124 réponses à ce sujet

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Doesn't the MP only have 4 active abilities at once?

 

Multiplayer has characters that are much more limited in what they can do. Their similar to the classes ME3 MP had.

[leaguer of one]

Nope, not worried about this at all and neither should you be.  You need to pay attention to what you're seeing/reading. 

 

What UI has every gameplay video used before today?  And what UI was debuted today, which if you looked closely contained multiple instances of pausing and strategy?  Take another look.

 

David Gaider was on here a few weeks ago and talked about how this combat system was NOT DA:O or DA2; that they had built it from the ground up with a new, specific focus in mind.

 

You need to quit reading what everyone is speculating about and listen to the things the Devs here have said.

.... You who was complaining the most is fine with the game now... Wow.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Perhaps, but limiting a player character to one class's ability set allows them to design things like cross class combos. If one character could both set up and exploit those, they wouldn't need companions. It also makes general ability design a lot simpler since you'd only have to worry about how rogue abilities perform alongside other rogue abilities, and not warrior and mage abilities. Cross class combos aside, there would undoubtedly be broken OP ability combinations if one character had access to all classes, and that makes the designer's job a lot more difficult since they would have to anticipate and balance those.

Finding those paths to being overpowered is part of the fun, I would argue.

 

And you could still do combos by having abilities needed to be used in rapid succession, faster than a single character could do it.  I did this a lot in DAO, having two mages do spellcombos together.  Sure, one mage could have done it, but two could do it faster.

 

And having all the combos be cross-class like in DA2 felt really contrived.  I don't mind combos, but I don't want to have to use multiple classes to do every single one (especially since I like all-mage parties).

[leaguer of one]

Finding those paths to being overpowered is part of the fun, I would argue.

 

And you could still do combos by having abilities needed to be used in rapid succession, faster than a single character could do it.  I did this a lot in DAO, having two mages do spellcombos together.  Sure, one mage could have done it, but two could do it faster.

 

And having all the combos be cross-class like in DA2 felt really contrived.  I don't mind combos, but I don't want to have to use multiple classes to do every single one (especially since I like all-mage parties).

But it's not like that in dai. Many of the demos show mages freezing enemies and then doing extra damage shattering them with stone fist.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But it's not like that in dai. Many of the demos show mages freezing enemies and then doing extra damage shattering them with stone fist.

I know.  I'm happy about that.

 

I'm disappointed Shatter is no longer an instant kill, though. 

[CrazyMooNew]

Oh...well ok...

 

Its odd to take so much time writing something...without actually thinking about what it is you're saying.

 

How....how in the hell...would pausing during multiplayer work? Could you even begin to imagine the absolute crap-fest that would take place? Having four players with the ability to freaking PAUSE the game whenever they want would be horrible...

 

And honestly...why would you need to pause the game? You're only controlling your character...you're not controlling the others...you cannot tell them where to go or queue up abilities...this mindset is perplexing and I for one really don't care if you buy the game or not TC.

 

Freakin hell....pausing the game for tactical cameras in multiplayer ...

[Maverick_One]

I am sorry for all those that have an issue with the game already, but since I like the series imma gonna give this one a try. If I don't like it then I don't like it and I am just out the money I was gonna use on another game. It is not like my arm is being twisted into getting the game. Bioware made a game I liked in DA:O, I got into the whole universe and here I am. If it is a bad game. Well I will at least have it beaten for Dragon Age: Return of The Warden Commander, or alternatively Dragon Age:Turning Point.

[AlanC9]

And you could still do combos by having abilities needed to be used in rapid succession, faster than a single character could do it.  I did this a lot in DAO, having two mages do spellcombos together.  Sure, one mage could have done it, but two could do it faster.

This goes back to BG2, where it made sense to have two mages so you could complete the Pierce Magic(etc.)/Breach combo in one round. Imoen and Aerie FTW!

[Brogan]

.... You who was complaining the most is fine with the game now... Wow.

 

I never complained about the 8 slot thing at all.  My "complaints" (at the time) were almost entirely focused on the pc ui.  Pretty much all of those worries were rendered unnecessary with today's (well, yesterday's) pc footage.

 

The one thing I still need to see are the pc specific menu screens and ability tables.  They said Monday for those.

[JerZey CJ]

So is there no longer a wheel we can bring up that has all our talents on it? If so, that is ridiculous. Why would they take that out after it's been in both games?

[AtreiyaN7]

*yawn*

[Spectre Impersonator]

I'm glad they limited the abilities. And I have no regrets that I won't be seeing you online.

[Ieldra]

As a side note, I play with a controller. I've played the games and all the expansions, read the books, loved the characters and licked a lampost in winter. I am not less as a fan because I prefer to play RPGs with a different piece of hardware. If you think otherwise, then as a sword-and-board warrior for justice, you can bite my shiny metal ass.

