Agreed. Bioware took the time and effort to write a blog post on romances (which are a tiny and optional part of the game in their own words) so they should really think about doing the same on gameplay mechanics.
You may have noticed that I spend less time on the boards as well. I don't know the specifics of why they chose a design like this over another, but it's really, really busy at the office right now.
And how will then know how strong you are when it comes to picking skills and armor that increase attributes? The numbers still matter, unless you're satisfied with vague ballpark estimates, in which case there's no reason you'd need numbers in the previous system either.It was necessary when you could distribute the points freely on level up. It would be hard to do it without numbers. Now, it's done automatically so it doesn't matter anymore.
In the new system, "I am weak", "I am strong", "I am very strong" is all I need to know. And I will from the start by picking the class.
You may have noticed that I spend less time on the boards as well. I don't know the specifics of why they chose a design like this over another, but it's really, really busy at the office right now.
Stop lying. We know you guys are just sitting around the office drinking coffee and dressing up nug plushies.
But seriously, we (I can only speak for myself, but I'm sure it's a we) appreciate all of the time and hard work you guys have put into the game, and I can only imagine how many long days the team are putting in as it gets closer and closer to release.
I'm sorry, I genuinely don't understand what your saying here.
In DA:O, your strength was a combination of your innate ability and the bonuses from your equiment. Looking at either of these in isolation was utterly pointless as it didn't tell you anything about how well your character would actually fight. When you added points to your strength when levelling up, all that mattered was that it added to your total strength. In DA:I, the same applies, except you apply those points to the gear instead of the character. The result is still the same. It still increases your total strength. Where's the difference?
Ok I make it simple.
Why even show us the numerical values of our attributes. In the past i needed to know these to disrtibute the free points. And now ?
What do I need that in that information for?
PS
English is not my primary so often, I may sound weird. Writing fast what I have in mind doesn't help. 
But those specializations now have an actual impact on the games narrative
Not to mention that the choice between specialisations is far more significant from a gameplay perspective - not only is there no ability to take an extra one to fill in some of what you've missed, but the specialisations themselves are significantly larger and thus have a greater impact on your character's ability and playstyle. There's likely to be a much greater difference between two rogues with different specs than there were in any previous DA game.
So while there might be less options, there is a much greater distinction between options. Your choices matter far more. And, for me at least, thats far far far more inportant than having a multitude of options that make little difference in the end.
It seems that the folks at Bioware need to put a big sign on the wall of the room where they make the major decisions, a sign that reads 'RPGs are about CHOICES' so they don't forget that and keep taking them away like they've done here. I really like the option to spend our attribute points however we see fit, it's one of the major ways you make your character unique. Its fun, and there's no sense in taking that fun away just to 'streamline' or 'make things simpler'. I hope they reconsider this decision and bring our attribute points back at the earliest possible opportunity.
Ok I make it simple.
Why even show us the numerical values of our attributes. In the past i needed to know these to disrtibute the free points. And now ?
What do I need that in that information for?
PS
English is not my primary so often, I may sound weird. Writing fast what I have in mind doesn't help.
Just to check, you would've been perfectly happy in DA:O if when you picked up a sword with a strngth boost on it, instead of saying "+3 strength" or "+8 strength", it said "this sword makes you a bit stronger" or "this sword makes you really really strong", right?
Because to all intents and purposes, that's what you're saying the characters innate attributes in DA:I should be like.
And how will then know how strong you are when it comes to picking skills and armor that increase attributes? The numbers still matter, unless you're satisfied with vague ballpark estimates, in which case there's no reason you'd need numbers in the previous system either.
I know by picking the class. I am strong because I am a wrrior, I can't be weak since the game forced me to be like that.
Every 10 lvl warrior will have the same stats (base stats). Do i need to know the exact number ?
Choosing attributes is a pretty universal RPG feature, even if adding attributes every level isn't.
(Though honestly I wouldn't mind losing attributes all together, I just dislike the equipment and crafting focus)
From my understanding the main beef was more that you can't change them as you level. Which is not really omnipresent in the genre. And you still choose attributes via skills. Just not the usual way of pushing an arrow in the desired direction.
