293 réponses à ce sujet

[Medhia_Nox]

This game has far more choices than DA:O or DA:2...

 

At the expense of:  3 pts/lvl. 

[Lumix19]

My problem is, though it seems varied, you're still going to be on the same damn railroad every single time. The melee rogue is always stuck with daggers, no matter what. The mage is stuck with a stick he can't even hit people with, no matter what. You might get a tiny bit of variation, but a lot of the fun with DAO replay is that I didn't have to use light armor and dual daggers, or wear robes and a stick.

Bonuses from gear is no problem at all. Being able to add or change stats on gear isn't a problem either. Its about the game limiting my choices that goes directly to my character. Even if some of the options in DA:O were junk etc, it gave options anyway. You could create a character with no diplomatic skills, but his skills at herbalism were great. Its about options, not optimizing. Nothing ruins immersion more in an rpg than when the game makes choices for you.

 

I get it. You both want the same thing really - variety, even if some of those builds are entirely non-viable. Unfortunately I think it harkens back to what Muspade is saying in that there is no room for junk builds in DA:I because the game has been balanced in a certain way. DA:O allowed these sort of junk builds because the game was poorly balanced and was pretty easy to beat.

[xkg]

Because assigning your own "stats" In DA:I via directly assigning them onto your character will upset the manner In which they've balanced the gameplay.

 

 

hmm In a single player game . Ok then, who cares how I play it, you or the devs ? If so, then why ?

 

If they won't allow me to change them manually I am going to cheatengine the freak out of this game. 

The manners can be upset as much as they want. As if I care.

[Rawgrim]

This game has far more choices than DA:O or DA:2...

 

At the expense of:  3 pts/lvl. 

 

Not when it comes to the character himself. Far less on that bit. When it comes to crafting and items, yes. Way more options.

[Muspade]

The "Who cares" argument.

Been there, done that.

[Paul E Dangerously]

This game has far more choices than DA:O or DA:2...

 

At the expense of:  3 pts/lvl. 

 

..and weapon choice, armor choice, the abilities from eight to ??, auto-attack, mid-battle weapon swap..

 

I get it. You both want the same thing really - variety, even if some of those builds are entirely non-viable. Unfortunately I think it harkens back to what Muspade is saying in that there is no room for junk builds in DA:I because the game has been balanced in a certain way. DA:O allowed these sort of junk builds because the game was poorly balanced and was pretty easy to beat.

 

Like how being able to use a longsword/dagger combo that cost you a whopping few miliseconds of attack speed. Totally not viable. Yup.

[Rawgrim]

I get it. You both want the same thing really - variety, even if some of those builds are entirely non-viable. Unfortunately I think it harkens back to what Muspade is saying in that there is no room for junk builds in DA:I because the game has been balanced in a certain way. DA:O allowed these sort of junk builds because the game was poorly balanced and was pretty easy to beat.

 

And why is that a problem in a single player game? Look at Pillars of Eternity. A game that has a fraction of the budget DA:I has, and still every class in the game has way more options than every class combined in DA:I. Variety doesn't just involve combat. It is about creating your own character. And being able to add a flaw or two to a character (optional) doesn't hurt the game at all.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Rawgrim:   There is a game called "Rogue Trader" - it's an RPG based in the Warhammer 40K universe where you play a Rogue Trader which is the head of an insanely powerful merchant house that can rule entire planets... start wars... etc. etc.

 

There's several paragraphs about the disconnect players will have who are so used to being just "plucky adventurer" and transitioning to "Leader of an organization." 

You reminded me of it.

 

This story isn't just about one character.  You may not like that - but ultimately, that doesn't matter.  Bioware has made a story about a leader and has crafted the game to better reflect the choices a leader can make (while also still having fun stuff).

 

Let's also not forget... you can still add stats by selecting powers. 

 

Did you ever REALLY have a warrior max out his Magic skill in DA:O or 2?  REALLY?  Or a mage who had a max Cunning?  Or is this all just Theory Anger?

