- New specs? Granted, but they also removed most of the old ones. That's not an addition, that's just a substitution. They get no credit for that.
What? LOL. If they reused the same specs every game people would complain they were not adding anything new. Just a rehash of last game. There is no winning, damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I don't ascribe to the idea that having fewer options on the surface is necessarily a bad thing. It depends on how those options are treated. For example, there are fewer specs in DAI than DAO, but we're told that they're more integrated into the plot and NPCs will take note of them this time. Obviously we'll have to wait for the game to know the truth of it, but it's not as simple as suggested in any case.Once you've set an expectation, it's a bit difficult to start changing perceptions. If you have a product that's got half (at best) the capability the previous one did, people are going to start looking at you a bit strangely. Especially when they're paying the same amount for it.
I wasn't against it in diablo 3 nor i'll be here. This is not a serious matter for game, especially because attributes not affect dialog option(like in other RPG's)
What? LOL. If they reused the same specs every game people would complain they were not adding anything new. Just a rehash of last game. There is no winning, damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Never changing isn't good, but neither is taking the hatchet to it. Especially when there was nothing wrong with a large portion of it.
Mistakes are subjective.
What lies did they tell, besides the ME3 ending? Because that is a totally different team and the DA team is going out of their way to clarify every potential misconstrued talking point this time around. If you're referring to them not being 100% transparent, then that's a different thing (and as much as I would like transparency, I understand why there are some things they shy away from).
And PR talk is part of the deal with any type of media. They want you to buy their product, so they talk it up. This time around, they seem legitimately proud of what they have made and are justifiably excited to share it. Would you prefer they sit down one-on-one with Charlie Rose and talk about all the ways the game is a disappointment?
Honesty's always a nice trick.
"We didn't have the time or funds to add this option in the way we would like" or " We decided to limit you to eight active abilities because.."
Never changing isn't good, but neither is taking the hatchet to it. Especially when there was nothing wrong with a large portion of it.
I agree. You take the good parts, keep them, and add to them as you go along in a series. More options, and more freedom, usually. Now we are getting less and less option. Only 2 weapon styles per class, or rather 2 for rogue or warrior, 1 for mage. The rogues seem to be default ninjas no matter how you level them up anyway, so you get even less control creating one of those.
I agree. You take the good parts, keep them, and add to them as you go along in a series. More options, and more freedom, usually. Now we are getting less and less option. Only 2 weapon styles per class, or rather 2 for rogue or warrior, 1 for mage. The rogues seem to be default ninjas no matter how you level them up anyway, so you get even less control creating one of those.
The problem with this post is no one will ever agree on just what the "good parts" are.
Mistakes are subjective.
What lies did they tell, besides the ME3 ending? Because that is a totally different team and the DA team is going out of their way to clarify every potential misconstrued talking point this time around. If you're referring to them not being 100% transparent, then that's a different thing (and as much as I would like transparency, I understand why there are some things they shy away from).
And PR talk is part of the deal with any type of media. They want you to buy their product, so they talk it up. This time around, they seem legitimately proud of what they have made and are justifiably excited to share it. Would you prefer they sit down one-on-one with Charlie Rose and talk about all the ways the game is a disappointment?
When there is generally a consensus or a good majority, not a 51/49 thing, against an illogical decision, it is a mistake, like the reused areas or enemies falling through the ceiling.
I am not really concerned about the ME team, that has its own team and people. From DAO and DA2 they have made promises of this and that, or led people to believe or expect things such as two years of DLC. Or how DA is about player choice. Yet those amount of choices seem fewer and fewer. Then there is the talk about wanting something that is between DAO and DA2.. Combat is basically a copy and paste of DA2 at this point, based on the gameplay vids. It is better because its more tactful and more in line with DAO, but the flashiness is unpleasant to look at.
AS for PR talk. Id rather take their honest answers and feelings.
Im not saying they didn't work their asses off. But I saw the passion in DAO... and I thought I was gonna see it back and with a few areas I do and may... some other areas big or small, i see laziness or not as much care
The problem with this post is no one will ever agree on just what the "good parts" are.
In that aspect, expansive character builds with multiple options and a whole host of variables to choose from. As an example, combining weapons and stats gave you at least eight possible melee rogue builds in DAO. You had one weapon option in DA2.