And yes, personally if they don't have a strict scale of what they represent I have always disliked attributes. Fallout made them right; 1 strength meant you were a wet noodle, 10 was the maximum and meant you were Hercules's bigger brother/sister, and you cannot change it by leveling. That's good, stats in this game give you a tangible impression of what your character is. The SPECIAL system is very well designed overall.
By contrast, what is 45 strength compared to 30? To 60? To 100? All these values could be easily attained in Origins or Awakening, and that's saying nothing of systems like Diablo II where stats were purely used for equipment requirement and made no sense in and of themselves. I have absolutely 0 attachements to such systems. If the choice is between a boring attribute system and no attribute growth, I'll take the latter and have the gameplay focus on more interesting stuff.
I know by picking the class. I am strong because I am a wrrior, I can't be weak since the game forced me to be like that.
Every 10 lvl warrior will have the same stats (base stats). Do i need to know the exact number ?
Ok I make it simple.
Why even show us the numerical values of our attributes. In the past i needed to know these to disrtibute the free points. And now ?
What do I need that in that information for?
Damage calculations often feature the notion of diminishing returns, so knowing how much a stat increases in comparison to the total prior to whatever you're equipping can still be useful there.
For example, if I have 50 STR and 21 CON, and I have two swords, one that increases STR by 10, another that increases CON by 7. The STR sword is clearly better, right?
Well....not necessarily. Seen as an opportunity cost, I'm losing out on boosting my CON by a higher percentage increase, even though the actual number is less. So it may be that the CON sword allows me to try some things the STR sword can't. I don't know if such thinking will actually apply in Inquisition as I don't know the damage formulas, but even without the exact formulas it can still be useful to see a numerical representation of your strong and weak areas, and by how much you can seek to either reinforce those strengths or cover those weaknesses.
If Bioware had announced that you were choosing your attributes at the start and then they remained fairly static, then I'm pretty sure you'd get a lot less in the way of complaints.
Or at least you'd get different complainers
From my understanding the main beef was more that you can't change them as you level. Which is not really omnipresent in the genre. And you still choose attributes via skills. Just not the usual way of pushing an arrow in the desired direction.
And yes, personally if they don't have a strict scale of what they represent I have always disliked attributes. Fallout made them right; 1 strength meant you were a wet noodle, 10 was the maximum and meant you were Hercules's bigger brother/sister, and you cannot change it by leveling. That's good, stats in this game give you a tangible impression of what your character is. The SPECIAL system is very well designed overall.
By contrast, what is 45 strength compared to 30? To 60? To 100? All these values could be easily attained in Origins or Awakening, and that's saying nothing of systems like Diablo II where stats were purely used for equipment requirement and made no sense in and of themselves. I have absolutely 0 attachements to such systems. If the choice is between a boring attribute system and no attribute growth, I'll take the latter and have the gameplay focus on more interesting stuff.
I'd like stats that were much, much lower. Imagine if they all started at 10 as a baseline minimum, and you allocated 3 points at first level after racial and class bonuses. So for an elven mage, for instance:
Strength 10
Dexterity 12 (+2 elven)
Constitution 10
Magic 14 (+3 mage, +1 elven)
Cunning 11 (+1 elven)
Willpower 13 (+3 mage)
Then you only increased one score by 1 at levels 5, 10, 15, and so on or something like that. I'm not sure exactly what each point would do, but it would seem...more meaningful to get a boost in one of them, including from equipment. Every point of Constitution could give you a 10% Health bonus calculated with a base Health that scales with level/class.
I don't mean tactical camera and you know it.
Less specializations: 9 vs 18 in Origins. Even if you don't count Awakening it's 9 vs 12.
Narrow corridors: constant canyons, caves, paths between cliffs etc. Watch gameplay videos. It's all there.
No attributes on level up - I don't even need to explain. First dragon age game to take this feature out. Even dumbed down DA2 had it.
I'm not misinformed.
Yeah, and specializations had 4 abilities max in DA:O. In DA:I they are entire trees with actives, passives, and upgrades for active abilities. We aren't misinformed either. The game isn't out yet so you, sorry to say, are just projecting and know actually nothing more than we do. We're just choosing to be reasonable, while you're choosing to be angry.
