2061 réponses à ce sujet

[sylvanaerie]

The problem with this kind of discussion is, you haven't played the game.  It may be it sucks to the highest level of suckocity.  It may prove more fun than previous installments.  It's hard to judge for now with any objectivity.  The removal of one aspect of the previous games has given a lot of people (myself included) a knee jerk reaction of 'this sucks'.  I'm not telling you how to think or feel about it.  Like I said, I felt it sucks too, but I'm willing to try it and give it a chance to grow on me.

Now I know, you would say 'Well, I don't need to get kicked in the groin to know that's no fun either, Syl' and that would be a viable argument.  Except this isn't a kick in the groin.  It's just a new way of looking at combat.  That's all.  Bioware has not singled you personally out to ruin your gaming experience (and yes, this was the hardest thing I had to accept, even if it does feel personal to me).

 

If you are unsure, wait to get a copy, see what other players say (and I'm sure the first reviews will start being posted within hours--at the latest a day or two).  Then you can make a more informed decision about if this game is for you or not.  Reading reviews won't be as good as a personal hands on experience, but at least you will have more information about the game and can decide if it's a good fit for you or not.

 

Bioware isn't going to change the way they have worked the combat at this late date, and frankly, I wouldn't want them to as that would back it up even longer.  Give it a chance to grow on you.  Play in easiest mode if you have to just till you get the hang of it.  If it's too easy on casual, up it a notch and try normal mode.  I will be playing on Easy myself as I'm not the most tactical player, tending to take fights pretty head on.  I imagine I'll be dying a lot.

 

Also, the injury system has been removed, so there isn't that concern.  All companions and the Protagonist have a 'revive' feature where you have them click on the fallen and bring them back into combat, so you don't even require a revive spell (though there is one in the Creation? tree that is a multiple target revive?).  In addition to a group heal/revive focus ability available to mages.  

 

If enough people like it, you better get used to the idea that this will set a trend, not just with Bioware, but other games as everyone will want to jump on the bandwagon.  If people don't like it, the company will have to rethink and try again.  That's if they still decide it's worth making games their fans just criticize without even trying them out.

[Medhia_Nox]

@xkg:  Once again though - the problem becomes:  If the people who are upset about the change really just wanted to vent.  This thread wouldn't have been 74 pages.  Same with the Attributes thread. 

 

Instead - I believe - they want to affect change through complaint.  It's not like it's ever anyone new - it's almost always the same people repeating themselves.  I also believe people are trying to prove they are right about their disappointment - which of course they never have to prove because their disappointment is an opinion - however the very nature of trying to prove it makes me wonder if people think it's not opinion.  Which is why I reply on threads like this.  You not liking it is just one more opinion amongst thousands.  Valid to you - not to me - as I am pleased with the changes (and vice versa). 

 

I'm sorry healing is not what you want - but there's less than 20 days till the game.  It's not going to change. 

 

IF all we really wanted in this thread was to say "Bummer" - then we would have and it would have been off the first page ages ago.

[Gothfather]

You are not being trolled, you are being told that people have different opinions. That some opinions are not viable to you doesn't mean it is the same for everyone else.

You are increasing your tactical choices not mine. I don't feel like having more of them.

 

For the last time I am gong try to explain it to you by using an example, but first I have to say something before doing that.

I have nothing against ss romances, people with diferent preferences. In fact I always supported them, and the act of adding content for them into the game.

 

Now, back to my example. Let's say you will take out the straight romance option out of the game. Do you believe you're giving me more choices?

That option was superior, for me personaly, now it's gone. So the truth is, by removing that option I am left with no choices at all.

 

I won't say more because it is very slippery example(that's why I had to do that preface).

You should figure out yourself now. why taking the options out, is not a viable option for everyone, and why it doesn't produce more choices for some people.

 

If you still can't ... *shrugs* then I am sorry. We will have to agree to disagree.

You can't cure... One last try.

 

you are taking something that is clearly subjective removing an option and saying see removing an option doesn't increase choice. I never said ALWAYS removing an option increases choice. I pointed out that in SOME cases removing an option does increase choice.

 

 

1) Straight F romance option

2) Straight M romance option

3) Bi F romance option

4) Bi M romance option

5) Gay F romance option

6) Gay M romance option

 

None of these option can be clearly demonstrated to be superior it is NOT possible because a person's sex and sexual orientation will be a deciding factor in which options are appealing. If you took a poll with the same number of bi women, bi men, straight men, straight women, gay women and gay men and said pick what you want you won't get a clear cut winner because there isn't one. Anyone capable of critical thought can see this. You also can't objectively show which choice is better because the criteria for making the choice is ALL SUBJECTIVE. Combat isn't all subjective there are clear cut objective matrixes that can show why one choice is better than another.

