416 réponses à ce sujet

[Icy Magebane]

AI runs on characters who aren't selected. They will behave normally, but for your selected character, you will need to hold down (or rapidly press) a button to continue attacking.

You could always play on easy and just stand around doing nothing while the AI cleans up for you, I guess. That sounds like fun, doesn't it?
 
Indeed. I question BioWare's decision to be misleading about this.

No thanks... xD  A slightly more interesting version of that might be to play as a pacifist mage who only uses support, evasion, and non-damaging crowd control spells, who also never uses the staff to attack... lol... maybe that would be a decent rp some day.

 

But as for the first part, yeah I meant that the character we are controlling must be told to attack each time, in both normal and tactical mode.

[Dunbartacus]

Wait, so in tactical camera on consoles do you still directly control someone or can you let the tactics of all 4 party members play out?

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Not only did I specifically refer to console controls in my earlier posts, I also made the distinction between PC and console when I brought up the possibility of a toggle on PC... this entire debate could easily have been avoided.

 

Perhaps, but the comment i was responding to in this conversation chain was "auto attack does not exist as a concept in this game, and the term shouldn't be used" not "Auto attack on consoles does not exist"

[devSin]

Well, in any case, it's not up to me to decide what terminology players want to use... if auto-attack makes sense to the majority then it will remain in use.  I personally don't see the need for it, but I also haven't played the game yet, so it's too early for me to judge.

Auto-attack is a proper term for the tactical view. "Funky tactical view controls" is certainly a phrase you can adopt for the console versions of the game.

But there is no auto-attack outside tactical view. And I'm not sure why BioWare has been trying to hide that.
 

No thanks... xD  A slightly more interesting version of that might be to play as a pacifist mage who only uses support, evasion, and non-damaging crowd control spells, who also never uses the staff to attack... lol... maybe that would be a decent rp some day.

See, I bet these restrictions are really there to just encourage more diverse play styles.

Make it hard to attack so that players have a reason not to!

Wait, so in tactical camera on consoles do you still directly control someone or can you let the tactics of all 4 party members play out?

You always control a single character; you can give orders to other characters, and you can set actions for them, and their AI will run if they're idle, but your selected character is a dummy (you have to explicitly order them to do anything).

[xkg]

AFAIK :

 

Wait, so in tactical camera on consoles do you still directly control someone ( YES ) or can you let the tactics of all 4 party members play out ( NO )?

[Icy Magebane]

So... did a lot of posts just get deleted or is something wrong with the forum?

 

Anyway... I guess the tactical cam and changes to auto-attack are just a couple more things to adapt to.  With every new piece of information they give us, this game is shaping up to be Dragon Age in name only...  I hope the final product works out.

 

edit:  Hm... nvm, the posts are on the previous page... it seems that one of my posts got duplicated long after I made it...

[pdusen]

Has anybody considered the possibility that maybe the damage done by auto-attack is now trivial enough compared to the other abilities that it doesn't make much of a difference whether you have it or not?

 

This change would make a lot more sense in that context, and would explain how you can have it still exist in tactical mode without seriously changing the balance of the encounter.

 

All I'm saying is, even if you need to hold a button to auto-attack, it doesn't necessarily mean you're actually expected to do that all of the time.

[dch2404]

If the only purpose of the auto-basic-attack button is to fill in the time gap between using skills, then I would find that very tedious. Why not just do that for me like the previous games?

 

Games like Shadows of Mordor and Batman have a manual attack button, but it fulfils a purpose. You use the button to gain hit streaks. With one of the ability upgrades (critical strike), it rewards you for finesse where you press once per hit to build up your streak faster. Not to mention there is also jumping and stunning during a melee battle to add variety.

 

Since I'm more of a tactical cam person, I guess the lack of auto-target doesn't affect me as much.

 

But still... TOGGLE!!!

[devSin]

Has anybody considered the possibility that maybe the damage done by auto-attack is now trivial enough compared to the other abilities that it doesn't make much of a difference whether you have it or not?

An auto-attack is a normal attack that continues without user intervention.

There's no difference between clicking twice to attack twice and clicking once and having the character auto-attack twice.

In the combat videos, I don't think damage for basic attacks was inconsequential (they use a lot of abilities, but they're still doing damage with their normal swings). I'm not sure how it makes sense that we'd be expected to stand there waiting for our abilities to come out of cool down and for our mana and stamina to regenerate (and stamina recharges by attacking and killing enemies IIRC).

[Tielis]

You know, this makes sense now why in all the first gameplay videos, most of the people were just running around like headless chickens when stuff was on cooldown and not using auto-attack.  And here we thought they were all just bad players!

 

But in fact, it's just bad game design.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

So... did a lot of posts just get deleted or is something wrong with the forum?

 

Anyway... I guess the tactical cam and changes to auto-attack are just a couple more things to adapt to.  With every new piece of information they give us, this game is shaping up to be Dragon Age in name only...  I hope the final product works out.