Hey, I do say DAO broke my immersion, but I said that I'd prefer a more realistic approach as wellNever use the term "lore-breaking". You will get swamped by fanboys saying DA:O had this and that combat move that broke the lore, so anything is fair game etc.
. I just don't see if happening in DA.
The problem with this post is no one will ever agree on just what the "good parts" are.
Quite true. But I don't think I am too far off when I say that the majority didn't much care for the combat in DA2.
When there is generally a consensus or a good majority, not a 51/49 thing, against a decision, it is a mistake, like the reused areas or enemies falling through the ceiling.
I am not really concerned about the ME team, that has its own team and people. From DAO and DA2 they have made promises of this and that, or led people to believe or expect things such as two years of DLC. Or how DA is about player choice. Yet those amount of choices seem fewer and fewer. Then there is the talk about wanting something that is between DAO and DA2.. Combat is basically a copy and paste of DA2 at this point, based on the gameplay vids. It is better because its more tactful and more in line with DAO, but the flashiness is unpleasant to look at.
1. They have totally addressed the reused areas and waves of enemies, though? Mike has made jokes about it, even, and they have mentioned in several demos how varied the areas were and how waves wouldn't be a thing.
2. The two years of DLC for Origins was obviously promised before they were forced to work on DA2. I'm sure they would have much rather have had the freedom to do the DLC and then spend a few years working on DA2.
3. We don't know how much choice we'll have in Inquisition when it's all said and done, or whether the choices we had before actually made things better or are just being exalted for existing.
4. If the combat in Inquisition contains elements of Origins (tactics) and elements of DA2 (faster, flashier), then it is indeed...a...hybrid? Plus, Origins combat could get pretty heavy on the effects. There was less flipping around (that would require some semblance of motivation on the part of the AI), but by the time Awakening rolled around, mages looked like something you'd pay to ride at the carnival and the effects from some of the warrior specs made a lot of people ignore them completely.
Honesty's always a nice trick.
"We didn't have the time or funds to add this option in the way we would like" or " We decided to limit you to eight active abilities because.."
Except they have talked a lot about budget and deadlines before, and how those factors limit what they can and cannot implement. And they did give a reason for the eight active abilities, right? To encourage players to focus on preparation and tactics?
Just because it's not phrased in a way you would like, or it's not what you actually think the truth is, doesn't mean it's not true.
Quite true. But I don't think I am too far off when I say that the majority didn't much care for the combat in DA2.
I dunno man for every complaint for DA2's combat I've seen one for Origins too.
*not to mention even among those that hated it there isn't a consensus as to WHY they hate it.*
Less arbitrary stats I have to allocated to maximize my combat efficiency and more focus on crafting good gear that makes me look like a pimp.
How exactly is allocating stats "roleplaying" again? It's a game mechanic, nothing else.
I also like that I can just focus on unlocking the abilities I want for my character instead of having to focus on giving myself the proper stats to achieve it. Less preventions and blockades for me to consider...
Spoiler
I say, good riddance. I play for the story and "nightmare mode". How people can insert "roleplaying" into "Stat assigning" is beyond my comprehension.
How many "character builds" we can create is not certain, as the game has not yet been released. I guess you need to bite down on a brick until then and not buy the game. Watch some "let's plays" maybe?
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.
A rogue that ignored cunning and pumped strength would be less effective as their specializations scale off cunning more often than not.
A warrior that used bows is technically classified as a rogue in the DA universe and is a notable exception in DAO. It was completely eliminated in DA2.
The fact of the matter is that doing off-builds was quite viable more often than not, but limited your character progression severely.
You could totally build a mage as a warrior, but then your spells would suck and you would rely on autoattacks.
I built my mage as a paladin, but since I focused on constitution rather than willpower I suffered when it came to mana til DAA remedied it with the mana increase talents and runes.
Less arbitrary state I have to allocated to maximize my combat efficiency and more focus on crafting good gear that makes me look like a pimp.
How exactly is allocating stats "roleplaying" again? It's a game mechanic, nothing else.
SpoilerI also like that I can just focus on unlocking the abilities I want for my character instead of having to focus on giving myself the proper stats to achieve it. Less preventions and blockades for me to consider...
