416 réponses à ce sujet

[finc.loki]

Excuse me?  If it doesn't happen automatically, it's not an auto-attack.  Mashing or holding a button is not automatic.  I think I might be misunderstanding your post... that first sentence is really throwing me off...

I'm saying we can't stop using these terms because it would cloud what we are talking about.

 

A "basic attack" is what is referred to when your character is on cooldown (the special abilities), this "basic" attack can either be done as a button mashing meaning you are involved in doing them, they do not cost any mana,stamina etc. OR they can be what many here want as an "auto-attack", meaning the character always do this basic attack on it's own without your input between you hitting special abilities coming off cooldowns.

 

So if we stop using the term 'auto-attack' in describing what we want and just say basic attack, it makes it confusing. The two are not the same.

Perhaps someone else can explain it better.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

It was just a reaction to players making it sound like everyone wants auto attack as default and only mode, or that we that like to have real time basic attacks are somehow stupid silly COD players. Do you understand why I reacted?

 

I just don't like the people that act like their way of playing is the ONLY acceptable way.

 

I like DA because it caters to both styles of play. 

 

Yes it boggles my mind why they don't just have a switch in setting saying auto-attack on or off. auto-attack exists in tac cam so there is no reason not to in real time for people like you that want it. I personally just don't want it to be ONLY an auto-attack, because I prefer the button mashing making me feel involved in the combat during cooldowns. 

 

I suspect it falls into the same reasoning why we only have 8 abilities available in combat. Its a design decision. We can only speculate on the reasons, but I assume it is because the team wants to make a more action based RPG this time. Why they want to force it on all players is beyond me as well.

[GeckoWacko]

Auto attack, button attack.

Auto attack, basic attack.

Yep, could work.

[Icy Magebane]

I'm saying we can't stop using these terms because it would cloud what we are talking about.

 

A "basic attack" is what is referred to when your character is on cooldown (the special abilities), this "basic" attack can either be done as a button mashing meaning you are involved in doing them, they do not cost any mana,stamina etc. OR they can be what many here want as an "auto-attack", meaning the character always do this basic attack on it's own without your input between you hitting special abilities coming off cooldowns.

 

So if we stop using the term 'auto-attack' in describing what we want and just say basic attack, it makes it confusing. The two are not the same.

Perhaps someone else can explain it better.

I see what you are saying now, but if auto-attacks no longer exist in this franchise, then the term is no longer needed... auto and basic were once interchangeable to describe the same style of attack.  Auto was the method, and basic was the type, but there was never any confusion because there was no such thing as a basic attack that didn't happen automatically and vice versa.  It just seems to me that the "auto" part is now gone, so there's no reason to even call them auto-attacks anymore... didn't they also remove the toggle feature from PC?  If that is still in, then auto-attack is still appropriate, but I thought that feature was removed as well...

[magicalzero]

Some people like to roleplay like their playing a table top game when they are playing dragon age. Unfortunately, that leads to various problems since dragon age doesn't pretend to be a table top game. DA games have always had a lot of combat in them and a strong action rpg element has always been in them. People who wish to play as if DA: I was a tabletop game are going to have to ignore such problems or DA: I is just not going to be the game for them.

Both Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2 had auto-attack in third-person so by your own logic that should be reason enough for Dragon Age: Inquisition to include it. I agree.

[devSin]

This tactical camera sounds annoying.  So we can tell the party members to auto-attack in tactical mode, but on consoles we can't advance time without holding down a button... and if we leave tactical mode, they stop auto-attacking since we aren't holding down the attack button.  So basically, we're going to be holding down a button to attack no matter what.

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?
 

I think it's time to stop using the term "auto-attack" and start using "basic attack."

