You conveniently cut out the part of DG's post that specifically addresses how gameplay elements and visuals in the past had a tendency to contradict or muddle said lore and how they were aiming to be better about that in future, ie with DAI. So great DA2 Legacy had an exploitable ability, bravo.
Maybe that's why I said it is unrelated to DA:I (re read my post) and I posted it only as a notice, that it happend in the past.
I don't have access to gifs right now. Can you wait 29 minutes?
Only bloggers and teens use gifs. Best ditch that habit.
Only bloggers and teens use gifs. Best ditch that habit.
Repeat after me:
"Gamplay"
"Abstraction"
Got it yet?
Muspade said Gameplay = Lore.
Muspade, on 22 Oct 2014 - 01:14 AM, said:Gameplay=\= lore.
no he didn't
-D-
Muspade said Gameplay = Lore.
Go back and read his post again. 
You realise that instead of passing through the closed gate the Vendetta ability in that instance can simply be explained as it being allowing the character to jump up over the ledge, which actually makes perfect sense. And an old run down castle has a bad gate that can be smashed down isn't too hard too imagine. It's not because Cassandra is super strong its because the old gate in this instance was a piece of ****. I've kicked through masonry on several occasions myself (my uncle used to use me and my brothers as his personal wrecking crew when he was renovating)
-D-
At that distance and height ? Yea it does maks a lot of sense.
Then sure, there is no teleportation needed, people can just jump far away so why bother teleporting.
Go back and read his post again.
Can't find it. But he said something to that effect.
Can't find it. But he said something to that effect.
He said "Gameplay =/= Lore". The complete opposite of what you are claiming he said.
As a opposed to teleporting through a gate, makes more sense to go twenty metres in a straight line through open air on a relatively shallow trajectory. Also, I work at at the Australian Institute of Sport and knew a guy in college who was way too much into parkour (guy was begging to end up in traction) seeing what those guys could do and then going into a world where we have to exercise our suspension of disbelief is it so hard to open our minds a fraction to take that one in. Maybe her magic shoes gave her superjump
-D-
He said "Gamplay =/= Lore". The complete opposite of what you are claiming he said.
My bad then. I remembered it wrong.
Does Fade Step teleport the entire party away to a safe distance in 1 second?
No, but it does "teleport" a single person to another location in less than a second.
A device imbuded with magical power is hardly an uncommon thing I can't see why one couldn't be created that could fade step a number of predesignated targets to its location.
i dont see the problem, you can customize your gear and thus your stats whenever you have the materials to do so, in DAO/2 you could only customize your stats when you leveled up, or when a piece of pre-generated gear gave you a bonus to a stat. If you look at it that way, DAI is superior in terms of stat customization.
My bad then. I remembered it wrong.
Heh, no prob, these things happen. Sorry if I came across a bit brusque, I thought you were being deliberately obtuse
It also does nothing to suggest it is. So why conclude either thing?The problem is, the game does nothing to suggest it isn't a linear scale.
Maybe unrealted much here but, it happened in DA2. No matter how hard you try to explain that, vendetta is going to teleport you in a blink of an eye, passing through solid objects.
I proved that already a few years ago:
Spoiler
Teleportation and so much ketchup! It's one of the reasons why DA2 sucked.
Heh, no prob, these things happen. Sorry if I came across a bit brusque, I thought you were being deliberately obtuse
Its ok. And no, I wasn't.
It also does nothing to suggest it is. So why conclude either thing?
You complained about the absursity of the numbers, but the numbers aren't necessarily absurd. They might be, but we don't have enough information to tell. The data support no conclusions.
That's my point.
The natural way to intepret a scale is to assume it's linear and that it starts at zero. When it does not, it will be indicated as such. That's standard practice.
The simple, logical, explanation is, as I said before, the entire thing is a gameplay abstraction. As is the changed system. So why object to one abstraction and not another?
As long as after a number of levels the assigned points make sense to me I won't have a major problem. If they start assigning points like most auto level ups do however it will be a problem. It seems that most auto level ups want to make a well rounded character. I usually like to min/max my stats.
Just like in the No Attributes thread I still don't see any evidence of auto allocation of attribute points at level given what we've seen from demos. The original Tweet by Mike Laidlaw and followup by Allen can be read to suggest that there is, but nothing we've seen supports that, or at least to any serious or noticeable degree.
