3034 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

In DAO, stats have had a few purposes:

1. Make the character grow stronger independent of gear
2. Constrain character growth by limiting outfit options by stats, demanding an investment in a major attribute
3. Provide limitations to skill usage,
4. Provide requirements for ability learning.
5. Provide some choice in the direction you want your character to grow, with each class having 2 main stats

So basically stat level up was a choice that had several options but only two were rewarding, as ignoring these two stats would hurt your character progression and outfit power growth. You needed high strength to be a 2-H warrior, etc...
So it seems stats were less about becoming stronger and more about hitting a number to unlock some abilities.
So stat level up was essentially a non-choice. Pick strength as a warrior or die.

That's a gross misrepresentation of how DAO worked.  There were many different ways to build a Warrior or a Rogue.

 

Mages, yes, were basically useless without putting the vast majority of points into Magic.

 

I will agree that DA2 was far more restrictive, however.  I found the game unplayable until I removed the level restrictions on abilities and the secondary stat requirements on gear.  Again, MODS.  This game - every game - needs mods.

 

 

With DAI

1. Characters grow stronger independent of gear, depending on ability choices.
2. Outfits dont have stat requirements and can be worn by any class without punishing the player by demanding non-class stat choices
3. Provide direction for your character o grow.

In DAI it seems they have effectively increased character freedom by removing the concept of stat restrictions.
Characters have more (logical) options in outfit and ability selections compared to previous games.
You are now capable of picking the stats of your choice to invest in, using abilities or gear, without hampering your ability development
Skills have returned and seem to be independent of stat growth. I can't imagine "Nobility knowledge" requires you to wear a monocle with +50 suave to use it.

So compared to DAO and DA2, DAI provides a net INCREASE in character development options.
Stats requirements were used to limit the player more often than not.

So all in all, we might miss the attribute allocation part of level up, but we gain so much more in terms of potential choices.

You're correct, but all of those could have been had without removing stat allocation.  I'd like to see an actual argument in favour of not being able to allocate stats ourselves.  Frankly, I'd rather stats were just removed from the game than having them pre-assigned.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

I absolutely agree - DA2 and ME3 "spoke for itself".

 

And theres plenty of hate for DA: O and the rest of the ME series. Heck I recall back when ME 2 first came out, how everyone hated it for "dumbing down the series for console gamers". Now, after ME 3, lots of the same people suddenly claim ME 2 is the best in the series.

 

Haters going to hate. What can you do?

[TheJiveDJ]

Has anyone considered that they may have done this because of the inclusion of multiplayer?

 

If attribute points are customizable ala DAO and DAII, then the min/maxers would have a huge advantage over the more casual players. Methinks they did this to bring some parity (such a lovely word lately) between mutiplayer and campaign.

[Lumix19]

And theres plenty of hate for DA: O and the rest of the ME series. Heck I recall back when ME 2 first came out, how everyone hated it for "dumbing down the game for console gamers". Now, after ME 3, lots of the same people suddenly claim ME 2 is the best in the series.

 

Haters going to hate. What can you do.

 

The ideal answer here is "kill them" but that's illegal. Wow I've spent way too much time on these forums.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Again we agree. I dislike having preset abilities. It just means that I'll be force to buy a respec potion for all my characters. Thankfully, there will be respec potions available.

Hopefully we'll be able to summon one with the developer console.

 

I'm not paying for something that shouldn't be necessary in the first place.

[Uccio]

goodbye rpg.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

You're correct, but all of those could have been had without removing stat allocation.  I'd like to see an actual argument in favour of not being able to allocate stats ourselves.  Frankly, I'd rather stats were just removed from the game than having them pre-assigned.

 

I fail to see why I should care one way or the other. I'm much more interested in the skill trees and what talents I can pick.

[Ryzaki]

And theres plenty of hate for DA: O and the rest of the ME series. Heck I recall back when ME 2 first came out, how everyone hated it for "dumbing down the game for console gamers". Now, after ME 3, lots of the same people suddenly claim ME 2 is the best in the series.

 

Haters going to hate. What can you do.

 

Are those people saying ME2's combat is better than ME3's?

 

Because even I who hated ME3's story will readily admit the combat in ME3 blows ME2's out of the water.