 

edit:  Hm... nvm, the posts are on the previous page... it seems that one of my posts got duplicated long after I made it...

 

Posting has been strange all morning, yes.

[TheJiveDJ]

I'm sure the devs at BW aren't morons, guys. At face value, however, I will say that I'm slightly flabbergasted and disappointed. This is probably a multifaceted issue which stems from the addition of multi player, and pressure from EA to appeal to twitch gamers. I'm sure I can tolerate a bit of trigger-finger ache so this definitely isn't a deal breaker for me. I'm actually more concerned about how this will affect accessibility for disabled gamers.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

You know, this makes sense now why in all the first gameplay videos, most of the people were just running around like headless chickens when stuff was on cooldown and not using auto-attack.  And here we thought they were all just bad players!

 

But in fact, it's just bad game design.

Lack of auto attack isn't lack of bad game design, also they were just bad players; they didn't even bother using skills in a more tactical method and didn't bother planning anything. One dude legit said "I'm not going to attack and I'll just spam my hook because its free and has no cd", yeah okay. 

[Tielis]

Lack of auto attack isn't lack of bad game design, also they were just bad players; they didn't even bother using skills in a more tactical method and didn't bother planning anything. One dude legit said "I'm not going to attack and I'll just spam my hook because its free and has no cd", yeah okay. 

 

Lack of an auto-attack toggle for disabled gamers is bad game design in my book.

[Wissenschaft 2.0]

Actually, I'd love it if the game had morale checks in it.

What I'm saying is that I'm not playing the combat to win. My character is trying to win (usually), but my job is to play the character.
 

 

Unfortunately for you and the like minded, DA:I is designed with the assumption that players are actually trying to win in combat.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

Lack of an auto-attack toggle for disabled gamers is bad game design in my book.

Firstly tactical camera still has auto attack. Secondly while I can't speak about disabled gamers issue, but I can say that Action RPGs are simply not that friendly with them, that being said I do hope tactical camera is convenient enough for them.  

[Tielis]

Firstly tactical camera still has auto attack. Secondly while I can't speak about disabled gamers issue, but I can say that Action RPGs are simply not that friendly with them, that being said I do hope tactical camera is convenient enough for them.  

 

And this is why we are pissed off.  The Dragon Age franchise that we have come to know and love is not an Action RPG.  It is an RPG, the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

And this is why we are pissed off.  The Dragon Age franchise that we have come to know and love is not an Action RPG.  It is an RPG, the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

Um, no.

Dragon Age has always been an action RPG that simply included significant tactical game play through pause and play, and tactical camera. 

[Tielis]

Um, no.

Dragon Age has always been an action RPG that simply included significant tactical game play through pause and play, and tactical camera. 

 

http://news.softpedi...ate-89944.shtml

 

That having been said, tactical pause and play is not the same as "action" as far as I understand it.  "Action" is usually reserved for shooter-like gameplay.

[GeckoWacko]

Unfortunately for you and the like minded, DA:I is designed with the assumption that players actually are trying to win in combat.

Isn't that where the tactical cam hops in? I really don't get the reasoning behind, it has waste of energy al over it. What were they thinking? Angry video game nerd style.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

http://news.softpedi...ate-89944.shtml

 

That having been said, tactical pause and play is not the same as "action" as far as I understand it.  "Action" is usually reserved for shooter-like gameplay.

Sigh..Common misconception.

Anyway DA:I still follows the formula of the article you just linked to me. Again; Tactical Camera, limited action bars to predetermine which spells you'll need for each encounter, cross class combos, full party control.. etc.. 

Honestly though, you should see how the game plays out before going on an outburst. 

[GeckoWacko]

Sigh..Common misconception.

Anyway DA:I still follows the formula of the article you just linked to me. Again; Tactical Camera, limited action bars to predetermine which spells you'll need for each encounter, cross class combos, full party control.. etc..

Honestly though, you should see how the game plays out before going on an outburst.

I'm not sure about that since I did the same with DA2 and ME3. Just see how it plays out, so many regrets.

[Brogan]

Sigh..Common misconception.

 

It's not a misconception, he just gave you a link to Bioware's own description of the series.

[Brogan]

This is probably a multifaceted issue which stems from the addition of multi player, and pressure from EA to appeal to twitch gamers. I'm sure I can tolerate a bit of trigger-finger ache so this definitely isn't a deal breaker for me. I'm actually more concerned about how this will affect accessibility for disabled gamers.

 

This team is so wrapped up in Marketing and pushing the console version (rightly so) roughly a month before release, there are bound to be pc specific details that get passed over, forgotten, or (and this is how I happen to feel about this particular one) just incorrectly reported.

[xkg]

limited action bars to predetermine which spells you'll need for each encounter, cross class combos, full party control.. etc.. 

 

It wasn't like that before. Not in both DAs, not in BG.

You had unlimited access to your action bars.