3034 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth Death]

For me to care, this depends on how heavy level scaling is. If there's a good amount of level scaling, then I might just be tempted to use the console commend out of defiance.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

 

You are not part of their game design team? Have you even played DAI, even less seen it?

 

So please spare me the "opinion is never irrelevant".  You haven't even bought the game and played it, and already are complaining about it.

Your opinions have no merit. 

In fact, neither do mine. I could be highly disappointed in some features that I think are Ok. The difference is that positive outlooks are healthy while the negative seething I've seen in this thread is not.

 

 

To some people, being positive equals being naive. As such, to some people, being positive is not a good thing given Bioware's track record with past few games. Some people like to be skeptical and realistic so they do not get their hopes unnecessarily crushed for no good reason.

 

Honestly, your argument so far is that we should all be positive, we are all whiners. That's very convincing argument *sarcasm*

[Nohvarr]

- New races? One. The others are old races that were re-added. After they claimed that we didn't need the other races in DA2 because 'the majority played human characters'. We see how well that worked.

- 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.

- Crafting? Mixed blessing at best. Crafting systems tend to ruin RPGs in all sorts of nice ways.

- Decoration? I'll give you that, but how much mileage is playing house in Skyhold going to have?

- Judgement was done already in DAA.

1. So they add back in races and include a new one to give players more options.

2. Not only do they give you more specs, they tie them more closely to the narrative so it doesn't feel like your class has no impact on the game.

3. Crafting, allows you to design an armor you find aesthetically pleasing, and give it the boosts you want to remain effective.

4. The Inquisition levels up alongside you, dictating various abilities you can have in dialogue at the very least:

5. A significantly more open world in previous games

 

As far as ME2, is it any wonder that most of those "changes" didn't make it to ME3? They went crawling back to the old armor and weapon systems and actually improved them so people would have options. I'd also say that initial sales for a game don't matter a lick if you alienate the fanbase. I'm really interested to see how ME4 sells after Bioware burned pretty much the entire fanbase.

 

Bioware did not go 'Crawling back' to the old weapon system. They made something new based on feedback. You could use as many weapons as you wanted, but had to factor their weight into the equation. Like ME2 the weapons were very clearly different in how they felt when fired and the kinds of damage they did. They even came in various versions with more limited upgrades. The armor system was modular in 3 allowing you to swap out parts to your hearts content instead of purchasing entire suits like ME1.

 

 

What I generally expect is for a game to build upon it's predecessor. Give me more options. Fix what doesn't work and make that better. Don't chop entire successful portions out of it like a butcher and claim that it's really for my own good

 

Here's the thing, the fanbase doesn't always agree on what needs fixing and what is successful.

 

Bioware has stated in the past that they want the distinction between classes to be clear. The lack of Dual wielding warriors is because they didn't have the time/resources to make them look and play differently from rogues, and last I checked Knight Enchanters can summon energy blades from the fade, which makes them visually distinctive from other classes.

[Rawgrim]

So RPG's shouldn't be allowed to evolve in the last 20 years?

 

Evolve, yes. By all means. removing more and more options isn't evolving, its devolving. No problems with changes at all, everything changes. But this change, combined with alot of other ones, makes the game too simplified and the player has very little input when creating his character.

[Vilegrim]

Except you can still do those things by shaping your equipment to fit how you want to play the character....

 

And I don't see why crafting is not optional. In all likelihood, if you just use the equipment you find, you'll have perfectly suitable stuff for a straightforward build. No need to craft. If however you want to do things differently, try different  stats, change your appearance and so on, then you have the option of doing this by crafting the specific gear your desire.

 

 

the removal of skill trees and advanced classes that made this viable has not helped.

[Lebanese Dude]

It has been said, time and again, on this very thread, that having the option to allow players to distribute attributes the way they wish provides more customization and more for character growth. 

 

You could for example, be a tanky mage that just uses a a few spells if you choose to focus on Constitution for your health or be a dexterous warrior by focusing on dexterity. This is called role playing where players role play the character they want, be it a well spoken & suave mage or a dextrous warrior or a tanky rogue.

 

Additionally, it has also been said on this thread, time and again, that there are plenty of people who dislike having their hand held and things being done for them. Having attributes level up on their own is auto-level which does exactly that.

 

Furthermore, Bioware has gone on record saying that crafting is an option. With this restriction, they seem to be lying about it because it now appears you have to craft weapons and armors to do well. This then leads to endless scurrying around the world like you do in an MMO to find crafting materials and then hoping that the loot gives you want you want. 