[Lumix19]

Are those people saying ME2's combat is better than ME3's?

 

Because even I who hated ME3's story will readily admit the combat in ME3 blows ME2's out of the water.

ME3's combat was definitely better than ME2's. I also may be one of the few people who actually like ME3's story but let's not get into that here.

[Althix]

ME3 combat > ME1/ME2 combat.

 

fast paced, intense, fun.

[Rawgrim]

And theres plenty of hate for DA: O and the rest of the ME series. Heck I recall back when ME 2 first came out, how everyone hated it for "dumbing down the series for console gamers". Now, after ME 3, lots of the same people suddenly claim ME 2 is the best in the series.

 

Haters going to hate. What can you do?

 

Everything about equipment and leveling up was dumbed down in ME2. Changing ammo and such isn't a skill, its a function on the gun itself. ME2 gets loads of praise (deservedly so) for the in-game content and the story, though. Your choices really affects the outcome in that game, and the developers nailed that bit. Too bad ME3 ignored all of it.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Hopefully we'll be able to summon one with the developer console.

 

I'm not paying for something that shouldn't be necessary in the first place

 

Hahaha, exactly what I do in DA 2. Just additem those sweet maker sighs. My drug of choice. I'll at least be happy that I won't have to reallocate my stat allocation every time I want to change my talents.

[Ryzaki]

ME3 combat > ME1/ME2 combat.

 

fast paced, intense, fun.

 

Yep. Only issue I had was wai does spacebar do everything. But that was in ME2 so I dealt with it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I fail to see why I should care one way or the other. I'm much more interested in the skill trees and what talents I can pick.

If we can make those skills and talents more or less effective based on our stat allocation, that gives us more design freedom.

 

Or maybe even get extra skill points.  That's always something I enjoyed being able to do - allocation stats to increase skill points, at the cost of overall effectiveness in other areas (even the use of those skills - you'd have more, but be less good at them).

 

And not all character builds should be viable.  I loved my non-combat Rogue in DAO.  But he was worthless in combat, so he died before he got anywhere near the archdemon.  That's a good thing.  That should be something we can do: make an ineffective character.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Are those people saying ME2's combat is better than ME3's?

 

Because even I who hated ME3's story will readily admit the combat in ME3 blows ME2's out of the water.

 

Believe it or not, I have seen people argue that ME 2 combat was better. Opinion, its incredibly subjective.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ME3 combat > ME1/ME2 combat.

 

fast paced, intense, fun.

I didn't play ME3, but ME1's combat was vastly superior to ME2's.  I hated that Shepard couldn't miss in ME2.

[Nohvarr]

ME2? The game that got blasted - and rightfully so - for throwing out 90% of the player options? So much so that they actually had to re-add and improve them for ME3?

 

Removing player options..sounds familiar, doesn't it?

People around her are always claiming player options are being taken away. Ignoring what's been added, like new races, new specs, the ability to play in overhead view or directly control combat. The ability to craft armor and weapons the way you want, the ability to decorate Skyhold as you wish, passing judgements on people to further define your players choices. No they focus on attributes, which can be increased via skills, gear and leveling up.

 

Perhaps it's not being done the way you want, but choice is being given to the player.

 

As for ME 2, despite all the complaints it was still a very popular game, something I clearly recall people on this forum saying would never happen. They hated the new characters, hated the changes to weapons, and hated the reload system. People on this forum said 'True RPG' fans would rise up against ME2 in an outpouring of hate......game did pretty well for itself overall.

[Lumix19]

Everything about equipment and leveling up was dumbed down in ME2. Changing ammo and such isn't a skill, its a function on the gun itself. ME2 gets loads of praise (deservedly so) for the in-game content and the story, though. Your choices really affects the outcome in that game, and the developers nailed that bit. Too bad ME3 ignored all of it.

Really? I though ME3 had plenty of choice, just not at the end like ME2. You had Wrex, Tali and the Geth, the Virmire Survivor etc. etc. and that was all dependent on your choices. People just see ME3's ending (which I didn't mind either to be honest) and think THEY GAVE US NO CHOICES.

[Ryzaki]

Believe it or not, I have seen people argue that ME 2 combat was better. Opinion, its incredibly subjective.

