3034 réponses à ce sujet

[nialler]

Possibly true, but we also have only a single sub-class this time, too; perhaps not the best example of versatility either. And Specializations were also different for the other games, as a Blood Mage could benefit from higher CON, and AW could benefit from DEX. Now every sub-class is likely to be the same as another Player design of the same sub-class.

You seem to think there's inherent value in your character, with the same specialization, being completely different from other players characters that will never affect your game ever. Why is this?

Some less meaningful choices (attribute distribution through level up) were removed in favor of dev time being spent in areas providing more choices (gear customization, new inquisition features, etc.).  I'm not sure what the issue is here.

[AlanC9]

You can harp on "but you can boost stats with gear!" all you want, but they've still eliminated about 80% of the combinations allowed through the weapon restrictions alone, and now you can't even control attribute gains.

I dunno if making declarations like 80% makes much sense without more knowledge of the talent trees.

[Rawgrim]

We now know that Rogues fight differently depending on if they are using punching daggers or blades, and that  Warrior with a great sword fights differently than one using a hammer or maul. So new choices added.

 

That is not new choices. Those choices and more were allready in the series to begin with. they could have kept that, and just had the rogues use different animations anyway.

[Heimdall]

One motive was that I was informed it was not viable; was better to simply use DEX or CUN. But by using higher STR and wearing heavy armor, I could shrug off more Grabs, Overwhelms, and like special attacks, and quickly go into melee if required. Now switching weapons is problematic, too.

And no need to grab STR, DEX, CuN, and perhaps CON now as a Mage if it does not help, as the game design is altered to focus on MGC and WILL.

I prefer versatility and customization in a design; not the same design as everyone else.

That sounds like a great argument for losing the warrior/rogue distinction, that seems to be what you want.

[nialler]

To be Fair, there are more choices in other areas of the game, Not for building your character for combat.

I am being fair.  Specializations in DA:O offered you 4 abilities, some of which were passive, not all of which were useful.  Now you can only pick one specialization, but it has a branching tree of abilities with passive, actives and upgrades to active abilities.  DA:O was not the be all, end all of CRPGs.  To me, it looks like most everything has been improved upon, and attribute points are automatically assigned, but further augmented through significant bonuses through the gear you craft and customize. And now there is gear that improves your active abilities as well. Did any gear in DA:O do that?

[Rawgrim]

You seem to think there's inherent value in your character, with the same specialization, being completely different from other players characters that will never affect your game ever. Why is this?

Some less meaningful choices (attribute distribution through level up) were removed in favor of dev time being spent in areas providing more choices (gear customization, new inquisition features, etc.).  I'm not sure what the issue is here.

 

Those are cosmetic choices.

[AlanC9]

You seem to think there's inherent value in your character, with the same specialization, being completely different from other players characters that will never affect your game ever. Why is this?

What about having that character be different from my own characters with the same class and specialization?

[Rawgrim]

That sounds like a great argument for losing the warrior/rogue distinction, that seems to be what you want.

 

Wouldn't it be better if the player got to make their own distinctive character?

[nialler]

It's a bit like adding a new story to your house while removing three-quarters of the foundation. It's better on the surface, but it's only great if you don't look at it too closely.

That's pretty bizarre.  The different types of weapons in DA:O (mace vs axe vs dagger) were largely cosmetic differences.  In the end you really equipped what gear had the best stats.  How is that 3/4ths of the foundation of the game?

[cjones91]

A)Yes you can choose your ability

 

B)You can still focus on particular attribute via gear

 

C)Thanks god they restricted the weapon so melee rogue found a purpose in life and not only being a warrior that wear a weaker armor.

Yes....I mean it's not like this is a RPG where character customization and choice has always been important.Apparently rogues can't use anything other than daggers and bows because in your opinion they're just gimped warriors.

 

[Giubba]

Absolutely. But the strategy also took a hit when we got forced to only use 8 of our abilities in fights.

No it didn't, you can change ability whenever you want out of combat and as was shown int the streaming 16 minutes ago with the tactical camera you can easily spot enemy ahead of your position and plan accordingly as we said months ago when this decision was announced.

[Elhanan]

Unfortunately you seem to thing that certain attributes are no longer useful for all classes.  This is not true.  The only thing that has changed is the method of distributing attribute points.  Previously it was done 3 points at a time each time you leveled.  Now it is done by equipping gear you can customize and switch out at any point in the game.  Constitution will still give health, dex will still give defensive bonuses, strength will still boost damage, cunning will still still affect crits, willpower will still affect stamina, etc. etc.

Perhaps, but since a Rogue does not seem to require higher STR any longer (ie; all wear lighter armors), it is far more likely that items selected will boost the scores one is given; not chosen.