 

Additionally, game is a subjective thing. As such, expecting people to not be subjective about it, is foolish. Sadly, from your posts, you seem to have made up your mind that people who dislike this no attribute thing are whiners and moaners....

 

I call some people here whiners and moaners because they focus on one aspect of the game while completely ignoring the game as a whole, then make sweeping misplaced generalizations.

They have shifted their character development into other parts of the game and altered the paradigm.

 

In Inquisition you get to upgrade your character, your base, and your organization to roleplay the way you want it. The inquisitor and the Inquisition are one and the same. Do you want to be a bloodthirsty warrior elf who rampages across the countryside and murders everything you see? Pick a warrior, pick reaver specialization, wear customized gear that makes you look like Sauron, focus your inquisition on martial prowess, and choose the bloody option in every scenario.  

Tell me how Dragon Age Origins EVER allowed that degree of shaping the game trajectory?

 

At most you can play a mage-paladin who inefficiently casts spells and has shitty autoattacks. That may be "roleplaying" but it's also "bad gameplay". They offer you a different way to roleplay; one that does not constrict your combat and dialogue options.

 

Just take it.

[CrimsonHead]

I call some people here whiners and moaners because they focus on one aspect of the game while completely ignoring the game as a whole, then make sweeping misplaced generalizations.

They have shifted their character development into other parts of the game and altered the paradigm.

 

In Inquisition you get to upgrade your character, your base, and your organization to roleplay the way you want it. The inquisitor and the Inquisition are one and the same. Do you want to be a bloodthirsty warrior elf who rampages across the countryside and murders everything you see? Pick a warrior, pick reaver specialization, wear customized gear that makes you look like Sauron, focus your inquisition on martial prowess, and choose the bloody option in every scenario.  

Tell me how Dragon Age Origins EVER allowed that degree of shaping the game trajectory?

 

At most you can play a mage-paladin who inefficiently casts spells and has shitty autoattacks. That may be "roleplaying" but it's also "bad gameplay". They offer you a different way to roleplay; one that does not constrict your combat and dialogue options.

 

Just take it.

 

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Except you can still do those things by shaping your equipment to fit how you want to play the character....

 

And I don't see why crafting is not optional. In all likelihood, if you just use the equipment you find, you'll have perfectly suitable stuff for a straightforward build. No need to craft. If however you want to do things differently, try different  stats, change your appearance and so on, then you have the option of doing this by crafting the specific gear your desire.

 

Yeah, about that...

 

Why should I craft a gear to be different ? Why can I not TRAIN to be different ? That's what attribute distribution is essentially, its to train your character to be what you wish. This then implies that my Inquisitor and their followers are incapable of diverging from stereotypical build paths on their own volition and by training on their own. Which is shallow and in many ways insulting. 

 

Its like saying that a cross country athlete can only become a marathon runner using special shoes and running vests as opposed to actually training for it. 

[Lebanese Dude]

So how am I not qualified to voice my opinion on this? I see you dodged that bit.

 

I removed that bit from my post before I read your response.

 

Even still I still answered you. You are not a DAI developer and therefore have insignificant insight into how the game meshes together. You are very unqualified to make any judgement until you join their team. Sure you can have your opinions but they are definitely only grounded in your past experiences, completely irrelevant to something you haven't experienced yourself. You may have developed Call Of Duty, but that doesnt mean you know how DAI was conceived and produced.

 

Play the game and your opinions have at least some merit. You haven't even started to enjoy it to start hating it.

[Rawgrim]

I call some people here whiners and moaners because they focus on one aspect of the game while completely ignoring the game as a whole, then make sweeping misplaced generalizations.

They have shifted their character development into other parts of the game and altered the paradigm.

 

In Inquisition you get to upgrade your character, your base, and your organization to roleplay the way you want it. The inquisitor and the Inquisition are one and the same. Do you want to be a bloodthirsty warrior elf who rampages across the countryside and murders everything you see? Pick a warrior, pick reaver specialization, wear customized gear that makes you look like Sauron, focus your inquisition on martial prowess, and choose the bloody option in every scenario.  

Tell me how Dragon Age Origins EVER allowed that degree of shaping the game trajectory?

 

At most you can play a mage-paladin who inefficiently casts spells and has shitty autoattacks. That may be "roleplaying" but it's also "bad gameplay". They offer you a different way to roleplay; one that does not constrict your combat and dialogue options.