 

1) get a free puppy

2) get a free turtle

3) get a free kitten

4) get a free budgie (small pet bird)

5) get 1 million dollars free

6) get a free goldfish

 

This option has a clear cut better choice. Even if you don't want any one of these choice anyone could point out which is better. You can objectively show which is better simply by pointing out that option 5 allows you to buy all the other five options. This clearly give option 5 an objectively better advantage to any of the other options. When one option is so clearly superior you render the real choice a person has to one even if there are 6 options.

 

In combat when you get OBJECTIVELY better results from a tactic in combat that tactic will be used to balance combat. It will be assumed that is a tactic peopel will use.This reduce the choices of the tactics people will use. Try to play dragon age origins on hard mode with only 8 potions and NO healing spells. You can't do it. One because there are no tactics in the game that makes things equal to healing and the game isn't balanced for not using that form of tactic. This is a testable mertic that can be preformed that shows how OBJECTIVELY superior using healing tactics are to Dragon age Origins.

 

By removing healing AND (key bloody point here -------->) rebalancing combat, you open up past options to combat that are now not objectively weaker so these options are now a REAL choice of tactic.

 

The above has nothing to do with the subjective opinion of "I don't like the appraoch to no healing, I liked making healers, I liked playing them." That is a perfectly valid position point and 100% correct for the person holding said position. That doesn't therefore mean they haven't been given more choice with teh changes, it simply means they lost a choice they wanted and 4 or 5 or 6 options they don't want doesn't compensate for the lost. This is true they have lost an option but just because you don't like teh choices given in return doesn't mean you don't have more choice. You just have more choices of stuff you don't like  or rather ASSUME you don't like. I mean no one here has actually PLAYED the game.

 

If you can't understand the above and you are honest about not trolling then you are being deliberatly obtuse.

[seraphymon]

@xkg:  Once again though - the problem becomes:  If the people who are upset about the change really just wanted to vent.  This thread wouldn't have been 74 pages.  Same with the Attributes thread. 

 

Instead - I believe - they want to affect change through complaint.  It's not like it's ever anyone new - it's almost always the same people repeating themselves.  I also believe people are trying to prove they are right about their disappointment - which of course they never have to prove because their disappointment is an opinion - however the very nature of trying to prove it makes me wonder if people think it's not opinion.  Which is why I reply on threads like this.  You not liking it is just one more opinion amongst thousands.  Valid to you - not to me - as I am pleased with the changes (and vice versa). 

 

I'm sorry healing is not what you want - but there's less than 20 days till the game.  It's not going to change. 

 

IF all we really wanted in this thread was to say "Bummer" - then we would have and it would have been off the first page ages ago.

I like it when people say "nothing you say will change a thing" as if that should be the reason for not to complain about something.

The same people complain about complainers just a much and always try to prove why the change or decision is the right one.

 

This all goes both ways.  We discuss and bring up our opinions and views not so much that we think changes will be made before the game is released but for perhaps future releases, whether DLC, expansions, and sequels.  And no. Somethings, we don't have to experience to know we don't like it or if it is a mistake.

[Elevon]

@xkg:  Once again though - the problem becomes:  If the people who are upset about the change really just wanted to vent.  This thread wouldn't have been 74 pages.  Same with the Attributes thread. 

 

Instead - I believe - they want to affect change through complaint.  It's not like it's ever anyone new - it's almost always the same people repeating themselves.  I also believe people are trying to prove they are right about their disappointment - which of course they never have to prove because their disappointment is an opinion - however the very nature of trying to prove it makes me wonder if people think it's not opinion.  Which is why I reply on threads like this.  You not liking it is just one more opinion amongst thousands.  Valid to you - not to me - as I am pleased with the changes (and vice versa). 

 

I'm sorry healing is not what you want - but there's less than 20 days till the game.  It's not going to change. 

 

IF all we really wanted in this thread was to say "Bummer" - then we would have and it would have been off the first page ages ago.

 

 

You may be right but personally I feel the game is being dumbed down as usual,however I 'll make  final judgement  after I have  played the game.