I would like to put this into perspective. As a rule, the complaints by PC players are not directed at console players because they're seen as lesser fans or generally more inept at playing games, but at console hardware and its limitations, which is seen as holding back PC implementation for the sake of a unified playing experience. Consider, for instance, the inability to holster your weapon in ME3. The reason given for that was that the Xbox 360 has dedicated animation memory, and the unarmed moving animations were removed in favor of others because there wasn't enough memory for all of them. PC graphics hardware doesn't have dedicated animation space and RAM can be easily upgraded, so that limitation would not apply to PC versions of the game, but nonetheless the PC version retains the inability to holster your weapon.

 

In some cases, that also applies to a game's user interface, though I think this is less of an issue for DAI because the PC version has its own interface. In the case of the 8-slot limitation, there is no technical reason why either version couldn't have more than 8 slots, so the reason probably lies somewhere else.

 

These things are what most people refer to when they speak of "dumbing down for the console versions". I think these are valid complaints. As a PC player, I will dismiss the ones coming from people with a "PC master race" attitude.

 

Edit:

I'm not a console player, but it appears to me that the ability selection scheme in the console ui is crap - I mean this diamond-shaped menu that only displays 4 abilities at a time and making you need to switch to a second tier to access more abilities. Can anyone shed light on the rationale for this - in my eyes - ridiculously limiting layout? People in the vids appear to be ok with it, so I'm probably missing something.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This goes back to BG2, where it made sense to have two mages so you could complete the Pierce Magic(etc.)/Breach combo in one round. Imoen and Aerie FTW!

Two?  Pfft.  In BG2 I used five.

[Heimdall]

I would like to put this into perspective. As a rule, the complaints by PC players are not directed at console players because they're seen as lesser fans or generally more inept at playing games, but at console hardware and its limitations, which is seen as holding back PC implementation for the sake of a unified playing experience. Consider, for instance, the inability to holster your weapon in ME3. The reason given for that was that the Xbox 360 has dedicated animation memory, and the unarmed moving animations were removed in favor of others because there wasn't enough memory for all of them. PC graphics hardware doesn't have dedicated animation space and RAM can be easily upgraded, so that limitation would not apply to PC versions of the game, but nonetheless the PC version retains the inability to holster your weapon.
 
In some cases, that also applies to a game's user interface, though I think this is less of an issue for DAI because the PC version has its own interface. In the case of the 8-slot limitation, there is no technical reason why either version couldn't have more than 8 slots, so the reason probably lies somewhere else.
 
These things are what most people refer to when they speak of "dumbing down for the console versions". I think these are valid complaints. As a PC player, I will dismiss the ones coming from people with a "PC master race" attitude.
 
Edit:
I'm not a console player, but it appears to me that the ability selection scheme in the console ui is crap - I mean this diamond-shaped menu that only displays 4 abilities at a time and making you need to switch to a second tier to access more abilities. Can anyone shed light on the rationale for this - in my eyes - ridiculously limiting layout? People in the vids appear to be ok with it, so I'm probably missing something.

The same interface, more or less, was used in the previous games. They want to give the player the ability to assign abilities to single buttons so they can be activated at a moment's notice. The obvious limitation being the number of buttons on a controller. So four abilities, one button press away from four more, allows the console players to access a variety of abilities usng the most easily accessed buttons on the controller, rather than trying to assign eight abilities to unique buttons.

[Mr.Chuckle]

Actually I like the no auto heal ideia
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 also had no auto heal after combat and that made me alot more Imersed because I actually had to buy potions in order to beat the game and prepare before every battle or else game over.

In DAO & DA2 not once did I use a potion during my playthroughs and I was on Hard dificulty everytime.
So I like the direction they are taking in this aspect

[Paul E Dangerously]

Honestly, I think it's just part of their design philosophy for this game.

 

"Giving you less player options is really giving you more player options!"

 

That isn't even an exaggeration, that's my honest opinion of what I've seen so far. If DA2 cut you off at the knees in terms of character builds, DAI is practically sawing you in half at the waist.

 

 

[AlanC9]

 

That isn't even an exaggeration, that's my honest opinion of what I've seen so far. If DA2 cut you off at the knees in terms of character builds, DAI is practically sawing you in half at the waist.

 

 

This strikes me as a bit hysterical. I thought there were more rogue and fighter builds in DA2 than there were in DAO. Fewer for mages, but a lot of the DAO spells were crappy. Dunno about DAI yet since I haven't seen enough of the talent trees.