 

Huh on replays ME2's combat is incredibly janky and not anywhere near as responsive as ME3's is. I don't even see how I did it now XD  But opinions as you said.

 

However I doubt the majority of people who are saying ME2 is better than ME3 are including the combat in that.

 

Oh wait yeah. Abusing the crap out of infiltrator's slow with the scope and cloak. But even that's more fun in ME3.

[Rawgrim]

Really? I though ME3 had plenty of choice, just not at the end like ME2. You had Wrex, Tali and the Geth, the Virmire Survivor etc. etc. and that was all dependent on your choices. People just see ME3's ending (which I didn't mind either to be honest) and think THEY GAVE US NO CHOICES.

 

 

I meant ME3 ignored what you did in ME2. It all came down to the galactic readiness meter. If you had enough of that, you got 3 colours to pick from at the end, instead of 2.

[ShadowLordXII]

 No matter what Bioware's reasons are, there are going to people that hate this change. There are always going to be people that hate change.

Bioware's best course of action is just to wait for the game to come out and let the game speak for itself. Theres people who have hated DA: O and DA: 2 for various reasons and DA: I will be no different. No matter what Bioware says, its not going to change this. They've made their decision already, best course of action is just to wait and see the reaction on release day.

 

Whether this attribute change is actually good won't be certain till the game comes out. There's nothing wrong with despising pointless, detrimental or nonsensical change. I for one embrace change. But I believe that change is only acceptable/good when it makes sense or improves something. 

 

After reading Lebanese Dude's post, I'll admit that I may have jumped the gun with earlier comments.

 

I'm just naturally skeptical of changes that seem unnecessary when the status quo is working just fine. Like when DA2 removed race selection, removed party equipment customization, streamlined skills and crafting, and restricted weapon styles on classes when the way that Origins handled these things was part of why it was regarded so highly. And don't get me started on a certain game called Soulcalibur V which might as well be called European Street Sword Fighter with all of it's unnecessary changes.

 

I'm not cancelling my pre-order though. I'm just keeping track of reasons to check my expectations. At this point, I'd expect this game to be better than DA2 (which honestly isn't saying much) and better than Origins in a few areas, but overall in the good-excellent range rather than excellent to near perfect range that Origins is in.

[TheCreeper]

People, the ME3 horse is well and trully beaten, let's move on to the actual topic at hand.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

If we can make those skills and talents more or less effective based on our stat allocation, that gives us more design freedom.

 

Or maybe even get extra skill points.  That's always something I enjoyed being able to do - allocation stats to increase skill points, at the cost of overall effectiveness in other areas (even the use of those skills - you'd have more, but be less good at them).

 

And not all character builds should be viable.  I loved my non-combat Rogue in DAO.  But he was worthless in combat, so he died before he got anywhere near the archdemon.  That's a good thing.  That should be something we can do: make an ineffective character.

 

Refuse to use your auto-attacks for "roleplaying reasons' as one of guys in the videos uploaded this week did. Its one way of making an ineffective character.

Personally, I have no connection to any style of character development. I've played RPGs with and without stat allocation. Its no big dealt to me.

That said, we've yet to learn how much an effect our stats have on our talents. Gaining stat boosts may well still be important.

[Amaror]

Whats so great about it? Amusingly, there are no attributes to allocate in Witcher 2 either but I don't remember people complaining about it.

 

You're hilarious. The Witcher games never had attribute allocation, while the Dragon Age games did. Therefore it is legitimate to complain about the removal of attribute allocation in Dragon Age.

I find it really funny how fanboys like you shout "Witcher and Dragon Age are completely different games!! There's no point comparing them!" when someone argues about all the things the Witcher games do better than the DA games, but when something is missing your quick to pull out "Witcher doesn't have it either, why are you complaining."

 

Everything i hear about this game is one bad news and one stupid design decision after the other.

I am currently on the edge weather i should cancell my preorder or not. Cancelling would most likely be the better choice, i don't want to waste money again for a piece of **** like DA 2.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

I didn't play ME3, but ME1's combat was vastly superior to ME2's.  I hated that Shepard couldn't miss in ME2.

 

You could miss plenty if your aim was as bad as mine.