 

I do feel they have made some  negative/bad moves to DA:I and don't see why they needed to do that,it's always more immersive when the player has more control over the characters and can fine tune  them to their own  personal needs,if I wanted a dumbed down game I can just go and play a basic Android or console game.

 

Also bear in mind this game is not cheap so stripping things that you normally see in  RPG games away is never a good thing.

[WarriorOfLight999]

You know, while I miss healing for gameplay reasons, I actually miss it more for RP reasons.

 

In Origins, you had 4 specializations. Whenever I played a mage, I never took up blood magic. Instead, I always went Spirit Healer. This might sound narrow minded, but the reason why I did it was because I always imagined my mage as being rather righteous and 'good'. What could be more noble than using ones' magic to ease the suffering and pain of others?

 

It was the same thing in DA2. Never went blood mage. Always went Force/Healer, even if I had Anders in the party.

 

I suppose it will be easier for me to try out other specializations this time around, since I assume that Necromancy, while probably close to Blood Magic as a school, may not be as dangerous or corrupting. Still, I will miss Spirit Healer, just as I miss Berserker or Ranger.

[Elevon]

You know, while I miss healing for gameplay reasons, I actually miss it more for RP reasons.

 

In Origins, you had 4 specializations. Whenever I played a mage, I never took up blood magic. Instead, I always went Spirit Healer. This might sound narrow minded, but the reason why I did it was because I always imagined my mage as being rather righteous and 'good'. What could be more noble than using ones' magic to ease the suffering and pain of others?

 

It was the same thing in DA2. Never went blood mage. Always went Force/Healer, even if I had Anders in the party.

 

I suppose it will be easier for me to try out other specializations this time around, since I assume that Necromancy, while probably close to Blood Magic as a school, may not be as dangerous or corrupting. Still, I will miss Spirit Healer, just as I miss Berserker or Ranger.

 

They should of kept magic healing mainly because DAO and DA2 had it,so suddenly all mages in DA:I cannot heal  via  magic, just does not make sense and does not follow the Dragon Age era,the developers got it wrong big time on this IMHO.

[sylvanaerie]

You know, while I miss healing for gameplay reasons, I actually miss it more for RP reasons.

 

In Origins, you had 4 specializations. Whenever I played a mage, I never took up blood magic. Instead, I always went Spirit Healer. This might sound narrow minded, but the reason why I did it was because I always imagined my mage as being rather righteous and 'good'. What could be more noble than using ones' magic to ease the suffering and pain of others?

 

It was the same thing in DA2. Never went blood mage. Always went Force/Healer, even if I had Anders in the party.

 

I suppose it will be easier for me to try out other specializations this time around, since I assume that Necromancy, while probably close to Blood Magic as a school, may not be as dangerous or corrupting. Still, I will miss Spirit Healer, just as I miss Berserker or Ranger.

I can certainly sympathize with this PoV, I share it.  It's my go-to type of character.

 

Knight Enchanter seems like it will touch on some aspects of the old Healer mage archtype, coming as close to what I want as the new system will allow.  It certainly seems to be the 'support mage' type. I'm going to alter my RP to 'my Dalish mage was a healing prodigy till the accident that makes her into the Herald happens.  Now instead of healing people she heals rifts, using her skills to protect her fellows in combat against the Inquisition's foes'.

Is this the same thing?  No.  But it is a viable RP standpoint.

[xkg]

Spoiler

 

You can't cure... One last try.
 
you are taking something that is clearly subjective removing an option and saying see removing an option doesn't increase choice. I never said ALWAYS removing an option increases choice. I pointed out that in SOME cases removing an option does increase choice.
 
 
1) Straight F romance option
2) Straight M romance option
3) Bi F romance option
4) Bi M romance option
5) Gay F romance option
6) Gay M romance option
 
None of these option can be clearly demonstrated to be superior it is NOT possible because a person's sex and sexual orientation will be a deciding factor in which options are appealing. If you took a poll with the same number of bi women, bi men, straight men, straight women, gay women and gay men and said pick what you want you won't get a clear cut winner because there isn't one. Anyone capable of critical thought can see this. You also can't objectively show which choice is better because the criteria for making the choice is ALL SUBJECTIVE. Combat isn't all subjective there are clear cut objective matrixes that can show why one choice is better than another.
 
1) get a free puppy
2) get a free turtle
3) get a free kitten
4) get a free budgie (small pet bird)
5) get 1 million dollars free
6) get a free goldfish
 
This option has a clear cut better choice. Even if you don't want any one of these choice anyone could point out which is better. You can objectively show which is better simply by pointing out that option 5 allows you to buy all the other five options. This clearly give option 5 an objectively better advantage to any of the other options. When one option is so clearly superior you render the real choice a person has to one even if there are 6 options.
 