Indeed. I question BioWare's decision to be misleading about this.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

I see what you are saying now, but if auto-attacks no longer exist in this franchise, then the term is no longer needed... auto and basic were once interchangeable to describe the same style of attack.  Auto was the method, and basic was the type, but there was never any confusion because there was no such thing as a basic attack that didn't happen automatically and vice versa.  It just seems to me that the "auto" part is now gone, so there's no reason to even call them auto-attacks anymore... didn't they also remove the toggle feature from PC?  If that is still in, then auto-attack is still appropriate, but I thought that feature was removed as well...

 

There was never an auto attack toggle on PC. It was always auto attack regardless of which character you control.

 

There is stil lauto attack in DAI. Your non controlled party members will auto attack and you have auto attack in tactical mode.

 

From what I understand you can play in tactical mode, without pausing, and have a similar gameplay experience to the previous games.

[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 engaging version of that might be to play as a pacifist mage who only uses support, evasion, and non-damaging crowd control spells.  Someone who is so repulsed by the notion of causing harm that they also never use their staff to attack... lol... maybe that would be a decent rp some day as a change of pace.

 

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.

[devSin]

There is stil lauto attack in DAI. Your non controlled party members will auto attack and you have auto attack in tactical mode.

AI is not auto-attack.

There is no auto-attack outside the tactical view.

[Lennard Testarossa]

Oh what a surprise a self-entitled Turn based player making assumption and the standard 'COD' comment.

 

I play RPG titles, like Witcher, Deus Ex, DAO, DA2, soon this DAI, Diablo,Skyrim,Fallout 3, countless others.

What the does me wanting to play an RPG game in REAL time got to do with COD. Seriously how utterly devoid of intellect can one get?

 

Trust me I am not alone in this nor the games I play. I guess I can assume the only games you play are Turn based then, because IF you play any other game in real time that would just make you a hypocrite. 

 

Oh, I do like Action RPGs. What makes your post moronic isn't liking Action RPGs, it's the "Hurr, not having to hold down a button to make a character attack means it's like chess!!111"-part.

[Dapper Pomegranate]

And with the casual reveal of this inexplicable tidbit, my hype train once again comes to a screeching halt. I think I might actually hate this change more than the ability restriction. I mean...who's decision was this and why do they not understand their player base? Why do they insist on forcing the way they like to play on everyone rather than providing choices in playstyle? Well, at least I get to look forward to playing on the easiest setting. I refuse to hold down and/or mash a button to autoattack in a CRPG, so I guess that's a quarter of my party's base damage gone in all instances. And I can pretty much forget ever getting a decent score in multiplayer. What a shame.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

No thanks... xD  A slightly more engaging version of that might be to play as a pacifist mage who only uses support, evasion, and non-damaging crowd control spells.  Someone who is so repulsed by the notion of causing harm that they also never use their staff to attack... lol... maybe that would be a decent rp some day as a change of pace.

 

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.

 

No, there is auto attack in tactical mode for all characters.

[Dr. Rush]

Once a toggle, always a toggle!

 

They make take our lives, but they'll never take our toggles!

 

Seriously BioWare, did you really remove a toggle?

[devSin]

And with the casual reveal of this inexplicable tidbit, my hype train once again comes to a screeching halt. I think I might actually hate this change more than the ability restriction. I mean...who's decision was this and why do they not understand their player base? Why do they insist on forcing the way they like to play on everyone rather than providing choices in play style? Well, at least I get to look forward to playing on the easiest setting. I refuse to hold down and/or mash a button to autoattack in a CRPG, so I guess that's a quarter of my party's base damage gone in all instances. And I can pretty much forget ever getting a decent score in multiplayer. What a shame.

I think you answered your own question there.

You can't auto-attack in exploration view because multiplayer is in exploration view and they don't want auto-attack in multiplayer.

[Icy Magebane]

No, there is auto attack in tactical mode for all characters.

You have to advance time in order for the auto attack to occur... on consoles this is done by holding down a button.  That isn't an "automatic attack," is it?

