3034 réponses à ce sujet

[Kleon]

BioWare tested both single-player and multiplayer combat in DAMP. Because of that they shaped their idea of combat for single-player while facerolling over 4 buttons in MP. 

 

It's a miracle that we can have 8 active abilities at once, If you look at PAX demo from a year ago, there were only 6 abilities in the UI. 

 

Gear focus? built for DAMP. No atributes? DAMP. 

 

That is the most basic and lazy mistake that they could have made. Including multipler alone doesn't do anything. Testing and shaping the system for single-player and multiplayer together - that's just stupid. 

[Muspade]

BioWare tested both single-player and multiplayer combat in DAMP. Because of that they shaped their idea of combat for single-player while facerolling over 4 buttons in MP. 

 

It's a miracle that we can have 8 active abilities at once, If you look at PAX demo from a year ago, there were only 6 abilities in the UI. 

 

Gear focus? built for DAMP. No atributes? DAMP. 

 

That is the most basic and lazy mistake that they could have made. Including multipler alone doesn't do anything. Testing and shaping the system for single-player and multiplayer together - that's just stupid. 

I kinda ponder how much basic thought went into this reply.

[seraphymon]

I do agree with him. Not as blatant as that but I've see it happen in other games and the results weren't that good.

[Kleon]

I kinda ponder how much basic thought went into this reply.

 

They are supposed to be game developers with years of experiance. They should know what influences their process. 

[VilhoDog13]

Then don't buy the game - you CLEARLY have an opinion on the direction it's headed. Why beat a dead horse?

[Kleon]

Then don't buy the game - you CLEARLY have an opinion on the direction it's headed. Why beat a dead horse?

Both DAO and DA2 had 34 skillslots in Ui available to the player. 

 

By the of end DAO I used 32/34 skill slots all of which were spells and abilites. By the end of DA2 I used 20/34 slots 15 of which were spells and abilites.

 

Now we find out that we can use only 8 spells and abilities on the UI and the number of active spells in comparison to DAO is like 1/6. 

 

See a pattern here? They keeping reducing it by half with each title. In next Dragon Age you will have 4 active abilities on UI, like you have now in DAMP.

 

Atributes? You could crunch numbers and make specific builds in  both DAO and less so in DA2. Now you can't do that without spending hours of gameplay on crafting. 

 

Still can't see the pattern?

 

DA2 reused locations? They are forced to create many varied locations in Inquisition because of that, but how much content is actually there? You have puzzles and random spawning bandits and animals, other than that? Story will probably only be in the main arc of the region.

 

Following this pattern don't be surprised if in the next Dragon Age The Cave^TM will return. The number of abilties will be further reduced and the game in general filled with farming to artificialy increase game time or in place of the story. 

[Lumix19]

Both DAO and DA2 had 34 skillslots in Ui available to the player. 
 
By the of DAO I used 32/24 skill slots all of which were spells and abilites. By the end of DA2 I used 20/34 slots 15 of which were spells and abilites.
 
Now we find out that we can use only 8 spells and abilities on the UI and the number of active spells in comparison to DAO is like 1/6. 
 
See a pattern here? They keeping reducing it by half with each title. In next Dragon Age you will have 4 active abilities on UI, like you have now in DAMP.
 
Atributes? You could crunch numbers and make specific builds in  both DAO and less so in DA2. Now you can't do that without spending hours of gameplay on crafting. 
 
Still can't see the pattern?
 
DA2 reused locations? They are forced to create many varied locations in Inquisition because of that, but how much content is actually there? You have puzzles and random spawning bandits and animals, other than that? Story will probably only be in the main arc of the region.
 
Following this pattern don't be surprised if in the next Dragon Age The Cave^TM will return. The number of abilties will be further reduced and the game in general filled with farming to artificialy increase game time or in place of the story. 

You quote but you don't seem to have heard. Stop beating a dead horse!

[Kleon]

Your lack of arguments is most amusing.

[Lumix19]

Your lack of arguments is most amusing.

Because this thread is literally 120 pages of people arguing about this. I notice you have also had a lot to say on this matter. Now you might like to argue but I certainly don't and I'm sick of coming onto this thread to see people having the same circular argument over and over again. Literally any response I can think of to counter your argument I could probably find and quote from this thread.

[berrieh]

I also choose to play solo in m/p, too; I tend to be a detriment to others in Co-op, so go it alone.

Also, if balancing were the case, the lesser Classes would not have required additional restrictions.

 

You lost me on the playing solo line there, or maybe I lost you. My point was 1) co-op multiplayer is balanced different than traditional MP, and 2) that the co-op multiplayer in DA:I should resemble the single player combat because even though you control only one character at a time in action mode and only embody one character for role-playing, in terms of combat, you are actually playing 4 player co-op in single player as you have a party combat system. So the balance from co-op helps the balance from SP because it is remarkably similar anyway. Maybe I said that poorly, or maybe I don't understand your point.

 

I don't know what a lesser Class is. If you mean the classes that were less OP, I think all the classes were re-built from the ground up with a new combat system from the ground up, focused on balancing encounters through persistent damage that doesn't auto-heal, the removal of must-have healing skills, and creating specializations and classes that are equally appealing and have equal utility. I think all the classes are (to some degree) re-imagined, and - for me - they are all re-imagined in exciting ways. The combat looks really deep and interesting to me. I'm sorry if it looks like a bummer to you - I understand different people have different opinions, and I'm not trying to invalidate yours at all. 

[Rawgrim]

If the lore being turned upside down comment was directed at inquisition you should know gameplay systems don't necessarily reflect lore they didn't in da:o or da:2. 

 

It was directed at The Forgotten Realms.