In combat when you get OBJECTIVELY better results from a tactic in combat that tactic will be used to balance combat. It will be assumed that is a tactic peopel will use.This reduce the choices of the tactics people will use. Try to play dragon age origins on hard mode with only 8 potions and NO healing spells. You can't do it. One because there are no tactics in the game that makes things equal to healing and the game isn't balanced for not using that form of tactic. This is a testable mertic that can be preformed that shows how OBJECTIVELY superior using healing tactics are to Dragon age Origins.
 
By removing healing AND (key bloody point here -------->) rebalancing combat, you open up past options to combat that are now not objectively weaker so these options are now a REAL choice of tactic.
 
The above has nothing to do with the subjective opinion of "I don't like the appraoch to no healing, I liked making healers, I liked playing them." That is a perfectly valid position point and 100% correct for the person holding said position. That doesn't therefore mean they haven't been given more choice with teh changes, it simply means they lost a choice they wanted and 4 or 5 or 6 options they don't want doesn't compensate for the lost. This is true they have lost an option but just because you don't like teh choices given in return doesn't mean you don't have more choice. You just have more choices of stuff you don't like  or rather ASSUME you don't like. I mean no one here has actually PLAYED the game.
 
If you can't understand the above and you are honest about not trolling then you are being deliberatly obtuse.

 

 
 
Another one of your examples and again failed.
And I will show you why

 
1) get a free puppy
2) get a free turtle
3) get a free kitten
4) get a free budgie (small pet bird)
5) get 1 million dollars free
6) get a free goldfish
 
This option has a clear cut better choice. Even if you don't want any one of these choice anyone could point out which is better. You can objectively show which is better simply by pointing out that option 5 allows you to buy all the other five options. This clearly give option 5 an objectively better advantage to any of the other options. When one option is so clearly superior you render the real choice a person has to one even if there are 6 options.

  

 

Yes the 6th choice is superior in this example, even more for me, since I don't care about animals at all. If you take it out I won't care anymore(read no choices for me there to choose from). So you see how it works ? Preferences ? By taking that one choice out you forced me to not care anymore thus to not choose anything.

 

I doubt you will get it this time either so I'll make it simple:

With all those mechanics changes I am left with just one choice now - to ignore the combat entirely. The same way I would ignore these animals.

Simple as that.

[Elhanan]

The problem with this kind of discussion is, you haven't played the game.  It may be it sucks to the highest level of suckocity.  It may prove more fun than previous installments.  It's hard to judge for now with any objectivity.  The removal of one aspect of the previous games has given a lot of people (myself included) a knee jerk reaction of 'this sucks'.  I'm not telling you how to think or feel about it.  Like I said, I felt it sucks too, but I'm willing to try it and give it a chance to grow on me.

Now I know, you would say 'Well, I don't need to get kicked in the groin to know that's no fun either, Syl' and that would be a viable argument.  Except this isn't a kick in the groin.  It's just a new way of looking at combat.  That's all.  Bioware has not singled you personally out to ruin your gaming experience (and yes, this was the hardest thing I had to accept, even if it does feel personal to me).
 
If you are unsure, wait to get a copy, see what other players say (and I'm sure the first reviews will start being posted within hours--at the latest a day or two).  Then you can make a more informed decision about if this game is for you or not.  Reading reviews won't be as good as a personal hands on experience, but at least you will have more information about the game and can decide if it's a good fit for you or not.
 
Bioware isn't going to change the way they have worked the combat at this late date, and frankly, I wouldn't want them to as that would back it up even longer.  Give it a chance to grow on you.  Play in easiest mode if you have to just till you get the hang of it.  If it's too easy on casual, up it a notch and try normal mode.  I will be playing on Easy myself as I'm not the most tactical player, tending to take fights pretty head on.  I imagine I'll be dying a lot.
 
Also, the injury system has been removed, so there isn't that concern.  All companions and the Protagonist have a 'revive' feature where you have them click on the fallen and bring them back into combat, so you don't even require a revive spell (though there is one in the Creation? tree that is a multiple target revive?).  In addition to a group heal/revive focus ability available to mages.  
 
If enough people like it, you better get used to the idea that this will set a trend, not just with Bioware, but other games as everyone will want to jump on the bandwagon.  If people don't like it, the company will have to rethink and try again.  That's if they still decide it's worth making games their fans just criticize without even trying them out.