[LostInReverie19]

Wow, if this is true, this is just stupid. They're going to have to patch it in again if this forum thread is any consensus on how everyone feels about this change. 

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

AI is not auto-attack.

There is no auto-attack outside the tactical view.

 

The person I responded to was saying there is no use for the term 'auto attack' now as it doesn't exist in the game anymore. Existing in tactical counts as existing in game.

[devSin]

You have to advance time in order for the auto attack to occur... on consoles this is done by holding down a button.  That isn't an "automatic attack," is it?

Technically, yes, because you'll keep attacking the target as long as time keeps advancing (it doesn't require any further intervention).
 

The person I responded to was saying there is no use for the term 'auto attack' now as it doesn't exist in the game anymore. Existing in tactical counts as existing in game.

And as I pointed out, AI control of characters doesn't constitute auto-attack.

Auto-attack is specifying a target and having attacks against that target continue until further input (or the target dies). It is a user-initiated action.

There is auto-attack in tactical view; I didn't disagree with that part of your statement.

[GeckoWacko]

And with the casual reveal of this inexplicable tidbit, my hype train once again comes to a screeching halt. I think I might actually hate this change more than the ability restriction. I mean...who's decision was this and why do they not understand their player base? Why do they insist on forcing the way they like to play on everyone rather than providing choices in playstyle? Well, at least I get to look forward to playing on the easiest setting. I refuse to hold down and/or mash a button to autoattack in a CRPG, so I guess that's a quarter of my party's base damage gone in all instances. And I can pretty much forget ever getting a decent score in multiplayer. What a shame.

They still have to respond to this so I wonder what they have to say. Sadly I'm really close to that pre-order cancel. With time passing there are more alarming signs. I know I complain, but I rather wished I didn't have to and enjoy a good game.

[Icy Magebane]

Technically, yes, because you'll keep attacking the target as long as time keeps advancing (it doesn't require any further intervention).

But you are holding a button to advance time... meaning the attack doesn't play out unless you directly intervene by holding down the "advance time" button...

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

You have to advance time in order for the auto attack to occur... on consoles this is done by holding down a button.  That isn't an "automatic attack," is it?

 

I've been talking about PC gameplay, as have most of the people I've responded to as far as I know. You can play in tactical unpaused. On PC at least. Is this not possible on consoles? if that's the case, it's weird after hearing them saying they want a similar experience across platforms.

[Icy Magebane]

I've been talking about PC gameplay, as have most of the people I've responded to as far as I know. You can play in tactical unpaused. On PC at least. Is this not possible on consoles? if that's the case, it's weird after hearing them saying they want a similar experience across platforms.

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.

[devSin]

But you are holding a button to advance time... meaning the attack doesn't play out unless you directly intervene by holding down the "advance time" button...

I'm not saying it's a stellar implementation of the tactical camera, but it's unrelated to the fact that you're auto-attacking.

"Auto" simply means that it will continue until the player indicates otherwise or the target dies. And this will happen when you un-pause the game (even if you have to hold a button to do that, you'll keep attacking your target without any further intervention).

[Sylvius the Mad]

What you say about you being a tactical genius but your character is not, what is that suppose to mean? The game character does EXACTLY what you tell it to do. It doesn't have a mind of it's own where you say go there, taunt and use this ability and it says "No I am going to run away and shoot with a bow instead".

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. So even if i see a path to victory, I might not choose it. I'm only going to have my character do the things he thinks to do.

So I'm thinking through what he's noticing (which might be different from what I would notice), and then working out what decision he would make regarding it.

Never am I choosing the tactic I think will be most effective, unless my character happens to reach the same conclusion.

This is why I can't do it in real time, because the decision-making process is too computationally complex.

It has nothing to do with the player's tactical skills, because the player's tactical skill isn't relevant.

[Icy Magebane]

I'm not saying it's a stellar implementation of the tactical camera, but it's unrelated to the fact that you're auto-attacking.

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.