[Paul E Dangerously]

That's pretty bizarre.  The different types of weapons in DA:O (mace vs axe vs dagger) were largely cosmetic differences.  In the end you really equipped what gear had the best stats.  How is that 3/4ths of the foundation of the game?

 

Races were largely cosmetic differences, too, outside of the first hour of the game. Yet when they removed those options, people screamed their damned heads off.

 

And it's about choice which people don't seem to get. My Dwarf Commoner Rogue used dual hand-axes. Why? It might have been a cosmetic choice in some respect, but there were some great weapons out there to choose from instead of just maining Dex/Con and heading for The Rose's Thorn and a tier 3 Thorn of the Dead Gods like everyone else.

[nialler]

Yes....I mean it's not like this is a RPG where character customization and choice has always been important.Apparently rogues can't use anything other than daggers and bows because in your opinion they're just gimped warriors.

 

Again, weapon choices between swords vs axes vs maces were largely cosmetic.  Now rogues and warriors play vastly differently, allowing more choices in playstyle instead of "this rogue has all the same dual wielding moves as my dual wielding warrior, but he can go invisible and drop a trap too!".

[cjones91]

Wouldn't it be better if the player got to make their own distinctive character?

It would,but then the Anti RPG crowd would complain about how trivial it is and that everyone should be forced down a linear path for their characters.

[PhroXenGold]

Again, weapon choices between swords vs axes vs maces were largely cosmetic.  Now rogues and warriors play vastly differently, allowing more choices in playstyle instead of "this rogue has all the same dual wielding moves as my dual wielding warrior, but he can go invisible and drop a trap too!".

 

Indeed. Meaningful difference between the choices we have is far more important than quantity of choices.

[Rawgrim]

That's pretty bizarre.  The different types of weapons in DA:O (mace vs axe vs dagger) were largely cosmetic differences.  In the end you really equipped what gear had the best stats.  How is that 3/4ths of the foundation of the game?

 

Maces and axes had more armour piercing than the daggers. So no. It wasn't only a cosmetic choice.

 

I never did that. I used 2 axes for my dwarven rogue, even though they were alot worse than the swords I found.

[Nohvarr]

That is not new choices. Those choices and more were allready in the series to begin with. they could have kept that, and just had the rogues use different animations anyway.

It's not just a matter of animation. When using a maul or hammer, a warrior focuses all their damage on one target. When using a Sword or Axe, the warrior swings wide doing less damage but hitting multiple targets.Same goes for the rogue using Punching daggers or short swords.

[nialler]

Perhaps, but since a Rogue does not seem to require higher STR any longer (ie; all wear lighter armors), it is far more likely that items selected will boost the scores one is given; not chosen.

No, gear works very differently now.  It is a template you equip with stats, and can recustomize and change.  You can keep the same gear from the beginning of the game, with the same appearance, but keep upgrading the stats as you choose.  There are no class-limited armors in this game.  There are penalties for mages wearing plate, I have heard, but they can still wear plate.  And you can further customize the plate to give you magic and willpower stats.  

 

People aren't considering all the moving parts of DA:I working together. They are trying to imagine DA:O without customizable attributes instead, which is not what DA:I is.

[Muspade]

It would,but then the Anti RPG crowd would complain about how trivial it is and that everyone should be forced down a linear path for their characters.

"Anti-RPG"

Spoiler

[Giubba]

Yes....I mean it's not like this is a RPG where character customization and choice has always been important.Apparently rogues can't use anything other than daggers and bows because in your opinion they're just gimped warriors.
 

They were in DA:O.

[Nohvarr]

It would,but then the Anti RPG crowd would complain about how trivial it is and that everyone should be forced down a linear path for their characters.

Okay you can stop using that label right now. They are not 'The Anti-RPG' crowd they just happen to have a different opinion on what makes a good RPG.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You still have a lot of option, simply they are given to you in a form you don't like.

We're talking about a level one character. What options do I have?

I would also argue that Awakening didn't ultimately have many choices, because we maxed out most of the trees. Very few abilities were left unlearned by the end.

[Rawgrim]

Indeed. Meaningful difference between the choices we have is far more important than quantity of choices.

 

Being able to use a weapon that is alot more effective vs heavily armoured opponents isn't a meaningful choice?

[Rawgrim]

It's not just a matter of animation. When using a maul or hammer, a warrior focuses all their damage on one target. When using a Sword or Axe, the warrior swings wide doing less damage but hitting multiple targets.Same goes for the rogue using Punching daggers or short swords.

 

You can swing wide with the two handed weapons too. In fact quite a few of the abilities did that.