a matter of how much tedium you're willing to endure. I've been waiting for an RPG with more intelligent enemy AI. From what I've been seeing, I don't think DA:I is going to be that game.

[KoorahUK]

This is just about the worst argument anyone could think up for this issue

 

Of course its not an issue if you can breeze through Nightmare with your eyes half closed, the rest of us who can't are going to have a rougher go of it.

I agree with you about the pointlessness of that argument, ignore and move on. 

 

I think all you can say without playing the game is that the rest of us are going to ahve a "different" time of it. For all you know, this system may actually work better for you.

 

You have to look at it holistically - its not just that healing has been removed in isolation of anything else, combat has been completely overhauled. We really have nothing to base our expectations of how hard or not it is other than our approach to it must change. 

 

If you didn't read Lance's reply on this is worth a look, it really clears up the thinking from a mechanical level about why they took this route,

 

http://forum.bioware...ver/?p=17416109

[Adhin]

Ok, this whole argument about mages not being able to heal now is pointless and a world that doesn't exist. It's been posted here before (but you guys have ignored it). So I'm gonna go ahead and post the full twitter ...thing. https://twitter.com/...985949322891266

 

Gist of it, one dudes pissed at no heals, one persons all 'hey I coulda sworn yall said you had a group heal' and mikes all 'yep' and we're all HAPPY THEY HAVE HEALS IN. Buncha angry arguin' over damn nothing I swear. We get snazzy mitigation mechanics, we got a big group heal (that's tied behind focus and 'still' cost mana) we have a long distance revive spell (probably not focus but big CD). We might also have a regeneration spell (but that may just be a potion).

 

So calm all your collective jibber-jabberin' folks. We all get snazzy stuff and you can make a heal/support mage. You just wont be spamming heals like a madman, it's something you do to turn the tide of battle and sit there being all awesome about it.

 

-edit-

Oh and in case people just blindly miss it that was posted... yesterday. It's not some super year or 2 old confirmation crap.. it was yesterday.

[HTTP 404]

Being able to breeze through nightmare means encounters were so poorly designed that 1) they follow an utterly predictable pattern and 2) game is too gear-centriic - meaning once you have the appropriate gear and know the boss's pattern, the challenge disappears, and higher "difficulty" becomes a matter of how much tedium you're willing to endure. I've been waiting for an RPG with more intelligent enemy AI. From what I've been seeing, I don't think DA:I is going to be that game.

 

It's probably not a game for you then

[Rawgrim]

Agree 100%. Remove choice? No, increase choice. Have the magical support you want in the party rather than the party + healer. 

 

Fewer options = less choice. Although the choices in this game, even if fewer, can have more impact on the combat.

[PhroXenGold]

Fewer options = less choice. Although the choices in this game, even if fewer, can have more impact on the combat.

 

A choice where one option is clearly best might as well not be a choice. So by taking out the clear cut best, to all practical intents and purposes you increase choice.

[KoorahUK]

Fewer options = less choice. Although the choices in this game, even if fewer, can have more impact on the combat.

Building a system where I am obliged to take a healer because the combat is scaled to expect one, removes my choice. Take a healer or fail. 

 

Building a system where I am not required to provide a healer because the combat is scaled around more easily calculable hit point pools increases choice, because I can build the party I want rather than building a party + a healer. Thats 25% of my party's primary skill sets decided for me. 

 

I appreciate you are talking about your preference to play a healer - I felt much the same when I couldn't Dual Wield as a Warrior anymore, but I think in retrospect the separation of Dual Wield as a rogue only skill set did give more definition to the classes so I adjusted. I hope you find that when you actually get to play you have a similar viewpoint. 

[Nohvarr]

All I've wanted for the last 5 years is a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins -- that's it, you can stop re-imagining the core concepts of the game...just give me another Archdemon to slay and I'm good.

 

No....because that's how you get yearly sport game release, the Assassins Creed series, and the stream of similar FPS games we've gotten for the past few years.

 

"Don't give the gamer anything new, don't try to innovate and change just give them the exact same thing over and over again with slightly prettier graphics and charge them up the wazoo for it."

 

I could understand reservations about the combat system...but to out and out call for another Archdemon to slay (and to be fair you might be getting something similar) and retread of the previous games combat system with no alterations is just too much.

 

 

 

Maybe this is going too far, but I honestly feel like the removal of the Spirit Healer is a Bioware's way of giving a large middle-finger to me as an individual.

 

I seriously doubt the entire Bioware team came togather and said 'Let's screw over DLaren that arrogant *****!"

 

They flat out told you why this was done, but in case you missed it I will repost.

