3034 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

Yeah but what do all the daggers in the game look like?  Do you know for certain?

What attributes do all the daggers have in the game?  Do you know for certain?

 

We've already seen warriors using maces, hammers, axes and swords whether with a shield or two handed.  You think rogues wont have that sort of weapon variety when even in DA2 they had more than just "standard daggers" to use?  And this game has 4x the development time that DA2 did.  Come on man.

 

What they look like would be a cosmetic difference. Its not about the look of the weapons, its about the choice in weapons.

[cjones91]

Sorry buddy, we understand the concept of development budgets for time, money and energy.  We also understand that DA:O already exists.

 

We trust bioware, given everything they've shown us, to make a new, good dragon age game called DA:I, with meaningful gameplay choices, exciting combat, great characters and a good story.  And we happen to understand they might make a decision to streamline attribute point distribution in lieu of giving us new, exciting features like improved crafting and even further branching ability trees.  In real life, there are trade offs, and we aren't going to cry about not clicking strength twice and constitution once when my warrior levels up.

Lol,please don't use the time and development budgets argument.If Bioware brought back races and added multiplayer then keeping a simple and minor feature the way it worked in two games now is a drop in the bucket.

 

And you should probably start speaking for yourself instead of saying 'we'.

[nialler]

You really don't know that yet. The game isn't out.

Nope.  But I like what I've seen in every gameplay video and panel discussion I've seen.  And I don't jump to conclusions.  I use all the information available to me to make a decision.

 

And I have been burned by ME3, DA2 (initially) and SWTOR.  And I've played games for a larger portion of my life than I haven't.  I'm being reasonable here, and I am eagerly anticipating DA:I based on all of the great features and characters they've shown us.  You are crying that you can't choose which numbers get bigger on your character, despite the fact that you can through gear, equipment and passive abilities.  

 

You really just confuse me.

[Muspade]

And you should probably speaking for yourself instead of saying 'we'.

If you stop labelling the opposing opinion as satanic, then he can stop saying "we".

Deal?

[cjones91]

Basicaly.

The game is different.

I don't like it.

Everybody is wrong on supporting those change.

[Elhanan]

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

It originally stemmed from:

* Difficulty in playing a Rogue in the Dwarven Commoner Origin; more armor helps.
* Liked the challenge of playing something that worked well after being informed it would not be viable (ie; dislike min/ max extremes).
* Wanted pants; not a skirt (ie; 'Shave my back and call me an Elf').

This character used the Warden's armor, as I recall; the Massive set from the Warden's Keep DLC. And while he may not have been optimal, he was unique; distinctive.

Now one cookie will be much the same as another, as done in the DA-MP selections. And I prefer something more personable and unique, esp in the solo game.

[Rawgrim]

Nope.  But I like what I've seen in every gameplay video and panel discussion I've seen.  And I don't jump to conclusions.  I use all the information available to me to make a decision.

 

And I have been burned by ME3, DA2 (initially) and SWTOR.  And I've played games for a larger portion of my life than I haven't.  I'm being reasonable here, and I am eagerly anticipating DA:I based on all of the great features and characters they've shown us.  You are crying that you can't choose which numbers get bigger on your character, despite the fact that you can through gear, equipment and passive abilities.  

 

You really just confuse me.

 

14th time. Should stick soon, right? The complaint is about the player not being able to put the stats on his character, wherever he wants, at level up. Not that it shouldn't be possible to boost stats via enchanted equipment.

[nialler]

Lol,please don't use the time and development budgets argument.If Bioware brought back races and added multiplayer then keeping a simple and minor feature the way it worked in two games now is a drop in the bucket.

 

And you should probably speaking for yourself instead of saying 'we'.

Games change.  Are you upset they took out healing too?

 

I suspect this decision to streamline attribute point distribution is in the same vein - if you control more of the inputs (health for the party per encounter, for instance) you can guarantee a better designed and balanced encounter system, especially considering the game doesn't auto level enemies to your abilities.  

 

And again, like we've been saying this whole thread (yes, WE), Bioware has introduced more meaningful choices beyond attribute point distribution at level up.  They haven't even removed attribute point distribution - they just added it to gear customization.  Why can't you understand this?

[Paul E Dangerously]

Nope.  But I like what I've seen in every gameplay video and panel discussion I've seen.  And I don't jump to conclusions.  I use all the information available to me to make a decision.

 

And I have been burned by ME3, DA2 (initially) and SWTOR.  And I've played games for a larger portion of my life than I haven't.  I'm being reasonable here, and I am eagerly anticipating DA:I based on all of the great features and characters they've shown us.  You are crying that you can't choose which numbers get bigger on your character, despite the fact that you can through gear, equipment and passive abilities.  

 

You really just confuse me.

 

Yeah, and the first two looked alright in most of the promo material, too. Hell, so did Aliens Colonial Marines, and look at how well that turned out from promo material to end product.

 

And I'm "crying" that Bioware has not only continued along the path from DA2 - removing a ton of character build options - they've taken a hatchet to the corpse that DA2 left lying on the ground. And I liked DA2 more than most.

[cjones91]

If you stop labelling the opposing opinion as satanic, then he can stop saying "we".

Deal?

When the hell have I ever done that?