Will speak only for myself, but believe many others agree: It is not just about one thing anymore, but the continued loss of options for the Players. Here, it is about Healing spells, though I believe all the Specializations will have the Focus. It is also losing the freedom to place Attributes ourselves, weapon restrictions, no switching weapons during combat, down to eight Hotkeys, and possibly more.

For me, I am fine with the changes to Healing, as it does not affect my playstyle, but I am aware it will hinder others, esp when Fast Travel becomes prioritized. But with all of the reductions, restrictions, and loss of options, the overall effect is a bit withering to me. I still plan to play, but the amount of content I will choose to avoid grows, as well as my disappointment of what could have been experienced by allowing more choices.

[sylvanaerie]

Will speak only for myself, but believe many others agree: It is not just about one thing anymore, but the continued loss of options for the Players. Here, it is about Healing spells, though I believe all the Specializations will have the Focus. It is also losing the freedom to place Attributes ourselves, weapon restrictions, no switching weapons during combat, down to eight Hotkeys, and possibly more.

For me, I am fine with the changes to Healing, as it does not affect my playstyle, but I am aware it will hinder others, esp when Fast Travel becomes prioritized. But with all of the reductions, restrictions, and loss of options, the overall effect is a bit withering to me. I still plan to play, but the amount of content I will choose to avoid grows, as well as my disappointment of what could have been experienced by allowing more choices.

 

I get that, I really do. I sympathize.  I have some real concerns about how the game will play out for me as well.  What irks me is people just criticizing without even trying it.  

If they tried it, found out that it sucks to high heaven and then complained, that's reasonable imo.  It may be horrible.  It may be fun.  You can make a subjective opinion that it sucks before trying it.  The only way to make an objective one is to experience it. 

Or am I alone in thinking this way?

 

It is giving me a real concern that Bioware devs are going to read all this negativity and decide "What's the freaking point?  They are just going to complain anyway, so why try anything new if people won't even give it a chance?"  

[Gothfather]

Spoiler

 

 

 
 
Another one of your examples and again failed.
And I will show you why

 

  

 

Yes the 6th choice is superior in this example, even more for me, since I don't care about animals at all. If you take it out I won't care anymore(read no choices for me there to choose from). So you see how it works ? Preferences ? By taking that one choice out you forced me to not care anymore thus to not choose anything.

 

I doubt you will get it this time either so I'll make it simple:

With all those mechanics changes I am left with just one choice now - to ignore the combat entirely. The same way I would ignore these animals.

Simple as that.

 

In the context of what i actually wrote what you responded with is...

 

[Muspade]

With all those mechanics changes I am left with just one choice now - to ignore the combat entirely. The same way I would ignore these animals.

Simple as that.

Have you considered getting into visuel novels?

Maybe Hatoful Boyfriend is what you're looking for. I mean, if taking away gamebreaking "choice" is all it takes to tick you off combat entirely, maybe you should just ditch it entirely and download a bunch of visuel novels. No Pesky combat to be wary of.

[Elhanan]

I get that, I really do. I sympathize.  I have some real concerns about how the game will play out for me as well.  What irks me is people just criticizing without even trying it.  

If they tried it, found out that it sucks to high heaven and then complained, that's reasonable imo.  It may be horrible.  It may be fun.  You can make a subjective opinion that it sucks before trying it.  The only way to make an objective one is to experience it. 
Or am I alone in thinking this way?
 
It is giving me a real concern that Bioware devs are going to read all this negativity and decide "What's the freaking point?  They are just going to complain anyway, so why try anything new if people won't even give it a chance?"

As a Bioware fanboy since the development days of NWN1 ('98 or '99), my experience tells me that most will be quite professional with civil criticism. Some may choose to move elsewhere, but I can honestly say that I have not seen anything better.

As for trying it, I do agree mostly. However, like in any relationship, there are some things one must ask themselves about priorities, and what one will accept as a compromise. Cap off the toothpaste? Let it slide. Toilet seat left in the upward position? Minor grievance; let it go with a warning. Eat the last slice? Outta here! That kinda thing.

In the game, I must choose what are things that I will not compromise. Thus far, the danger I fear is Strong Language, as there may not be a way to filter it or avoid it. Mechanically, I have Pause and Tac-Cam, so I am good there. But do to my RL inabilities, likely no DA-MP, or action style gameplay due to auto-attack controls. For others, it may be Fast Travel, weapon switching, Class restrictions, etc; cannot speak for them.

