Haha, there you go. If I'm the Grand High Inquisitor and all that and can order people from Orlais to Ferelden to Navarra and back, why can't I get some squire to act as my potion caddy?
Or stock some extra ones on the horses. We do have horses in the game, after all.
So you're saying it's super-easy, then?
Pretty much. This generation of gamers(at least some of them) is spoilt, they start to complain even if a game has a tiny little bit of challenge. I don't see a problem with no healing(it still does have a limited healing) in DA:I, Baldur's Gate 2 is one of the greatest games of all time with a very limited healing. But I see that Bioware made it "super easy" even without healing, even resorting to writing exact character levels to enter a particular area. If a 7 year old kid can play the game easily, I absolutely don't see a problem with difficulty.
I would still prefer a game with healing, but tough luck and you need to suck it up.
'Spoiled' is a weird word to use when it comes to recreational media.
Or stock some extra ones on the horses. We do have horses in the game, after all.
You're speaking too much sense.To the dungeons with you. 
'Spoiled' is a weird word to use when it comes to recreational media.
Yet it describes a good chunk of gamers today.
You're speaking too much sense.To the dungeons with you.
I know. Its shameful.
Eh...I could totally roll with a KE Inquisitor,in fact my human mage will be one.
Of course everything I say (and I assume everything others say) is imo, not saying the spec sucks, just that it's not a style I like to play
Yet it describes a good chunk of gamers today.
If we're talking along the lines of entitlement then yes, if we're talking about how preferring one level of difficulty over another in your bit of recreational media weeellllllll... How exactly would that work? It's attaching a value to difficulty. Like it being difficult is somehow better or more desirable instead of merely a preference. Games primarily exist as a means of recreation, not a testing ground. If most people like their games super easy and it's implemented by devs it isn't being spoiled since it's not giving someone something they don't 'deserve' it's a shift in paradigms.
I wonder why the difficulty curve is so lopsided then? Why go from a "casual that a 7 year old can do", to "normal you will have a hard time in if not planning bla bla". Is seems like it went from Easy to Hard and just skipped "normal" altogether.
I also find it as an underhanded insult to adult gamers that might not be good at the game that "a 7 year old can do it", I'm looking at those story mode players.
For me the issue is more about a potential nuisance of going to a camp to restock. It is simply a bad game play mechanic. Doesn't matter what game it is.
Yes, they DID kill off healing magic. Going against their own lore established in two previous games. A single focus spell that can ONLY be used every other 5-10 fights and then as a choice of doing more damage or a "get out of jail healing spell".
Sucks for the players that loved playing a healer.
Like someone said, this is a single player game, choice is imperative. I guess Bioware forgot that. Except of course their own constructed Idea of "choice".
Now you are forced to construct a certain party mechanic and not be able to story wise take party members you like and want to hear more in party banter etc.
Always the mage for barriers, because a warriors guard does jack squat to your ranged player or rogue dual wielder.
Another questions, can you set up AI in this game for real time play? Meaning can I just focus on my Quizzy and then have a rule set for my FORCED to bring mage to cast barrier as soon as it is off cooldown. If I have to babysit and switch to the mage every time. SO ANNOYING!!!!!!!!!!!
Why fix what was never broke.
Yes, 7 year old kid can play DAI on easy. If some people(adults I presume) can't match kid's smartness, they must get better.
No, they DIDN'T kill healing magic. There is a healing spell in the game.
I'm sure DAI will be as difficult as playing in the kindergarten is. There are really hardcore games with steep learning curve, DAI is not one of them.
To me, this post actually just strengthened my concerns because it does seem to implicate that in order to deal with the change, you do, at least for an extended period of the game, have to drag both a tank and a mage in your group to handle the guard and barrier, thus essentially over half of the party composition to those tasks and not encouraging just trying different party mixes. This is just what I got from the post, even though I started reading it really optimistically and hopefully that it would put to rest those lingering fears for me.
Now I realize that experiences vary greatly for different players, but I'm currently re-playing DA2 and I've cleared big fights on hard difficulty with Fenris, Varric, Merrill and 2-weapon rogue while having a blast and also being able to bring those different characters to different situations and just hear their comments and interactions. Based on the information here, if I make Cassandra my tank, I'm pretty expected to drag her around to not hit a wall with the combat progression. And the post even seems to address the fact that if you want to a damage or crowd-control oriented mage, you basically need to bring that one along in addition to the protection oriented mage.
