It's not a misconception, he just gave you a link to Bioware's own description of the series.
"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."
It wasn't like that before. Not in both DAs, not in BG.
You had unlimited access to your action bars.
Regardless, it still encourages pre-combat planning and trying different combination to see which one works best.
I'm not sure about that since I did the same with DA2 and ME3. Just see how it plays out, so many regrets.
Or maybe the game's just not for you. Honestly if you don't like what you see then just don't play it and spare us the tedious complaints.
Regardless, it still encourages pre-combat planning and trying different combination to see which one works best.
Agreed.
But that is secondary to the point here. Taking aa away from "normal" gameplay is a huge, huge departure.
Nobody played with exactly the same key settings on DAO and DA2. Some people only used the mouse and the spacebar. Some people didn't even use the mouse. But nobody had to button mash before. It wasn't required, and because of that, you had so many different ways to setup your control scheme. When you take away a feature that then forces everyplayer to change to a button mashing style, it's a bad design decision.
It wasn't even a toggle before. And now, because the console scheme was their first overlay going in and they apparently have to try and reverse engineer it for the pc, we don't even get a choice?
Um, no.
Dragon Age has always been an action RPG that simply included significant tactical game play through pause and play, and tactical camera.
Halo is a turn-based stategy game that simply includes a significant portion of "Pew-Pew", vehicles and explosive flapdoodlery.
Agreed.
But that is secondary to the point here. Taking aa away from "normal" gameplay is a huge, huge departure.
Nobody played with exactly the same key settings on DAO and DA2. Some people only used the mouse and the spacebar. Some people didn't even use the mouse. But nobody had to button mash before. It wasn't required, and because of that, you had so many different ways to setup your control scheme. When you take away a feature that then forces everyplayer to change to a button mashing style, it's a bad design decision.
It wasn't even a toggle before. And now, because the console scheme was their first overlay going in and they apparently have to try and reverse engineer it for the pc, we don't even get a choice?
No. It's clear they wanted to create both tactical and real time experiences as best they can, and believe it or not what you call 'button mashing' is much better than auto attacking during real-time gameplay for numerous reasons; one example is allowing you to see your opponents moves and the actions they're going to take, making it easier for you to react whether by dodging or activating a protective spell, or even switch targets which has to be done as fast as possible, giving you full control of attacking allows that.
Agreed.
But that is secondary to the point here. Taking aa away from "normal" gameplay is a huge, huge departure.
Nobody played with exactly the same key settings on DAO and DA2. Some people only used the mouse and the spacebar. Some people didn't even use the mouse. But nobody had to button mash before. It wasn't required, and because of that, you had so many different ways to setup your control scheme. When you take away a feature that then forces everyplayer to change to a button mashing style, it's a bad design decision.
It wasn't even a toggle before. And now, because the console scheme was their first overlay going in and they apparently have to try and reverse engineer it for the pc, we don't even get a choice?
I think it's more due to the inclusion of multiplayer. After all, they don't want anyone auto-attacking in a competitive mode! Competition is for button mashers only because it's all about how fast your reflexes are!
Sorry, I guess I'm just wandering around muttering about my lost reflexes. (Thanks, fibromyalgia.)
In any case, it would have been better of them to make two separate but equal control systems for both single player and multiplayer. Tac-cam may be the way they did this, but, as I said in another thread, in order to make them equal, one will have to be able to set the camera to third person view and hide all the UI elements in tac-cam. We don't know if this is possible yet.
Halo is a turn-based stategy game that simply includes a significant portion of "Pew-Pew", vehicles and explosive flapdoodlery.
That's a horrible comparison. In Dragon Age you can fully play in real time with the occasional pause function, hell even consoles could only play that way.
No. It's clear they wanted to create both tactical and real time experiences as best they can, and believe it or not what you call 'button mashing' is much better than auto attacking during real-time gameplay for numerous reasons; one example is allowing you to see your opponents moves and the actions they're going to take, making it easier for you to react whether by dodging or activating a protective spell, or even switch targets which has to be done as fast as possible, giving you full control of attacking allows that.
Then why didn't they remove the pause button?
DA has always been "both a tactical and real time experience". Why would you need to see "your opponents moves and the actions they're going to take" when you can just pause the game and set up appropriate counters? How is it "easier to react" with dodging or spellcasting while you are button mashing? How is it easier to switch targets?
I think your issue is you don't use the pause button, and you are trying to explain how mashing a button lets you also do other things at the same time?
LOL are you serious?
That's a horrible comparison. In Dragon Age you can fully play in real time with the occasional pause function, hell even consoles could only play that way.
You can play Baldur´s Gate that way and it still dosen´t make it into a Action-RPG. Guess what you can´t do in those.