 

From Luckas:

 

 

 

A lot of people are picturing trying to play DAO/2 with no heals. Of course that wouldn't work, those games weren't balanced for that. But how well were they balanced with heals, really? I'm not a numbers guy, but I like a good fight. And here's what made it make sense for me.

There's a very simple reason why this is a good decision, and it's also why the balance in DAO/2 was all over the map. It's in the question "How many health points does a player have?" Because we need to know this before we can design an encounter and know how balanced it is.

So, how many HP? Well, we'd hope it starts with "somewhere between the minimum for a mage and the max for a warrior, varied based on party makeup." Okay, good place to start. That's a real number. We can build encounters that do somewhere within that range of total damage + effects.

Now add in healing. How many HP does the player have? "Somewhere between the minimum for a mage and the max for a warrior, plus somewhere between the minimum and maximum number of healing spells/potions and between the min/max of their mana/potions."

Okay, how much HP is that exactly? Since potions restore mana, and potions also restored HP, the actual number of potential HP was somewhere between the minimum for a mage and the total amount of gold you had available to spend on potions. And the later in the game it was, the more the top reached astronomical numbers. And so the greatest power the player had in previous games was not any one of their abilities, it was the ability to make the number of HP impossible to estimate.

And to counter effectively infinite HP, "balance" meant we needed to hit the player with far more potential damage than their characters could withstand, and do it all but instantly. In effect, replacing HP damage (unknown limits) with death/resurrection (known limits). Or we had to stop them from chaining potions, meaning more enemies that put them to sleep or confused them, or otherwise made the player not able to take action. Alpha strikes and crowd control, neither of which were tactics that were fun to face again and again, because they "balanced" by removing actions, by removing control.

Now in Inquisition, by reducing healing, by actually defining HP to a range that can have real numbers in it, we can better balance encounters. And no, players can't rely on chaining potions. So what do they get instead?

Abilities/gear/choices that actually have an effect on the battle that is greater than infinite health on your belt. And because your greatest ability isn't chugging potions, we need less effects that shut you down. You spend more time in control of your characters making more varied decisions to have a greater effect on the flow of the battle. You have regen from spells and potions and gear. You have effects you can craft that grant health on enemy deaths. You have damage mitigation through abilities and buffs and crafting. Limiting health and balancing enemies accordingly makes more tactical choices viable while keeping the challenge.

Does this make it more difficult? On Nightmare, Well, you asked for a challenge, and you'll have one that you can overcome in many more viable ways than previously possible.

But what about Easy? Well, last weekend, on Easy/Casual, starting the game with a mage and me not saying a word, my seven year old played for two hours that included many battles, including rifts and beating the crap out of a low level Pride demon. No party wipes. I covered his ears once.

I think you'll be fine.

 

I don't see your name mentioned anywhere so I think I can safely say, screwing you over was not the goal of this decision.

 

Now if you don't think the game is for you....fantastic, best wishes where ever you go.

[Medhia_Nox]

How does this game have "fewer options"?

Could I own a customizable keep previously?  Could I choose between various styles?

Could I play a Qunari?

Could I craft my own gear?

 

Did I have agents?

Could I pass more than three or four judgements?

 

Was my character creator so robust in the past? 

 

Honestly - whine whine whine - that's all I ever hear the little BSN bitches do.

 

Healing:

More mitigation than we've ever had:  "Guard" and Barrier are at least two

Regen. grenades

Potions

Focus GROUP heal spell

Multiple camps cutting down on tedious returning to camp - camps heal

Reaver has a self heal I'm told

Free Potion restocking at camps.

EDITED:  Because I ALSO forgot the Drain Life on Hit mod for gear.

 

Seriously - how bad are people at video games?  I'm NOT some min/maxing uber gamer - which is exactly why all this baffles me.

 

==

 

If you're just upset that you don't get a Healing tree that lets you use "Regen" and "Heal" and "Group Heal" and "Some more Heal" And "Healing Aura" and "Heal because you don't want to bother doing anything else." - then just say so.

 

But don't cry about this game not having more options and how it's just so limiting and inferior in every way to every "good" game that caters to your particular play style.

 

I was going to have a lot of healing spells too if they were available... and maybe, just maybe, Bioware hasn't shown everything available in the game yet (shocker) - but if that's "all" we can do to heal... it's a LOT even if it's not exactly how you did it last game.

[Jester]

To those screaming about "lore breaking":

 

1) Casting healing in combat is far more lore breaking, than using healing only as a rare, Focus-based spell. 

2) How does auto-regeneration after combat make sense within lore? Or becoming a Spirit Healer by reading a manual? Or using Blood Magic in a city controlled by Templars, with nobody noticing? Or none of your companions being infected with the taint, after slaying hundreds of Darkspawn?

 

Gameplay mechanics always take precedence over lore. ALWAYS.