[Paul E Dangerously]

This strikes me as a bit hysterical. I thought there were more rogue and fighter builds in DA2 than there were in DAO. Fewer for mages, but a lot of the DAO spells were crappy. Dunno about DAI yet since I haven't seen enough of the talent trees.

 

Not by half, since DA2 cut the weapon count for warriors by four, and for rogues by five. You've got less by default.

[AlanC9]

The same interface, more or less, was used in the previous games. They want to give the player the ability to assign abilities to single buttons so they can be activated at a moment's notice. The obvious limitation being the number of buttons on a controller. So four abilities, one button press away from four more, allows the console players to access a variety of abilities usng the most easily accessed buttons on the controller, rather than trying to assign eight abilities to unique buttons.

 

So the controller's limitations are a necessary cause for the 8-ability limitation, but not a sufficient one.

[AlanC9]

Not by half, since DA2 cut the weapon count for warriors by three, and for rogues by five. You've got less by default.

 

Well, duh. Still doesn't matter since the DAO rogue and warrior talent trees were so limited. Although we may be about to run into the weeds here about what constitutes a "different build."

[Paul E Dangerously]

Well, duh. Still doesn't matter since the DAO rogue and warrior talent trees were so limited. Although we may be about to run into the weeds here about what constitutes a "different build."

 

For the melee or ranged rogue in DAO, you had:

Weapon choice + attributes + specs + talents + gear

 

For the melee or ranged rogue in DA2, you had

Attributes + specs + talents + gear

As each tree now only had one possible weapon - dagger or long bow.

 

For a melee or ranged rogue in DAI, you're down to:

specs + talents + gear

No control over attributes, still the same gimped weapon selection.

[Heimdall]

So the controller's limitations are a necessary cause for the 8-ability limitation, but not a sufficient one.

It was the same in Origins and 2, and opening up the wheel to access other abilities was a simple task on consoles. Controller limitations simply aren't the cause for the 8 ability limitation, it makes no sense.

[Lumix19]

For the melee or ranged rogue in DAO, you had:

Weapon choice + attributes + specs + talents + gear

 

For the melee or ranged rogue in DA2, you had

Attributes + specs + talents + gear

As each tree now only had one possible weapon - dagger or long bow.

 

For a melee or ranged rogue in DAI, you're down to:

specs + talents + gear

No control over attributes, still the same gimped weapon selection.

That's just blatant misinformation. Attributes are controllable through passives and gear.

[bEVEsthda]

I will mainly address the OP, I think, though I've read the thread.

 

"lack of healing", I have no concerns at all. On the contrary, I kind of look forward to see what they've done to the combat's story context and combat balancing. Because that is what it's all about. What I personally would want, is to have fights of varying severity (instead of the very fixed and set difficulty of every each single fight, that we see in DA:O and DA2, and having different fights in the same strategic context, i.e. forcing you to think about the condition of your force. If they have done this well, it's all for the good. We will have a game where the combat is far more integrated into roleplay and the story.

Don't worry. The game will NOT become harder. How hard it is, is a balancing issue. A game like this will be balanced differently. Just like BG and IWD. There are certainly people around who just want a succession of set battles, with everything reset between. But I'm kinda hoping people will discover and enjoy something different, something more roleplay invoking. Something that more connects combat with everything else.

 

"Only 8" abilities. <Shrugs> I have no idea why that would affect the game negatively. The game and gameplay is something whole. You have to take a holistic view of it. We don't know how things fit together before we have played it. Would a game that have no limitations for the player's choices be good? Of course not! Instinctively, we want all. Every power, every item. We want to vaporize every enemy with our fingertip. But we also know such a "game" will be no good.

 

"Non pausing and non tactical gameplay". Here, I agree. If the multiplayer doesn't offer pause and tactical gameplay, then it's a horrible disappointment. I was originally overjoyed with how they had appeared to implement MP, but now, if it's just some console button mashing zip-zap-kaboom feast with pretty colors fireworks, - it's awful. Horrible. And it's also doubly horrible if that design has affected even one single iota of single player.

 

Also, in this context, I'd like to say that the long gameplay video that was recently released, also made me disappointed and depressed.

What absolutely disgusting DA2-nuke-effects-kabang manure is that? Where is the compromise? It's even worse than DA2!

 

And where is the marketing sense in releasing that video? Please tell me, Bioware and EA. - Why would that video of gameplay, which looks exactly like a pile from the floor all to the roof, of other console games, littering the stores and the discount bins, extremely few of them making any money, sell your game? Why wouldn't it instead cause the same resentment that a certain DA2 did?

 

Well, I didn't comment in the thread of that video, because I didn't want to be negative. There is a tactical gameplay mode also. And there is much else to this game, as well. So I will not despair just yet. And that's my advice to you as well.