I think it's more due to the inclusion of multiplayer. After all, they don't want anyone auto-attacking in a competitive mode! Competition is for button mashers only because it's all about how fast your reflexes are!
Sorry, I guess I'm just wandering around muttering about my lost reflexes. (Thanks, fibromyalgia.)
In any case, it would have been better of them to make two separate but equal control systems for both single player and multiplayer. Tac-cam may be the way they did this, but, as I said in another thread, in order to make them equal, one will have to be able to set the camera to third person view and hide all the UI elements in tac-cam. We don't know if this is possible yet.
Unfortunately we do not know the full extent to which you can modify the Tac Cam. Lots of players are saying "I'll play the whole time in tac cam". But we don't know what else happens yet when you go to it. Maybe theres restrictions on items, tactics, etc.
Lots of details we don't have right now.
Removing auto-attack from third person is a big departure from previous titles in this series and as such many will view it as a controversial change. In other words, complaints are to be expected. Diversity of opinion is the lifeblood of any Internet forum - perhaps the problem here isn't "tedious complaints" but your inability to handle negative criticism of a product you're looking forward to.Or maybe the game's just not for you. Honestly if you don't like what you see then just don't play it and spare us the tedious complaints.
Removing auto-attack from third person is a big departure from previous titles in this series and as such many will view it as a controversial change. In other words, complaints are to be expected. Diversity of opinion is the lifeblood of any Internet forum - perhaps the problem here isn't "tedious complaints" but your inability to handle negative criticism of a product you're looking forward to.
No I really just have low tolerance for whining, again there is a bunch of over reaction that eventually leads to trashing the game that non of us even played yet, and when trying to reassure 'DA2 and ME3' are brought up, so the solution is simple, don't buy it.
You can play Baldur´s Gate that way and it still dosen´t make it into a Action-RPG. Guess what you can´t do in those.
I didn't even play Baldur's Gate so I can't tell you.
But to say that Dragon Age Origins isn't action RPG is ridiculous. Honestly I'm in no mood to argue about that.
No I really just have low tolerance for whining, again there is a bunch of over reaction that eventually leads to trashing the game that non of us even played yet, and when trying to reassure 'DA2 and ME3' are brought up, so the solution is simple, don't buy it.
This isn't Origins. This isn't the first game in a series with familiar controls not already in place.
If you don't care about the changes, why worry about those who do? It's not your problem.
Or maybe the game's just not for you. Honestly if you don't like what you see then just don't play it and spare us the tedious complaints.
No I really just have low tolerance for whining, again there is a bunch of over reaction that eventually leads to trashing the game that non of us even played yet, and when trying to reassure 'DA2 and ME3' are brought up, so the solution is simple, don't buy it.
So you voluntarily entered the thread made to complain about the game feature, and you're telling people to stop complaining ? Logical.
Btw, You know you're whining about whining ?
I ain't even mad.
Years of button-mashing throughout console generations has prepared me for this. I'm ready, coach.
So you voluntarily entered the thread made to complain about the game feature, and you're telling people to stop complaining ? Logical.
Btw, You know you're whining about whining ?
"whining about whining" is an invalid principle, I'd explain but I don't have the time.
I entered a thread that gave no indication in the title that it'd be a complaint thread because after all, this kind of thread should be in the Feedback and Suggestion section of the forums.
Seriously, your first comment in a thread filled with people pissed off about the idea of there being no auto attack was:
Lack of auto attack isn't lack of bad game design
Seriously, your first comment in a thread filled with people pissed off about the idea of there being no auto attack was:
Because there's a difference between expressing an opinion and attacking the design.
Anyway I'm out. I'm not in the mood for this.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
I didn't even play Baldur's Gate so I can't tell you.
But to say that Dragon Age Origins isn't action RPG is ridiculous. Honestly I'm in no mood to argue about that.
How are you defining "action?" Because I suspect you're defining it differently than the rest of us.
To me, "action" means based on twitch mechanics--you being able to click a button fast enough, for example. As such, DA:O was not an action RPG. At all. In any way whatsoever. Neither was DA ][.
This multiplayer-inspired change to the game's mechanics, however, creates a situation where your combat prowess is based on twitch mechanics--you being able to click a button fast enough.
This is not like DA:O. Period. That's not debatable.
Now, the fact that auto-attack exists in tactical cam means there's a fortunate alternative. However, this is still, indisputably, a fundamental change in game mechanics.
Because there's a difference between expressing an opinion and attacking the design.
Anyway I'm out. I'm not in the mood for this.
The starting of the thread was an attack on the design, unless you don't know how forums work.
But I'm sorry to see you go because I wanted to ask about your DA playing history. What platforms you played on, etc. That usually gets to the heart of the matter lately. Lot of misunderstandings about a game that's always had versatility for the user.
Retour en haut