[xkg]

 

In the context of what i actually wrote what you responded with is...

 

 

Ok then. What you actually wrote was a dumb example, and I did show you why it doesn't work. You are just too full of yourself to accept that.

If you wanted to convice me with it, you failed and I told you why.

Besides that, In that 'academic' speech of yours, you were talking about some testable metrics, ok. If you have them, give me some numbers so I can see.

 

And yeah, nice video. That is your right to express your opinion about my opinion. I can do the same. You opinion sux big time.

Good night.

[sylvanaerie]

As a Bioware fanboy since the development days of NWN1 ('98 or '99), my experience tells me that most will be quite professional with civil criticism. Some may choose to move elsewhere, but I can honestly say that I have not seen anything better.

As for trying it, I do agree mostly. However, like in any relationship, there are some things one must ask themselves about priorities, and what one will accept as a compromise. Cap off the toothpaste? Let it slide. Toilet seat left in the upward position? Minor grievance; let it go with a warning. Eat the last slice? Outta here! That kinda thing.

In the game, I must choose what are things that I will not compromise. Thus far, the danger I fear is Strong Language, as there may not be a way to filter it or avoid it. Mechanically, I have Pause and Tac-Cam, so I am good there. But do to my RL inabilities, likely no DA-MP, or action style gameplay due to auto-attack controls. For others, it may be Fast Travel, weapon switching, Class restrictions, etc; cannot speak for them.

Toilet seat left up....?  *cue Bugs Bunny* this means war...   My poor husband.  In a house with 4 girls...he doesn't stand a chance if he ever does that...

 

*Edit* yea, I've been a fan since BG2 and these guys are really good.  I love their stories.

[xkg]

Have you considered getting into visuel novels?

 

That's how I am going to play DA:I. Can I ?

[Muspade]

That's how I am going to play DA:I. Can I ?

 

Doubtful. Casual mode might help, though.

[Elhanan]

Toilet seat left up....?  *cue Bugs Bunny* this means war...   My poor husband.  In a house with 4 girls...he doesn't stand a chance if he ever does that...

"Dad used to say that live fire exercises were good prep for facing his 'girly horde'" - Ashley Williams: ME3.

[TammieAZ]

So they got rid of healing magic and gave us healing bombs instead? So when i use up all 5 of my potions, I'm going to have run back to the freaking fort!This is so backwards...mages should be able heal themselves & others.

[sylvanaerie]

So they got rid of healing magic and gave us healing bombs instead? So when i use up all 5 of my potions, I'm going to have run back to the freaking fort!This is so backwards...mages should be able heal themselves & others.

 

You get 8 potions (and slots for additional others) and these can be refilled in camps in the various areas.  Also right before doing bosses, there will be a table where you can restock your supply.  The 8 slots can be upgraded as well with Inquisition Perks.

[Ser Jynx]

http://forum.bioware...side/?bioware=1

 

for anyone panicking about no healing magic ^ 

[Gothfather]

So they got rid of healing magic and gave us healing bombs instead? So when i use up all 5 of my potions, I'm going to have run back to the freaking fort!This is so backwards...mages should be able heal themselves & others.

 

 

You get 8 potions (and slots for additional others) and these can be refilled in camps in the various areas.  Also right before doing bosses, there will be a table where you can restock your supply.  The 8 slots can be upgraded as well with Inquisition Perks.

 

Your concern also presupposes that combat behaves like in did in the past games Lukas ( http://forum.bioware...ever/?bioware=1 ) Shows that things have change so the fear of runing back and forth to camp isnt as "backwards" as some people fear because you wont always be running back to camp. Sylvanarie also shows that you can increase your capacity of potions to mitigate the number of trips you take.

 

[edit] that said it might suck we have to wait and see. I am curious what this conversation will be like in 6 months from now.

[sylvanaerie]

Also, there is limited health regen depending on the level of difficulty you pick.  Easy 50%, Normal 25% and Hard/Nightmare 10%.  I am thinking this is: IF health is less than 50% (on easy) it goes up to 50%, not that you gain 50% overall.

 

But it should help.

[Heimdall]

Just feel I should point out, just because healing is no longer an option doesn't mean there are fewer options overall. We haven't experienced enough of the game yet.

Fewer specs, sure, but we've been told that they did that for the sake of integrating them into the story and world. Only time can tell us if it will be an acceptable tradoff.