This is in no way to indicate that I'm somehow dropping my pre-order or something, I'm still really looking forward to the game. The consequences of the non-regenerative health and those nagging doubts are just eating in to it somewhat at the moment, but I guess I will see in the finished product.
And neither of us knows whether this will be popular or not. I was surprised when Dark Souls gained an impressive following considering that game is highly stingy with heals and ruthless in challenge early on. Yet people loved it for the challenge. We shall see how this goes.
Dark Souls: Inquisition? 
I was actually wondering if some of these changes were inspired by the popularity of Dark Souls with certain types of players. Dark Souls seems to have a more narrow appeal though. Dark Souls seems to mostly attract players who play games primarily for the challenge, the adrenaline rush, the stress, and the result of a feeling of accomplishment with having performed a difficult task in combat.
Is this the primary audience that DAI is attempting to attract though?
The DA audience seems broader in the sense that there is *also* a fairly large group of players who don't play games for the challenge. They instead play games to kick back, relax, enjoy the exploration, the environment, and the story. The challenge as represented in Dark Souls-like combat only gets in the way of the "real game."
Both are very legitimate playing styles. Just because a person views the combat as only a minor aspect of their gameplay doesn't mean that they should be compared to 7-year-olds and casuals and lazy gamers who just want an easy button, etc.
Now I don't know what DAI combat will actually be like...whether it will be reasonable on casual/normal despite the lack of healing, and only get difficult on the harder difficulties, or whether it will be brutally difficult no matter what difficulty mode is chosen due to having to make 50,000 strategic choices to survive a small group of bandits. No idea! I do think we need to understand that we all play games for different reasons though.
If we're talking along the lines of entitlement then yes, if we're talking about how preferring one level of difficulty over another in your bit of recreational media weeellllllll... How exactly would that work? It's attaching a value to difficulty. Like it being difficult is somehow better or more desirable instead of merely a preference. Games primarily exist as a means of recreation, not a testing ground. If most people like their games super easy and it's implemented by devs it isn't being spoiled since it's not giving someone something they don't 'deserve' it's a shift in paradigms.
This. ^ Gamers who consider themselves "hardcore" need to get over themselves.
A game being "difficult" does not mean a game is "better". This mentality is frankly toxic for the whole industry. Note this does not mean Hard games should not exist. Quite the opposite. I am happy Dark Souls exists, will I ever play it? Absolutely not. Why? Because I don't play games for challenging combat mechanics and found Demon's Souls to be not worth the time I spent beating it at all. I play games for narrative and character developments. If I want a challenge I will buy a game that provides one. This does not make me a "casual". Ignoring the fact that "casual" and "hardcore" are both meaningless terms, because "hardcore games" are not actually a thing. Don't believe me? heres a guy who agrees.
https://www.youtube....nG-2pzlaenh2ECw
If we're talking along the lines of entitlement then yes, if we're talking about how preferring one level of difficulty over another in your bit of recreational media weeellllllll... How exactly would that work? It's attaching a value to difficulty. Like it being difficult is somehow better or more desirable instead of merely a preference. Games primarily exist as a means of recreation, not a testing ground. If most people like their games super easy and it's implemented by devs it isn't being spoiled since it's not giving someone something they don't 'deserve' it's a shift in paradigms.
7 year old kid can play DAI on an easy difficulty.
Your opinion about games is irrelevant, many people love games to be challenging that's why different game difficulties exist. Some people gonna play hard and nightmare, you should stick to easy.
This. ^ Gamers who consider themselves "hardcore" need to get over themselves.
Not my fault I like a challenge in my game and not being spoonfed.
I'm pretty sure the argument is done by now. They've said easy is pretty easy and that nightmare was really hard, doesn't that satisfy everyone ?
While I appreciate Mr Weekes taking the time to post his playing experience on the boards here, he has done little to allay my concerns about the game. I can't compare someone else's gaming experience to what playing the game will be for me. I have only previous games and my own knowledge of what I am capable of in these games to go by.