 

Just take it.

 

The topic is about attribute points. So naturally people will focus on that in this thread. I have seen every one of the "whiners" in here being extatic about other aspects of the game. Myself included. But those parts of the game have their own threads so...

[Rawgrim]

I removed that bit from my post before I read your response.

 

Even still I still answered you. You are not a DAI developer and therefore have insignificant insight into how the game meshes together. You are very unqualified to make any judgement until you join their team. Play the game and your opinions have at least some merit. You haven't even started to enjoy it to start hating it.

 

And what are you? You haven't played it either, so your own argument shoots itself down.

 

So what you are saying is that if you work as a chef, you have dinner at a different restaurant and you find a fly in the soup, you are not qualiied to say that the fly shouldn't be there. Since you work for a different restaurant. Sound logic there, mate.

 

I dislike this aspect of the game, and the limitations. Everything else about the game looks great. There is a difference between disliking certain aspects and hatng the whole package.

[CrimsonHead]

The topic is about attribute points. So naturally people will focus on that in this thread. I have seen every one of the "whiners" in here being extatic about other aspects of the game. Myself included. But those parts of the game have their own threads so...

 

What's the point in bashing on a tiny part of a game without putting it in greater context?

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I call some people here whiners and moaners because they focus on one aspect of the game while completely ignoring the game as a whole, then make sweeping misplaced generalizations.

They have shifted their character development into other parts of the game and altered the paradigm.

 

In Inquisition you get to upgrade your character, your base, and your organization to roleplay the way you want it. The inquisitor and the Inquisition are one and the same. Do you want to be a bloodthirsty warrior elf who rampages across the countryside and murders everything you see? Pick a warrior, pick reaver specialization, wear customized gear that makes you look like Sauron, focus your inquisition on martial prowess, and choose the bloody option in every scenario.  

Tell me how Dragon Age Origins EVER allowed that degree of shaping the game trajectory?

 

At most you can play a mage-paladin who inefficiently casts spells and has shitty autoattacks. That may be "roleplaying" but it's also "bad gameplay". They offer you a different way to roleplay; one that does not constrict your combat and dialogue options.

 

Just take it.

 

Bad gameplay..to you...To others...its a challenge...I have made tanky rogues, dextrous warriors in DA:O before. It can be done well and it has been done well before. Check the DA:O forums. 

 

Also...about the upgrade your character part ? How much can we upgrade ? We can only just pick talents and specializations and do nothing else to our character personally. Everything else is reliant on other people. 

[Rawgrim]

What's the point in bashing on a tiny part of a game without putting it in greater context?

 

I put it into a greater context about 10 times. Its right here in the thread.

[CrimsonHead]

Bad gameplay..to you...To others...its a challenge...I have made tanky rogues, dextrous warriors in DA:O before. It can be done well and it has been done well before. Check the DA:O forums. 

 

Also...about the upgrade your character part ? How much can we upgrade ? We can only just pick talents and specializations and do nothing else to our character personally. Everything else is reliant on other people. 

 

Why is it so hard to grasp that the game is as much about the organization you lead as the character you're controlling?

[Bayonet Hipshot]

And what are you? You haven't played it either, so your own argument shoots itself down.

 

So what you are saying is that if you work as a chef, you have dinner at a different restaurant and you find a fly in the soup, you are not qualiied to say that the fly shouldn't be there. Since you work for a different restaurant. Sound logic there, mate.

 

I dislike this aspect of the game, and the limitations. Everything else about the game looks great. There is a difference between disliking certain aspects and hatng the whole package.

 

Precisely. This thread is about the lack of the ability to have control over attribute point allocation and why some of us have issue with this restriction. 

 

But some people here evidently cannot see that and just resort to tell us to shut up or take it or stop being whiners and what have you.  They never try to address that the point that this lack of control over attributes in favor of crafting forces people to craft. They never try to address the point that this lack of control streamlines the game even more by removing options.

[CrimsonHead]

I put it into a greater context about 10 times. Its right here in the thread.

 Yet you dismiss gear customization, talents and inquisition perks as parts of character progression.

[Gtdef]

Bad gameplay..to you...To others...its a challenge...I have made tanky rogues, dextrous warriors in DA:O before. It can be done well and it has been done well before. Check the DA:O forums. 

 

That's a conflicting interest. What is the challenge you talk about? Beating the game with a non viable combination?