[nialler]

14th time. Should stick soon, right? The complaint is about the player not being able to put the stats on his character, wherever he wants, at level up. Not that it shouldn't be possible to boost stats via enchanted equipment.

I get your point.  My point is it doesn't matter because its alleviated and improved in other areas.  Should I start counting how many times I have to tell you this?

[Muspade]

When the hell have I ever done that?

I thought you were familiar with exaggerations.

[Paul E Dangerously]

I get your point.  My point is it doesn't matter because its alleviated and improved in other areas.  Should I start counting how many times I have to tell you this?

 

Really? Then how do I get new build options for my rogue? Where does the crafting system let me use an axe or a longsword?

[Heimdall]

If you have a better term then I'm all for it.And what exactly makes a "good" RPG?

 

Less choice?

Less options?

More restricted character building?

The number of options isn't quite as important to me as the depth of each option and the degree to which it is reflected in the game world.  I'm not going to have this silly knee-jerk reaction that the game is ruined some posters are having simply because stat development has changed, not been removed, changed.

[cjones91]

Games change.  Are you upset they took out healing too?

 

I suspect this decision to streamline attribute point distribution is in the same vein - if you control more of the inputs (health for the party per encounter, for instance) you can guarantee a better designed and balanced encounter system, especially considering the game doesn't auto level enemies to your abilities.  

 

And again, like we've been saying this whole thread (yes, WE), Bioware has introduced more meaningful choices beyond attribute point distribution at level up.  They haven't even removed attribute point distribution - they just added it to gear customization.  Why can't you understand this?

I'm over that actually.And yes games change but change for the sake of it is never good.

[nialler]

Yeah, and the first two looked alright in most of the promo material, too. Hell, so did Aliens Colonial Marines, and look at how well that turned out from promo material to end product.

 

And I'm "crying" that Bioware has not only continued along the path from DA2 - removing a ton of character build options - they've taken a hatchet to the corpse that DA2 left lying on the ground. And I liked DA2 more than most.

Ok, you're using DA2 as a comparison point.

 

Considering the ability trees and perks look more involved in DA:I than in DA2, we can say based on that that there are more meaningful character builds in DAI than in DA2. 

 

Now you want to talk about a "ton of character build options" based on stats?  Is my rogue hawke in DA2 with 40 dex and 35 cunning really that different from my rogue hawke in DA with 39 dex and 36 cunning?  Didn't think so.

 

All the meaningful customization choices in DA2 came from the abilities you used, anyway.

[Star fury]

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 fandom in general....

Yeah, bsn and fandom must be blindly optimistic and deluded while ignoring all warning signs and criticism even after TORtanic, ME3 and especially DA2.

[Rawgrim]

I get your point.  My point is it doesn't matter because its alleviated and improved in other areas.  Should I start counting how many times I have to tell you this?

 

No need. I told you I understood your point right away. You still claim to be confused by the other side of it. So I am being nice and reminding you of it.

[Giubba]

Again, we're talking about character design choices, not tactical options.
[/quote]

Abilities selection is one of the main way for design your character and mine was simply an example for proving that giving huge amount of option doesn't lead to superior system
 
 

And I have no objection to defining the character over time, but I'd like to do it at the start, too. Let me play a scrawny skillless Warrior, or a beefy thuggish Rogue, or a particularly erudite anything at all.

Ok but that's not gonna happen

 

But all level 1 archers should not be the same. And it appears they're selecting not only our stats, but our starting abilities as well.

Who the hell are you for saying what it should and shouldn't be possible in a rpg?

They went too far with this in DAO and DA2. I was hoping they'd retreat from this design, nor forge ahead.

Once again, this game needs mods.

Who the hell are you for saying that they went "too far"?

Arrogant and prety much the most idiotic thing i've read in this thread.[/quote]

[nialler]

Really? Then how do I get new build options for my rogue? Where does the crafting system let me use an axe or a longsword?

Maybe, maybe not.  But I'm not really worried given that axes and longswords were really the same thing in DA:O, only with either slightly slower attack or armor penetration than the other, and a different model.  Your rogue still played and controlled the same despite what melee weapon you gave them.

[Elhanan]

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!".

Even if this were true, cosmetic appearances matter; hence the many posts for CC, In DAO, I passed on the reported best 2H choice in the game because it was a maul; looked like it was smashing into the spine during movement. I also avoided hats on my Mages for appearances.

But it goes beyond cosmetic choices; it is about internal CC and the ability to design as the Player wishes.

[cjones91]

I thought you were familiar with exaggurations.

Strawmanning isn't what I would call exaggerations.

[Muspade]

Yeah, bsn and fandom must be blindly optimistic and deluded while ignoring all warning signs and criticism even after TORtanic, ME3 and especially DA2.

God forbid that I liked DA2's combat better except the combat encounters being badly designed due to "Ninja's", an issue which was fixed in the DLC's.

[nialler]

No need. I told you I understood your point right away. You still claim to be confused by the other side of it. So I am being nice and reminding you of it.

I'm confused why it matters so much to you.  It's arguably the most minor change made in this game.  I'd rather you complained about the removal of healing spells (which, for the record, I'm totally ok with as well).

[Star fury]

If you stop labelling the opposing opinion as satanic, then he can stop saying "we".

Deal?

Where exactly did he label "the opposing opinion as satanic"? Quote? Maybe you should really stop lying.