I say, good riddance. I play for the story and "nightmare mode". How people can insert "roleplaying" into "Stat assigning" is beyond my comprehension.
How many "character builds" we can create is not certain, as the game has not yet been released. I guess you need to calm your ****** until then and not buy the game. Watch some "let's plays" maybe?
Allocating stats is a roleplaying element because you can create characters with weaknesses and whatever else. Like a rogue that is exclent at bluffing and diplomacy, but sucks at lockpicking - for rp reasons. Or a super intelligent warrior, that is an utter clutz in combat. Those are the extreme examples, but you can also base your stats on the backstory of the character, or on how you feel they have progressed storywise.
None of this will work if you are all about min\maxing to create perfect builds, though.
I dunno man for every complaint for DA2's combat I've seen one for Origins too.
*not to mention even among those that hated it there isn't a consensus as to WHY they hate it.*
Allocating stats is a roleplaying element because you can create characters with weaknesses and whatever else.
Like a rogue that is exclent at bluffing and diplomacy, but sucks at lockpicking - for rp reasons. Or a super intelligent warrior, that is an utter clutz in combat. Those are the extreme examples, but you can also base your stats on the backstory of the character, or on how you feel they have progressed storywise.
Gameplay. That is all.
That's what dialogue options are for.
None of this will work if you are all about min\maxing to create perfect builds, though.
You're right. I seperate the gameplay aspect from the story and roleplay aspect.
It's more fluid actually. If your stats are based on your weapons armor and you can build your weapons and armor any way you want that would mean you can make any build you want.
Hell of a lot more fluid actually, after all you could have different armor sets for whatever stat build you want and switch them out as desired.
Because adding 2 points in strenght and 1 point in Vitalty is so "hardcore" Stop using the word "casual" so easy... You dont even know that it means.
1. They have totally addressed the reused areas and waves of enemies, though? Mike has made jokes about it, even, and they have mentioned in several demos how varied the areas were and how waves wouldn't be a thing.
2. The two years of DLC for Origins was obviously promised before they were forced to work on DA2. I'm sure they would have much rather have had the freedom to do the DLC and then spend a few years working on DA2.
3. We don't know how much choice we'll have in Inquisition when it's all said and done, or whether the choices we had before actually made things better or are just being exalted for existing.
4. If the combat in Inquisition contains elements of Origins (tactics) and elements of DA2 (faster, flashier), then it is indeed...a...hybrid? Plus, Origins combat could get pretty heavy on the effects. There was less flipping around (that would require some semblance of motivation on the part of the AI), but by the time Awakening rolled around, mages looked like something you'd pay to ride at the carnival and the effects from some of the warrior specs made a lot of people ignore them completely.
1. Yeah... after the amount of hate that come from it. I still remember their initial response being something along the lines of "we didn't think reused areas would be a big deal."
2. dont make promises you can't keep. They remade that mistake with DA2 as well, promising an expansion ,but then had to work on DAI. Or how about the, witch hunt dlc that was advertised to give us insight and answers when all it did was leave us with more questions and answer nothing that wasn't already known.
3. True, which is why I can't really comment too much on that or the story, but other decisions like no healing or 8 ability max are things that we can infer certain conclusions to.
4. really combat and tactics or how the enemies are handled are two different things. Really I think the only thing they have done is slowed down animations and added sound effects that seemed like more weight is added to a blow. Yes. DAO suffered from bad auras and magics of flash, especially that rainbow ability from mages in DAA, but at least i could tell where everyone is.. DAI it is incredibly hard, with all those colors and smoke effects. and with the need to keep an eye on health being very important, this doesn't help things.
I say if it turns out our attributes are being auto-leveled why not leave control with the player with optional auto leveling.
On the other hand auto-leveling should hopefully provide a decent foundation for each class at all lvls and from the look of crafting there could be a great number of viable builds within each class.
Gameplay. That is all.
That's what dialogue options are for.
And alot of rpg games gives you dialogue options based on your stats...
And alot of rpg games gives you dialogue options based on your stats...
I know. It does nothing for the roleplay aspect what I assign my stats to, as they are combat oriented in the gameplay aspect.
I hope it keeps that way.
Retour en haut