If you can beat the game with a bad build, then imagine what happens when you have a good one. 

 

Bad gameplay is doing anything and winning. That's why most modern games suck. That's the definition of hand holding.

[Rawgrim]

I call some people here whiners and moaners because they focus on one aspect of the game while completely ignoring the game as a whole, then make sweeping misplaced generalizations.

They have shifted their character development into other parts of the game and altered the paradigm.

 

In Inquisition you get to upgrade your character, your base, and your organization to roleplay the way you want it. The inquisitor and the Inquisition are one and the same. Do you want to be a bloodthirsty warrior elf who rampages across the countryside and murders everything you see? Pick a warrior, pick reaver specialization, wear customized gear that makes you look like Sauron, focus your inquisition on martial prowess, and choose the bloody option in every scenario.  

Tell me how Dragon Age Origins EVER allowed that degree of shaping the game trajectory?

 

At most you can play a mage-paladin who inefficiently casts spells and has shitty autoattacks. That may be "roleplaying" but it's also "bad gameplay". They offer you a different way to roleplay; one that does not constrict your combat and dialogue options.

 

Just take it.

 

By attacking the opposition's person (by calling them whiners etc) is a deliberate decision to move away from the topic, and is a sure way to lose a discussion. You have put the topic aside and gone for personal attacks. You need to raise your cunning stat.

[Gileadan]

Damn. I was going to write a really clever reply here, but sadly I'm only wielding my Mobile of Mediocrity right now. My Keyboard of Sassy Smartarse is at home. Oh well.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Why is it so hard to grasp that the game is as much about the organization you lead as the character you're controlling?

 

It has been mentioned, time and again, that the Inquisition and the Inquisitor level up differently, have different leveling system, different leveling perks. The Inquisitor's attributes are not related to the Inquisition's attributes in the same way follower's attributes are not related to the Inquisitor's attributes. This makes your point null and void. 

 

I do not see how because I as a leader need to level up my own organization, I am somehow incapable of choosing how healthy I am or how dextrous I am or how cunning I am on my own. 

[Bayonet Hipshot]

 Yet you dismiss gear customization, talents and inquisition perks as parts of character progression.

 

That is part of the ORGANIZATION progression. 

 

Character =/= Organization. 

 

Inquisition is made up of just more than the Inquisitor. 

[Lebanese Dude]

And what are you? You haven't played it either, so your own argument shoots itself down.

 

So what you are saying is that if you work as a chef, you have dinner at a different restaurant and you find a fly in the soup, you are not qualiied to say that the fly shouldn't be there. Since you work for a different restaurant. Sound logic there, mate.

 

I dislike this aspect of the game, and the limitations. Everything else about the game looks great. There is a difference between disliking certain aspects and hatng the whole package.

 

Did you not read my response? 

I also said that my "positive" responses to the game aren't much more grounded. The difference is that the way I choose to approach the game with a positive outlook is actually healthy. I actually try to understand the reasoning before making my conclusions. 

I don't like some aspects of the game myself. I just realize that I am probably not seeing the whole picture and will refrain from making threads about it because I know that I don't know how it will actually be like in the game.

 

For example, I dislike not having healing spells. My favorite character archetype is the paladin, and only DAO allowed me to half-ass it. However you may have seen me defend their choice of eliminating healing. Why?

 

It's because I understand that they are shifting their focus on an attrition style of combat.

I understand that this style of gameplay requires different sets of rules, ones that I have not played yet to make a judgement about.

I recognize that healing may be available in other forms.

I believe that BioWare is not trying to make me feel bad and will make it up to me by making other aspects of supporting better.

I realize that the game won't change and I should alter the way I approach things.

I feel good about the new system. I rationalize that it will make the game more lore-friendly. 

 

There... I have adapted my preferences to DAI and changed my expectations according to what I see.

 

If you wish to see everything in dark hues, who am I to stop you yea? It doesn't mean it's a good way to look at things. Not at all.

[Vilegrim]

So...It's just like bulders gate.

we have hundreds of spells to choose from do we?

[Rawgrim]

Why is it so hard to grasp that the game is as much about the organization you lead as the character you're controlling?

 

Because you are in direct control of the inquisitor. He is your window into the gameworld and the story is told through his eyes. Not every individual in the inquisition. The Inquisition is the inquisitor's main ASSET to use to achieve his goals. Rpgs, especially Bioware's rpgs are character driven (they are famous for it bcause they do it extremely well).