When I heard about the major reworking of the combat system and what it entailed, I had concerns. I am not a big fan of combat in these games, it feels to me like an 'interrupt' of the 'real game'. I prefer just moving through it to get to the 'good parts'. What I got from Mr Weekes post is: it seems it is now all one long ass, tedious tactical grind.
My own actual game experience might prove to be different. Maker, I hope it's different anyway. I don't know yet whether I will like this or not. I'll just have to adopt a 'wait and see' attitude, since there is nothing (short of canceling my preorder) that I can do about it.
You saw the post from Patrick Weeks....the one where he told you they'd give you the chance to restock potions before a boss fight, meaning they have no issue with you having a full set of potions on top of everything else when you face the enemy?
And neither of us knows whether this will be popular or not. I was surprised when Dark Souls gained an impressive following considering that game is highly stingy with heals and ruthless in challenge early on. Yet people loved it for the challenge. We shall see how this goes.
Yes but people loved Dark souls for that reason, Dragon Age was never geared towards that, but is geared towards choice and story with ability to be tactical and harder on higher difficulty. Setting difficulty high on lower levels might not be a positive change for some.
That a Fair approach. Though Patrick was fighting at Normal. There's still one easier difficulty level, Which has partial health regen as well.While I appreciate Mr Weekes taking the time to post his playing experience on the boards here, he has done little to allay my concerns about the game. I can't compare someone else's gaming experience to what playing the game will be for me. I have only previous games and my own knowledge of what I am capable of in these games to go by.
When I heard about the major reworking of the combat system and what it entailed, I had concerns. I am not a big fan of combat in these games, it feels to me like an 'interrupt' of the 'real game'. I prefer just moving through it to get to the 'good parts'. What I got from Mr Weekes post is: it seems it is now all one long ass, tedious tactical grind.
My own actual game experience might prove to be different. Maker, I hope it's different anyway. I don't know yet whether I will like this or not. I'll just have to adopt a 'wait and see' attitude, since there is nothing (short of canceling my preorder) that I can do about it.
The game won't be as hard as people think. Schumacher posted in a different thread that DA:I, on normal, is about as difficult as DA:O was on normal.
Yes but people loved Dark souls for that reason, Dragon Age was never geared towards that, but is geared towards choice and story with ability to be tactical and harder on higher difficulty. Setting difficulty high on lower levels might not be a positive change for some.
While I appreciate Mr Weekes taking the time to post his playing experience on the boards here, he has done little to allay my concerns about the game. I can't compare someone else's gaming experience to what playing the game will be for me. I have only previous games and my own knowledge of what I am capable of in these games to go by.
When I heard about the major reworking of the combat system and what it entailed, I had concerns. I am not a big fan of combat in these games, it feels to me like an 'interrupt' of the 'real game'. I prefer just moving through it to get to the 'good parts'. What I got from Mr Weekes post is: it seems it is now all one long ass, tedious tactical grind.
My own actual game experience might prove to be different. Maker, I hope it's different anyway. I don't know yet whether I will like this or not. I'll just have to adopt a 'wait and see' attitude, since there is nothing (short of canceling my preorder) that I can do about it.
How can gameplay, the core aspect of a video game be an "interruption"?
7 year old kid can play DAI on an easy difficulty.
Your opinion about games is irrelevant, many people love games to be challenging that's why different game difficulties exist. Some people gonna play hard and nightmare, you should stick to easy.
Ease up on the assumptions panda, I usually play my games on normal. You also totally missed my point, people here act like a difficult game SHOULD be the norm or that it's somehow preferable or the way 'real' gamers play their games when all it boils down to is a preference which means not a one is more or less valid than the other.
7 year old kid can play DAI on an easy difficulty.
Your opinion about games is irrelevant, many people love games to be challenging that's why different game difficulties exist. Some people gonna play hard and nightmare, you should stick to easy.
You should stick to dark souls.
7 year old kid can play DAI on an easy difficulty.
Your opinion about games is irrelevant, many people love games to be challenging that's why different game difficulties exist. Some people gonna play hard and nightmare, you should stick to easy.
Telling me a 7 year old can play it tell me absolutely nothing. A 7 year old can also own your ass in Counter Strike. please, continue to spread the word about the 7 year old, as if that actually means a damn thing.
Retour en haut