The first piece of evidence is the weapons themselves which can and often do provide substantial stat bonuses far greater than anything we ever saw in DAO and DA2. So unless stats are greatly inflated, which my next set of screens will show aren't, then I don't see how we can have auto stat growths at level up, permanent stat increase via passive and massive stat increase via equipment. That's just way too many stat altering options given the relatively low stats amounts we've seen ingame.
Because we've seen weapons that have +36 Magic. It might not be 1:1 with DAO/DA2 but it probably pretty close.
They're both level 20 Items, don't know what that means exactly since one is restricted for level 17 and the other level 9, but their corresponding stat boosts make sense for those level requirements. At level 17 +36 magic is a huge boost, and at level 9 a +12 Strength is pretty substantial. And while one is Unique and the other Rare we have seen other more common weapons with near double digit boosts as well.
Then we have the actual attributes screen which paint a much more interesting picture:
So here are 3 more screens from one of the new YouTuber videos showing three characters partial attributes list. Like the screen I showed from the Gamescom demo of the 2handed Inquisitor all these have increased attributes in their respective fields while all others are 10, which further leads me to believe either attributes are solely based on Equipment and Passive Ability bonuses, or automatic distribution at level up only focuses on the attributes most pertinent to your class. I'm gonna go with the former as you will see that while Varric and the Inquisitor are both Rogues the Inquisitor has no extra points in Cunning, only 35 in Dex, while Varric has 25 in both.
Maybe attributes do have auto stat growths upon level up, but from what we've seen they don't look like the normal 3 points per level, which wouldn't make sense to begin with know how we have roughly 12 attribute points per ability tree via passives, plus the much larger potential stat bonuses on equipment. If there were actually 3 attribute points per level like in DAO and DA2 then we would end up with much higher attribute numbers than what we see here which are relatively average if not low.
Drawing conclusions in the absence of evidence benefits no one.The natural way to intepret a scale is to assume it's linear and that it starts at zero. When it does not, it will be indicated as such. That's standard practice.
I'm not objecting to anything other than your characterisation of DAO's attributes as being absurd based on their linearity.The simple, logical, explanation is, as I said before, the entire thing is a gameplay abstraction. As is the changed system. So why object to one abstraction and not another?
I almost want to think it's to prevent people from monkeying with the new, "improved" health/damage system. If non-Warriors can bump up CON and get bigger HP pools, the requisite Barrier spam may not be necessary.
Warriors get to be tanks, and rogues/mages have to be glass cannons.
You didn't have that much liberty in DAO and DA2 with what to do with the stats allocation, you had to plan it so you could pick talent X. In DAI, the system auto-allocate the requirements stat points via granting them by selection talents/passive. The end result is the same has in DAO/DA2: your talents selection determine how you allocate your stats in all the games.
Drawing conclusions in the absence of evidence benefits no one.
If there is an absence of specific evidence for a particular case, then the natural thing to do is to assume the norm. It might be wrong, but at least it gives us a basis to work from rather than trying to make decisions based on nothing.
I'm not objecting to anything other than your characterisation of DAO's attributes as being absurd based on their linearity.
I wholly approve of viewing attributes (and hit points, and experience, and dialogue options) as abstractions. Anything that makes the game more enjoyable to play.
Ok, sorry if I misrepresented you. But many people are objecting to one abstraction (stat customisation being moved to equipment) , while favouring other ones ("traditional" levelling based attribute distribution) and claiming things like "lore" when neither make perfect sense as presented to us.
If there is an absence of specific evidence for a particular case, then the natural thing to do is to assume the norm. It might be wrong, but at least it gives us a basis to work from rather than trying to make decisions based on nothing.
Ok, sorry if I misrepresented you. But many people are objecting to one abstraction (stat customisation being moved to equipment) , while favouring other ones ("traditional" levelling based attribute distribution) and claiming things like "lore" when neither make perfect sense as presented to us.
Actually nobody claimed lore when it came to this bit. They claimed it removed control of the PC away from the player.
Actually nobody claimed lore when it came to this bit. They claimed it removed control of the PC away from the player.
Actually there was a remark on that, objecting to the inquisitor's power coming form his wardrobe, which was why I raised the comical nature of the older system.
But yet, essentially, you are complaing for reasons like "lore" and "RP". You haven't lost any control. It's just been moved from the character's stats to the character's gear. Gameplay wise, there's little difference, and, given that the entire concept is a gameplay abstraction, what difference does it make?
Retour en haut
