3034 réponses à ce sujet

[The Elder King]

It seems that in this game the extra dialogue options will be based on other means. I think I recall some unlocking based on how you choose to build up the inquisition, but I'm Not sure.

[Kleon]

No allocating atribute points? 8 abilites limit? 

 

Multiplayer much?

 

None of those decisions make sense for single player. 

 

All the hype is pretty much gone for me at this point. The improved graphics and vast open spaces for me can't compensate the lore-rape and simplyfing of the game. From what we've seen the healing limitation doesn't matter, because you wont need healing in fights. The only thing it will promote is running back to camp every two/three easy fights.  

[Muspade]

All the hype is pretty much gone for me at this point. The improved graphics and vast open spaces for me can't compensate the lore-rape and simplyfing of the game. From what we've seen the healing limitation doesn't matter, because you wont need healing in fights. The only thing it will promote is running back to camp every two/three easy fights.  

There is a healing spell based on the "Focus" meter. 

Also, what lore-rape? Are you crying for attention because I'm giving it to you.

[nici2412]

Seems they took inspiration form Diablo 3.

Hack n' Slay combat - check

Limited amount of skills - check (Diablo 3 has 6, DA I 8)

No manual distribution of attribute points - check (at least Blizzard reverted this to some degree with the paragon system)

fleshy and exaggerated visual effects- check

No  healing spells - check

 

[Ieldra]

I dislike this change.

Not on principle. Whether attributes can be developed at all is a matter of game design, and the way DA did it so far is actually rather unusual. Many RPG systems have fixed stats.

What I don't like is the higher dependence on gear. I've always found the mage class appealing because it depends less on gear than other classes, and that's why I chose my level-up options with greater care when playing a mage.

Well, we'll see. If I get the ability to craft some signature gear that adds to my character's uniqueness rather than detracting from it, then I might be ok with this.

Anyway, I do dislike it but it's not a big thing at all.

Edit:
The bigger issue is that we may be unable to select our character's attributes at the start *and* unable to spend points as we level up. That inndicates that stats are only used for combat and not for roleplaying purposes, which in turn raises the question of what character trait roleplaying opportunities will be based on. None at all? Possibly the approval system will kick in here, but that depends more on NPCs than our own character. I want a persuasion skill.

[Hobbes]

That's a little...disappointing...

 

I'm trying to remain open-minded about it as it may make more sense in game and it may not be so bad, but at this point I'm struggling to see the positive effects of this sort of design choice.

 

We will see though...

[Kleon]

There is a healing spell based on the "Focus" meter. 

Also, what lore-rape? Are you crying for attention because I'm giving it to you.

 

Lore-rape would be: various different schools of magic, specializations present in previous games- all that is gone. Stonefist was a mundane spell, firestorm was a spell within the fire tree. Now they moved those to spacialization? What is the reason? Lore-wise it doesn't make sense.

 

Lore-wise it doesn't make sense that the mages suddenly don't know entropy school of magic.  Revive spell, which was previously restricted to spirit healers, is now in a spirit tree? 

 

Mage trees that we've seen so far are one giant mess if one looks at them from the lore perspective. 

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Seems they took inspiration form Diablo 3.

Hack n' Slay combat - check

Limited amount of skills - check (Diablo 3 has 6, DA I 8)

No manual distribution of attribute points - check (at least Blizzard reverted this to some degree with the paragon system)

fleshy and exaggerated visual effects- check

No  healing spells - check

 

I was waiting for someone to make this comparison. I knew it was coming. lol

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Lore-rape would be: various different schools of magic, specializations present in previous games- all that is gone. Stonefist was a mundane spell, firestorm was a spell within the fire tree. Now they moved those to spacialization? What is the reason? Lore-wise it doesn't make sense.

 

Lore-wise it doesn't make sense that the mages suddenly don't know entropy school of magic.  Revive spell, which was previously restricted to spirit healers, is now in a spirit tree? 

 

Mage trees that we've seen so far are one giant mess ifone looks at them from the lore perspecrtive. 

 

Err, none of that was lore, there are no codex entries stating those spells belong to certain schools.

[Muspade]

Lore-rape would be: various different schools of magic, specializations present in previous games- all that is gone. Stonefist was a mundane spell, firestorm was a spell within the fire tree. Now they moved those to spacialization? What is the reason? Lore-wise it doesn't make sense.

Lore-wise it doesn't make sense that the mages suddenly don't know entropy school of magic.  Revive spell, which was previously restricted to spirit healers, is now in a spirit tree? 

Mage trees that we've seen so far are one giant mess ifone looks at them from the lore perspecrtive. 

 

Oh, so we're talking about gameplay. Then I can safely ignore you.

[Gtdef]

That's good, 2 of the greatest imbalances of the previous games were due to the attribute system. I'll be more than happy to see it gone. Although just getting a skill point on lvl up seems underwhelming. Hope it will be a bit more involved than that.

[Milan92]

This new attribute system reminds me of TOR.

 

Which worked fine, I guess?