[Rawgrim]

@Rawgrim:  Again with opinion as fact. 

 

I did not like 4th Edition - and I've always hated the Forgotten Realms - but those are my opinions.  

 

I still played an entire 4th Edition campaign and enjoyed it without talking endlessly about how inferior it was and living in the glory days of my youth and talking about how evil change is.

 

3.5 came out just a few years before, so I don't think age is a factor here. Unless you are 10 years old.

[wolfhowwl]

System sounds like Diablo 3.

[Rawgrim]

That's customising the character. From an RP perspective what you wear and what it does is a major in-character decision. From a power-gaming POV it doesn't matter what the number crunching interface is going to be (e.g. ability screen or crafting screen).

 

No it is not. It is customizing the gear. If I paint my cellphone I don't paint part of my body.

[Rawgrim]

System sounds like Diablo 3.

 

Spot on.

[Timate]

Lol I don't want to paint my body that's just asking for issues if I was going to paint my body I would paint it blue lol

[Rawgrim]

Lol I don't want to paint my body that's just asking for issues if I was going to paint my body I would paint it blue lol

 

Ok. I will simplify my post. If you paint your cellphone. And only your cellphone. You haven't painted a body part.

[Timate]

It was a joke lol

[Kleon]

It was a joke lol

 

Last I checked lol was not a full stop.

[AlanC9]

Both DAO and DA2 had 34 skillslots in Ui available to the player. 
 
By the of DAO I used 32/24 skill slots all of which were spells and abilites. By the end of DA2 I used 20/34 slots 15 of which were spells and abilites.
 
Now we find out that we can use only 8 spells and abilities on the UI and the number of active spells in comparison to DAO is like 1/6. 
 
See a pattern here? They keeping reducing it by half with each title. In next Dragon Age you will have 4 active abilities on UI, like you have now in DAMP.
 
Atributes? You could crunch numbers and make specific builds in  both DAO and less so in DA2. Now you can't do that without spending hours of gameplay on crafting. 
 
Still can't see the pattern?

Is this supposed to be a serious argument? I sometimes have trouble telling the satire posts from the real ones here.

[Kleon]

Is this supposed to be a serious argument? I sometimes have trouble telling the satire posts from the real ones here.

 

What is satire about it? 

 

There is no fabricated information in this. I can just run DAO and DA2 make a screenshot and show it. 

 

Unless what you called satire is the theory of DA4 formed from obvious pattern which was followed with Dragon Age so far?

[Dunbartacus]

No I want to put the gloves (+34 STR) on, and then knockout Klitschko. Because that's how it is going to work now, in the game. And it is very realistic.

Gameplay systems in dragon age have never been realistic, The point of them is to make a fun and tactical combat experience. Correct me if i'm wrong but after dao you didn't complain that your party could get burnt, stung, frozen, stabbed, shot with arrows all within a minute and then return to perfectly healthy in a matter of seconds.

 

On the matter of attributes on lvl up vs on equipment the previous system wasn't anymore realistic. for a few examples at the start of the game you are clearly a capable rogue or warrior yet your strength and dexterity can increase exponentially when in reality massive strength would decrease combat dexterity and vice verse. Now on the matter of constitution, the idea that through the process of wading through grievous bodily combat you become more proficient at being burnt, stung, frozen, stabbed, shot with arrows to name just a few may be a great way to make a damage sponge but it isn't exactly realistic. 

 

Keep in mind i loved the lvl up system in dao/2 but the Gear based attributes are no more unrealistic imo. Its simply a game system that i will judge based on its ability to provide tangible and satisfying character progression as i did with the lvl up system in the previous 2 games of the series.

[Morroian]

Right – the game creates a scenario where players can RP. To me, this system seems to allow for a more immersive and cohesive experience (from what I’ve seen so far) that would allow for more RP. To me, RP is as much helped by smart limits as it is by freedoms, especially in the context of a video game where all reactivity must be planned for in advance (in a P&P rpg, obviously you can just react as needed and thus a LOT more freedom is good) in a cohesive and meaningful way to make any creative choices matter. The game can better react to a limited (but still varied) array of roles than it can to infinite possibilities – at least with the tech we have at such.

 

To me this was DA2, more limited than DAO but still with variety. The ME series in role playing terms OTOH had too little variety. Now with DAI they are limiting the DA franchise even more in role playing terms.

[Morroian]

Then don't buy the game - you CLEARLY have an opinion on the direction it's headed. Why beat a dead horse?

 

To give feedback to Bioware.

[berrieh]

To me this was DA2, more limited than DAO but still with variety. The ME series in role playing terms OTOH had too little variety. Now with DAI they are limiting the DA franchise even more in role playing terms.

 

 

Really? It seems much more open to me - building an organization the way you want, coming from one of several different backgrounds, having more choice of companions, having specializations that actually matter to role-playing, these are all way more important factors for role-playing than the tweaks to combat. As to the actual character building, selecting talents/passives/perks and building a play style seems less "What's more optimal?" now with the choices seeming - at least at this point - very balanced and thus opens a wider array of tactics and ways to approach things. Additionally, the gameplay they've shown so far shows several ways to approach each combat tactically. 

 

To me, attributes add very little to actual role-playing (though some form of character skill customization is clearly crucial to the RPG video game genre, it seems passives and talents fill this role more vibrantly and they are still there and more interesting than ever, it seems, based on the released trees. 

 

The gear variety is also very impressive. I see a lot of choice and variety in DA:I and very little that attribute adding gives to real "variety" - control I can see an argument for, but not any real sense of variety, as the stats never had that great an impact anyway and presumably gear stats look to add more and be more changeable thus allowing for even more variety.