I'd like stats that were much, much lower. Imagine if they all started at 10 as a baseline minimum, and you allocated 3 points at first level after racial and class bonuses. So for an elven mage, for instance:
Strength 10
Dexterity 12 (+2 elven)
Constitution 10
Magic 14 (+3 mage, +1 elven)
Cunning 11 (+1 elven)
Willpower 13 (+3 mage)
Then you only increased one score by 1 at levels 5, 10, 15, and so on or something like that. I'm not sure exactly what each point would do, but it would seem...more meaningful to get a boost in one of them, including from equipment. Every point of Constitution could give you a 10% Health bonus calculated with a base Health that scales with level/class.
I agree, and it would actually make attribute selection meaningful. In DA1/2 one attribute point was only meaningful if you were one short of equipping a new weapon/piece of armor.
I know by picking the class. I am strong because I am a wrrior, I can't be weak since the game forced me to be like that.
Every 10 lvl warrior will have the same stats (base stats). Do i need to know the exact number ?
But they won't. They'll have different passives, different gear, etc.
Just to check, you would've been perfectly happy in DA:O if when you picked up a sword with a strngth boost on it, instead of saying "+3 strength" or "+8 strength", it said "this sword makes you a bit stronger" or "this sword makes you really really strong", right?
Because to all intents and purposes, that's what you're saying the characters innate attributes in DA:I should be like.
Not in DA:O. In DAO I had to increase the attributes by myself on level up -> For that I needed to know the numerical values of them -> Because of that I needed to know the exact number for the bonuses on my gear.
And now after the Streamlining©2010 by ... nvermind that ... I don't need that info anymore.
Believe I know what you are saying. We know that a Shepard Soldier has more Encumbrance than a Shepard Engineer, but it makes little difference when one is playing that character as to the exact numbers or differences.
Yeah, that is exactly what I was trying to communicate.
Not in DA:O. In DAO I had to increase the attributes by myself on level up -> For that I needed to know the numerical values of them -> Because of that I needed to know the exact number for the bonuses on my gear.
And now after the Streamlining©2010 by ... nvermind that ... I don't need that info anymore.
And in DA:I, to customise your character you have to increase the attributes on your gear manually. And so for that you need to know the exact number of your base stats. The end result is exactly the same.
Or, to put in another way, in DA:O, your stats were X+3, where X is the variable you chose. In DA:I, they're 3+X.
Where is the streamlining?
Where is the difference?
I have strongly mixed feelings about it. it doesnt sound like a terrible idea but at the same time I'm a bit nervous at the sound of losing points upon leveling up. Its nice they are moving in a new direction and trying something different though. 
And in DA:I, to customise your character you have to increase the attributes on your gear manually. And so for that you need to know the exact number of your base stats. The end result is exactly the same.
Or, to put in another way, in DA:O, your stats were X+3, where X is the variable you chose. In DA:I, they're 3+X.
Where is the streamlining?
Where is the difference?
There is none but it's different, and different mean bad.
This complaints could have a little value if we actualy played the game and see how this system work but right now it's the usual hysterical reaction by BSN.
I was playing as a mage today and was able to make a build that was pretty clearly the most powerful build in terms of speed of killing enemies today than I was with my rogues. There are certainly some very good synergies you can make early that can make the mage smash opponents. My favourite was using an ability that let me one on one the guardians (which can be hard with their shields) because it was an arcing blast the ended up curling around and hitting them in the rear while reducing their magic resistance letting me chain an a spell that did large damage while knocking them down, allowing me to finish them off with basic attacks while on the ground.
I am honestly ashamed of some of the naysayers in this thread. People are so quick to judge, to misunderstand and to blow one tweet out of proportion without 1. seeing the whole picture and 2. considering that DA:I, while a Dragon Age game, is also a different game and its own sort of game. Bioware has shown us plenty of footage, dev diaries, panel discussions and other stuff of all the GOOD changes and customization they are adding to this game. People just need to relax.
I am honestly ashamed of some of the naysayers in this thread. People are so quick to judge, to misunderstand and to blow one tweet out of proportion without 1. seeing the whole picture and 2. considering that DA:I, while a Dragon Age game, is also a different game and its own sort of game. Bioware has shown us plenty of footage, dev diaries, panel discussions and other stuff of all the GOOD changes and customization they are adding to this game. People just need to relax.
Welcome to BSN
Retour en haut