[Lumix19]

Lore-rape would be: various different schools of magic, specializations present in previous games- all that is gone. Stonefist was a mundane spell, firestorm was a spell within the fire tree. Now they moved those to spacialization? What is the reason? Lore-wise it doesn't make sense.
 
Lore-wise it doesn't make sense that the mages suddenly don't know entropy school of magic.  Revive spell, which was previously restricted to spirit healers, is now in a spirit tree? 
 
Mage trees that we've seen so far are one giant mess ifone looks at them from the lore perspecrtive.

But most of the Mage Inquisitors aren't raised in the circle and thus don't have the circle's schools of magic. That's probably why they developed these more neutral schools.

[The Elder King]

I dislike this change.Not on principle. Whether attributes can be developed at all is a matter of game design, and the way DA did it so far is actually rather unusual. Many RPG systems have fixed stats.What I don't like is the higher dependence on gear. I've always found the mage class appealing because it depends less on gear than other classes, and that's why I chose my level-up options with greater care when playing a mage.Well, we'll see. If I get the ability to craft some signature gear that adds to my character's uniqueness rather than detracting from it, then I might be ok with this.Anyway, I do dislike it but it's not a big thing at all.Edit:The bigger issue is that we may be unable to select our character's attributes at the start *and* unable to spend points as we level up. That inndicates that stats are only used for combat and not for roleplaying purposes, which in turn raises the question of what character trait roleplaying opportunities will be based on. None at all? Possibly the approval system will kick in here, but that depends more on NPCs than our own character. I want a persuasion skill.

Persuasion might be based on the perks of the Inquisition level up, I think. Unlocking some perks might give you additional dialogue options.

[Lebanese Dude]

Edit:
The bigger issue is that we may be unable to select our character's attributes at the start *and* unable to spend points as we level up. That inndicates that stats are only used for combat and not for roleplaying purposes, which in turn raises the question of what character trait roleplaying opportunities will be based on. None at all? Possibly the approval system will kick in here, but that depends more on NPCs than our own character. I want a persuasion skill.

 

Divorcing stats from roleplaying is a good approach. Now you don't need 32 cunning to tell that guy to buzz off. You can tell him to buzz off because you should be able to.

This is the most "realistic" approach. People complained in DA2 that you had to have a static personality to keep certain dialogue options available. Now you don't.

 

For more intricate options, we are getting non-combat skills, some of which include skills that grant additional dialogue options (and consequently "persuasion").

[Rawgrim]

But most of the Mage Inquisitors aren't raised in the circle and thus don't have the circle's schools of magic. That's probably why they developed these more neutral schools.

 

What did they do before the inquisition? They didn't go from being a child to full adulthood in the few years between DA2 and DA:I.

[Lumix19]

Divorcing stats from roleplaying is a good approach. Now you don't need 32 cunning to tell that guy to buzz off. You can tell him to buzz off because you should be able to buzz off.
This is the most "realistic" approach. People complained in DA2 that you had to have a static personality to keep certain dialogue options available. Now you don't.
 
For more intricate options, we are getting non-combat skills, some of which include skills that grant additional dialogue options (and consequently "persuasion").

Yes, a very good point. Why do I need x cunning for dialogue when I don't use it in combat?

[Jigglypuff]

I will wait before I judge, this could be a good thing.

[Muspade]

I can't believe people are still calling lore-rape on game mechanics...I need to bite down on a brick soon, too.

[Rawgrim]

Divorcing stats from roleplaying is a good approach. Now you don't need 32 cunning to tell that guy to buzz off. You can tell him to buzz off because you should be able to buzz off.

This is the most "realistic" approach. People complained in DA2 that you had to have a static personality to keep certain dialogue options available. Now you don't.

 

For more intricate options, we are getting non-combat skills, some of which include skills that grant additional dialogue options (and consequently "persuasion").

 

Divorcing stats from roleplaying is a bad move. Look at Planescape and tell me what that game would be like if they had done that.

[Lumix19]

What did they do before the inquisition? They didn't go from being a child to full adulthood in the few years between DA2 and DA:I.

What? I meant the Dalish mages were taught by their Keepers who probably don't subscribe to the Circle's schools of magic and the Qunari are taught by someone (i forgot, does anybody know?)

[Rawgrim]

Yes, a very good point. Why do I need x cunning for dialogue when I don't use it in combat?

 

Because rpgs arn't 100 percent about combat. And being cunning is something you can take adtvantage of in most aspects in life.

[Rawgrim]

What? I meant the Dalish mages were taught by their Keepers who probably don't subscribe to the Circle's schools of magic and the Qunari are taught by someone (i forgot, does anybody know?)

 

Your human inquisitor is a circle mage.

[Muspade]

Because rpgs arn't 100 percent about combat. And being cunning is something you can take adtvantage of in most aspects in life.

Social cunning is not the same as combat cunning.

[fchopin]

So with DA:O and DA:I you could choose to put points into CON of a mage character. This was a bad idea since you would end up crippling your character if you put points into anything other than the attributes that improved your spell slinging abilities. So this choice was really no choice at all, since you followed the best path or paid dearly.

It is not for you to say how a person wishes to build their character.
That is why we have options to build how we like to play.