181 réponses à ce sujet

[Flog the Undying]

The butthurt is strong in this one.

 

 

How am I butthurt?

 

I was just asking for others' opinions about one comment, I wasn't saying 'ugh it's soooooo annoying how they don't have long hair' or whatever.

[leaguer of one]

I don't care. I just want them with better hair.

/topic

[leaguer of one]

This isn't the first time they do something like this.

 

They reduced the number of abilities per combat to 8 so console users don't have to pause to access all abilities. In short, they dumbed down the combat. The official explanation is that you're limited to 8 abilities so you have to carefully plan your attacks.

 

Most dialog wheels in Mass Effect 3 had only two options: paragon and renegade, with barely any investigate options and about three neutral options in the entire game (which were incorrectly mapped on the left side of the dialog wheel). They probably didn't have the time or resources to write enough dialog, but the official explanation was that there are no neutral options when faced with the Reaper threat.

So planning what talents and spells to have before each fight mean dumbing down combat? You do understand what dumbing down means, right?

[WazzuMan]

We KNOW the reason they have a different head slot is due to the fact that managing headgear with horns is very tricky. Why try to pass off an issue they ran into as doing something extra for their fans?

You already have half the answer, it didn't need to be said. When I learned the qunari would be a playable race, I also saw some concept art showing male and female horned qunari and one of the questions that popped into my head was what did that mean for headgear. I also knew that it was quite possible that challenge of altering all the various headgear of other races for all the various horn styles was probably impractical and would draw too much time and resources away from other things to justify. If Bioware simply chose to lock out the headgear for the entire race, I would not have questioned why and respected the decision.

As it turned out, they chose another option. To do something different for the qunari, something extra for fans who play the race and enjoy customisation to have something new to mess with. That's how I see it anyway, that instead of stating the obvious question on everyone's mind they just gave the answer and some insight into the reasoning behind the decision.

[Fiddles dee dee]

How am I butthurt?

 

I was just asking for others' opinions about one comment, I wasn't saying 'ugh it's soooooo annoying how they don't have long hair' or whatever.

 

"Disingenuous" is not a low modality term, still I was probably projecting others' butthurt at you. Plus there's always criticism out there for BioWare's PR (as it is atrocious). 

 

To answer your question directly then - it was a foolish thing to say if meant for the purposes of PR. If however, it was said purely from the developer's point of view that they were aware of the shortcomings and addressed it as best they could with the time they had because they were concerned for their audience, then I figure no harm done. 

 

Regardless, I like the Qunari hence why my avatar has horns and is green.

[Sylvius the Mad]

some would say you have a dissociative disorder.

Isn't that what roleplaying is?

If you can get into character with a single character without losing the ability to become yourself again later (setting aside the question of whether it's possible for you to tell if you're being yourself), then you should be able to do the same between multiple characters.

[Travie]

"It was too hard designing helmets around horns so we made facepaint."

 

"Consoles and multiplayer had restrictions so now you have eight slots when you should have as many as you want"

 

I really wish developers could give the real answers sometimes, but that's just marketing reality.

[leaguer of one]

"It was too hard designing helmets around horns so we made facepaint."

 

"Consoles and multiplayer had restrictions so now you have eight slots when you should have as many as you want"

 

I really wish developers could give the real answers sometimes, but that's just marketing reality.

After da2. it a wonder they tell us anything.

[Paul E Dangerously]

I wonder where all the effort went, because it sure as hell didn't go to the hair.

[leaguer of one]

I wonder where all the effort went, because it sure as hell didn't go to the hair.

The horns because.....reasons!!!

[katerinafm]

I'm just sad I won't be able to have permanent badass tattooes (I wanted huge warpaint like the ones we saw in DA2 and the DLC). I want to hide the helmets on me and my companions, but not the warpaint. I guess I might just not wear helmets on my companions if I see it bothering me in that playthrough, hahah

[AresKeith]

In general the recent livestream was very good, but when Mike said this I arched my eyebrow.

We KNOW the reason they have a different head slot is due to the fact that managing headgear with horns is very tricky. Why try to pass off an issue they ran into as doing something extra for their fans?

It just felt a bit disingenuous to me. Like trying to twist a limitation into a Fantastic Fresh Feature For our Fabulous Fanbase™!

Did anyone else feel the same?

Bioware did comment in the past about helmets and horns being tricky

[AresKeith]

It's a 3D model without bones for animating. You can rescale it at will for a bigger head.

Seriously?

That also takes up time

[In Exile]

We could play as Sten in DAO so i don’t see much difference.

Sten I wouldn't count because of the DAO model. Qunari in DAO were just really tall humans. I still do think this is all pr doublespeak.

[Fredvdp]

So planning what talents and spells to have before each fight mean dumbing down combat? You do understand what dumbing down means, right?

I didn't say it's dumbed down because you have to plan in advance. I'm saying the "planning in advance" is used as an excuse for why the combat is dumbed down.