I many aspects, DA:I got rid of those mechanics that really break lore (Blood Magic, auto-regeneration post combat, healing in combat with ease), and you scream about removing a basic healing spell and making healing actually rare and needing effort (Focus) and devotion (last ability in the tree)?

 

For those screaming about difficulty - maybe play the game first and judge for yourself. 

According to BioWare employer in this very thread, a child can beat easy. Nightmare on the other hand is supposed to be a challange, and by no means a difficulty for everybody. 

 

If you think that the game will require backtracking... it surely won't for easy. And as to higher difficulties, now apart from thinking tactically in every battle, you have to think stratigically by managing your resources. That's another layer of difficulty, which is by no means artificial. Artificial difficulty is a thing like imbalanced friendly fire in DA2 Nightmare. 

 

A choice where one option is clearly best might as well not be a choice. So by taking out the clear cut best, to all practical intents and purposes you increase choice.

 

This.

The problem is, that when one option is clearly superior to all the others, there really is no choice. There was no efficient way of damage mitigation in previous titles - there was mid combat healing, and as a means of survival it was clearly superior to any other method.

Similarly, there was really no choice of companions in DA2, once you realized that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever not to take Varric and Anders on each quest (from gameplay perspective) - as the first one has clearly the best DPS and single-target damage in the game (apart from Rogue Hawke), and the other one is the only mage with access to Heal and Haste. Once you realize this, the choice becomes an illusion, because choosing outside of optimal route, means you're purposefully weakening your party - in other words you add artificial difficulty. 

[Jaulen]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

[PhroXenGold]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

 

Well, we don't know that barrier will be neccesary. There are other means of preventing incoming damage - crowd control, guard etc. I certianly hope that it doesn't become a must have, as the point you raise is a valid one.

[volkoff]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

 

apparently rogue's get a grenade which shields people. and i think i heard something about warriors getting something aswell (has to do with taunts or something ? idk)
 

[Nohvarr]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

Actually, warriors come with the ability to increase their 'Guard' all on their own, read through post by the Biodev on the subject it should clear some things up.

[sylvanaerie]

My favorite class was mage, specifically healing mages.  My favorite 2 wardens were my Female Surana and Male Amell, because i was able to RP them as 'gentle healers' thrust into a world of constant fighting.  Really added to the game and it's replayability.  My second favorite Hawke was a pacifistic Hawke Spirit Healer.  First favorite Hawke was a snarky rogue because...well snarky!

 

Now I find out every mage, including the Player Character him/herself, has apparently become my warden's 'mentally disabled cousin' and forgotten how to heal?  I am not the best player in the world, always play on casual, only developing some competence after a half dozen playthroughs.  I doubt I will have the zeal to do this with Inquisition since it's longer than War and Peace apparently and will require loads of backtracking to 'regroup'  zzzzzzzzzzz  .  I only played Skyrim through once, and lost any desire for a second playthrough.  And I enjoyed that game!  

 

I have zero enthusiasm for Inquisition now.  

[CronoDragoon]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

 

In a sense you are wrong, as the mage Barrier spell isn't the only barrier mechanic they've introduced. The guard mechanic for Warrior, for example, is in essence a barrier as it creates a temporary HP buffer that will get eaten before your real HP. I imagine rogue will have some comparable survival technique.

 

 

 

Now I find out every mage, including the Player Character him/herself, has apparently become my warden's 'mentally disabled cousin' and forgotten how to heal?

 

Healing is actually quite rare. Not every mage can heal, and most can't.

 

The backtracking thing is being blown out of proportion. With the introduction of camps and the proliferation of HP-retention abilities to all classes, I imagine your per-fight survivability will actually be quite high (this is supported by Lukas saying they don't need to focus on CC and one-shot damage from enemies in a system where your potential total HP has a lower cap), and that the real danger might be in overextending yourself over the long haul. Which again, is what camps are for. If you find yourself constantly out of potions and/or unable to sustain yourself over an extended period of play, then that's probably a sign to play at a lower difficulty. But I really doubt that someone who played Origins and DA2 on Normal will have trouble with Inquisition Normal, and so on.

[Jaulen]

The problem is, that when one option is clearly superior to all the others, there really is no choice. There was no efficient way of damage mitigation in previous titles - there was mid combat healing, and as a means of survival it was clearly superior to any other method.

Similarly, there was really no choice of companions in DA2, once you realized that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever not to take Varric and Anders on each quest (from gameplay perspective) - as the first one has clearly the best DPS and single-target damage in the game (apart from Rogue Hawke), and the other one is the only mage with access to Heal and Haste. Once you realize this, the choice becomes an illusion, because choosing outside of optimal route, means you're purposefully weakening your party - in other words you add artificial difficulty. 