[Kirasdream13]

I'm just sad I won't be able to have permanent badass tattooes (I wanted huge warpaint like the ones we saw in DA2 and the DLC). I want to hide the helmets on me and my companions, but not the warpaint. I guess I might just not wear helmets on my companions if I see it bothering me in that playthrough, hahah

 

I felt the same way, but if the Vitar (?) are like helmets, then there might be more options that become available as the plot/level progresses; so if you have a Vitar that you like that you are currently wearing and you come across another design you like better, then you're free to interchange.  The warpaint that the qunari have in DA2 was pretty cool, and hopefully will be an option sometime.

[leaguer of one]

I didn't say it's dumbed down because you have to plan in advance. I'm saying the "planning in advance" is used as an excuse for why the combat is dumbed down.

Your not getting it. Not in any way is limiting what you can use in combat "dumbing down" if fact it just makes it more complex. Think about for a moment, they going to make casual player stop and think about which talents and spells they should have before every fight. Forcing someone to make tactics is not dumbing down which is what the 8 button selection is forcing anyone to do. It would be like saying pick out what spell you have for the day in BG1 and 2 is dumbing it down.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Your not getting it. Not in any way is limiting what you can use in combat "dumbing down" if fact it just makes it more complex. Think about for a moment, they going to make casual player stop and think about which talents and spells they should have before every fight. Forcing someone to make tactics is not dumbing down which is what the 8 button selection is forcing anyone to do. It would be like saying pick out what spell you have for the day in BG1 and 2 is dumbing it down.

 

The problem is, with BG (and D&D in general) you've got more spells to choose from per level than you do ability slots in DAI. A level one mage can choose from 22 spells. And spell slots? Those grow per level. It's not even comparable.

 

So many of these "choices" just seem like Bioware doesn't think DA2 was a mistake. Player options are limited and it's covered up with "well, having less options is tactical".

[Zakhar]

They were playable during DAO's development. They were cut.

If they weren't in the final game they don't count

[veeia]

Eh, it was said during an unscripted live stream. If it was something that was one of their talking points or in more official promotional materials, I'd be annoyed. But this seems more like a human stumble, not a PR manipulation.

[leaguer of one]

The problem is, with BG (and D&D in general) you've got more spells to choose from per level than you do ability slots in DAI. A level one mage can choose from 22 spells. And spell slots? Those grow per level. It's not even comparable.

 

So many of these "choices" just seem like Bioware doesn't think DA2 was a mistake. Player options are limited and it's covered up with "well, having less options is tactical".

That an arguement that it's inflexible, not that it's dumb down. It matter not how many spells you had at the start, what matters is how much you can us. The fact there is a limit to how much you can use despite how many spell you can use show it not a feature that makes the game easier. You're forgetting that dumb down means the the features added makes the game easier to play and need less tactics to play. How does limiting the button slot do that?

[TheGusWho]

The problem is, with BG (and D&D in general) you've got more spells to choose from per level than you do ability slots in DAI. A level one mage can choose from 22 spells. And spell slots? Those grow per level. It's not even comparable.

 

So many of these "choices" just seem like Bioware doesn't think DA2 was a mistake. Player options are limited and it's covered up with "well, having less options is tactical".

 

Because DA2 wasn't a mistake. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean that Bioware needs to burn DA2 down and salt the earth.

[Pressedcat]

In general the recent livestream was very good, but when Mike said this I arched my eyebrow.

 

We KNOW the reason they have a different head slot is due to the fact that managing headgear with horns is very tricky. Why try to pass off an issue they ran into as doing something extra for their fans?

 

It just felt a bit disingenuous to me. Like trying to twist a limitation into a Fantastic Fresh Feature For our Fabulous Fanbase™!

 

Did anyone else feel the same?

 

He could have been being disingenuous, or equally he could have misspoke or not expressed himself in a concise manner. It didn't come off as a fully scripted event with everything pre-written, but rather as a couple of BioWare employees taking time out of their (no doubt very busy) schedules in order to give fans a taster of aspects of the game.

 

I would interpret the situation as Mike possibly meaning to say that [since the normal helms do not work for quanari due to clipping/horns]

'The reason we gave Qunari different headgear is because, with them being a new playable race, we wanted to give them something new and unique!' [rather than simply leaving them with no headgear].

 

You might choose to interpret the statement as Mike deliberately lying or omitting information so as to put pr spin on the situation, but I think it is far more reasonable to simply accept that Mike might simply be a fallible human being who doesn't always manage to express himself as clearly as he might hope.

 

TL:DR: No, I don't feel the same. Where you interpret the statement as Mike being deliberately deceitful and misleading, I interpret it as Mike not communicating his thoughts succinctly. I suggest you pretend for just a moment that the BioWare developers are reasonable human beings who occasionally don't do things perfectly, rather than dissemblers attempting to separate you from your money through nefarious methods.