 

 

You don't think with they way they are going with the emphasis on 'tactics' and cross-class combos that the same isn't going to happen based on how you spec your character and the companions?

 

I would argue that it's going to be worse.....that based on how you spec everybody, that there will be an 'optimal' team for you to take around with your Inquistor.

 

At least in DAO and DA2 I could play around with builds and change out teams pretty often and still do half-way decent in any encounter, with or without healers or mages. Which meant that if I wanted to take different party combos I could and I wasn't super penalized if I didn't have a mage with a freeze spell to pair with my smash-warrior.

 

(or as DAI is going to do, mages will have the ability to spec for 'rebuilding' stuff like broken bridges....so if you want to get somewhere, you have to have a mage with you that also has the ability to 'rebuild')

[Medhia_Nox]

@sylvanaerie:  You know... you have a group focus heal spell right?  You know you have Barrier right? 

It would actually be a little mentally deranged if a "Pacifist" actually preferred their allies to get wounded so they could heal them over creating a barrier so they never got wounded.

 

You know you'll have Revive right - it's at the end of the Spirit tree (and who knows what OTHER damage mitigation/heals are in that tree). 

 

You know you could have your mage throw magical grenades that "cast" regenerate on the group right? 

[Shadowson]

Question here....

 

People keep saying to the effect:

 

Barriers are Awesome! Better than a heal spell! Now it's no big deal that we don't have heal spells 'cause we have Barrier effects! this means I don't have to tote a healer/mage whom I don't like around with me.

 

 

Am I wrong in assuming that barriers are still mage-only? So, now instead of having to tote a healer mage around with you, you have to tote a mage around with you that can cast a barrier spell......and we are limited to 8 ability/spell slots, so mages will pretty much be required to have barrier as one of their set slots, so in effect reducing your open ability slots to 7 (same with dodge/roll for rogues/warriors).

 

I don't see the difference between 'barrier and heal' in this respect, since as with a heal spell, you are going to be forced to spend your ability points in the school of magic that gives the mage the ability to cast a barrier.

 

warriors can cast guard so no you don't have to tote around a mage

[PhroXenGold]

My favorite class was mage, specifically healing mages.  My favorite 2 wardens were my Female Surana and Male Amell, because i was able to RP them as 'gentle healers' thrust into a world of constant fighting.  Really added to the game and it's replayability.  My second favorite Hawke was a pacifistic Hawke Spirit Healer.  First favorite Hawke was a snarky rogue because...well snarky!

 

Now I find out every mage, including the Player Character him/herself, has apparently become my warden's 'mentally disabled cousin' and forgotten how to heal?  I am not the best player in the world, always play on casual, only developing some competence after a half dozen playthroughs.  I doubt I will have the zeal to do this with Inquisition since it's longer than War and Peace apparently and will require loads of backtracking to 'regroup'  zzzzzzzzzzz  .  I only played Skyrim through once, and lost any desire for a second playthrough.  And I enjoyed that game!  

 

I have zero enthusiasm for Inquisition now.  

 

Wait...what? Why do you think that casual difficulty will involve backtracking?

[Jaulen]

In a sense you are wrong, as the mage Barrier spell isn't the only barrier mechanic they've introduced. The guard mechanic for Warrior, for example, is in essence a barrier as it creates a temporary HP buffer that will get eaten before your real HP. I imagine rogue will have some comparable survival technique.

 

So.....now instead of one character having to be focused in healing/protection, everyone will have to be......further reducing our open ability slots.

 

Sweet. /sarcasm

[Nohvarr]

My favorite class was mage, specifically healing mages.  My favorite 2 wardens were my Female Surana and Male Amell, because i was able to RP them as 'gentle healers' thrust into a world of constant fighting.  Really added to the game and it's replayability.  My second favorite Hawke was a pacifistic Hawke Spirit Healer.  First favorite Hawke was a snarky rogue because...well snarky!

 

Now I find out every mage, including the Player Character him/herself, has apparently become my warden's 'mentally disabled cousin' and forgotten how to heal?  I am not the best player in the world, always play on casual, only developing some competence after a half dozen playthroughs.  I doubt I will have the zeal to do this with Inquisition since it's longer than War and Peace apparently and will require loads of backtracking to 'regroup'  zzzzzzzzzzz  .  I only played Skyrim through once, and lost any desire for a second playthrough.  And I enjoyed that game!  

 

I have zero enthusiasm for Inquisition now.  

Bioware devs 7 year old kid was able to play the game on casual with no problems, you'll be fine.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Jaulen:  Yeah, let's look at it only from our own selfish playstyle instead of saying:  "Great, now people can play really viable 4 man fighter groups if they wish."