[greywatch]

I always feel cheated when all the classes can equip the same things/level the same stats. It just feels like, what's even the point of having different classes in that case? I much prefer it this way. Gives me way more incentive to actually try all the classes, for one.

[Blisscolas]

We are not against ( can I say we? nope I am not going to risk) ...

 

I am not against. You can have your gear crafting and customization, attribute points from abilities, auto attribute allocation.

It is all right, I don't want to take that from you.

 

I'am for even more variety. On top of that what you already have, allow me to manually assign the points.

You win, I win.

 

How can anyone vote against that - I have no clue.

 

I think this whole idea was just transfered into another system, but I do get your point

 

 

Bonuses from gear is no problem at all. Being able to add or change stats on gear isn't a problem either. Its about the game limiting my choices that goes directly to my character. Even if some of the options in DA:O were junk etc, it gave options anyway. You could create a character with no diplomatic skills, but his skills at herbalism were great. Its about options, not optimizing. Nothing ruins immersion more in an rpg than when the game makes choices for you.

 

Are we still talking about attribute points (as in str, constitution, dex, int...)? because I agre that diplomatic skills and herbalism should have stayed throughout the series (although this makes kind of a return with the inquisition upgrades I think), your other stat customization is transfered to your gear....Yeah, you won't get your all of your stat points and I see how that can be difficult to accept. But I do believe that most of your stat customization will be through your gear. After all we have no idea how many stat points are added per level through the auto-level up system, nor how each point changes the percentages of resistances and what not

[viperidae]

We are not against ( can I say we? nope I am not going to risk) ...

 

I am not against. You can have your gear crafting and customization, attribute points from abilities, auto attribute allocation.

It is all right, I don't want to take that from you.

 

I'am for even more variety. On top of that what you already have, allow me to manually assign the points.

You win, I win.

 

How can anyone vote against that - I have no clue.

 

Perhaps this could've been implemented 6 months or a year ago, sure. But right now, this game is balanced as it is, and that's not going to change in 4 weeks.

 

The fact that you don't choose stats on level up yourself but instead we get more variety in Armor and weapon customization is the vision they have. They've already made the game, from the ground up, with that concept. To draw a parallel, maybe if a mod comes out that lets you choose every attribute you get on level-up, all it could serve to do is make the game harder because it isn't balanced that way. If it was designed from the ground up with that idea, sure, but there are still reasons unknown to us behind why it wasn't.

 

All i'm really arguing is that the system as it is, partially replacing the attribute system of earlier games, while greatly expanding the gear customization is not necessarily such a bad thing, and might not even be a loss of customization options at all, compared to the earlier games.

[Lumix19]

And why is that a problem in a single player game? Look at Pillars of Eternity. A game that has a fraction of the budget DA:I has, and still every class in the game has way more options than every class combined in DA:I. Variety doesn't just involve combat. It is about creating your own character. And being able to add a flaw or two to a character (optional) doesn't hurt the game at all.

It's not. I think Bioware is responding to criticism that DA:O and DA2 were too easy. So they've balanced it more appropriately to provide a better challenge and in the process cut away junk builds that would have caused a great deal of frustration because they wouldn't have been viable.

 

I always feel cheated when all the classes can equip the same things/level the same stats. It just feels like, what's even the point of having different classes in that case? I much prefer it this way. Gives me way more incentive to actually try all the classes, for one.

Plus this. What's the point of classes if everyone can use everything? That's an Elder Scrolls thing.

[Rawgrim]

@Rawgrim:   There is a game called "Rogue Trader" - it's an RPG based in the Warhammer 40K universe where you play a Rogue Trader which is the head of an insanely powerful merchant house that can rule entire planets... start wars... etc. etc.

 

There's several paragraphs about the disconnect players will have who are so used to being just "plucky adventurer" and transitioning to "Leader of an organization." 

You reminded me of it.

 

This story isn't just about one character.  You may not like that - but ultimately, that doesn't matter.  Bioware has made a story about a leader and has crafted the game to better reflect the choices a leader can make (while also still having fun stuff).

 

Let's also not forget... you can still add stats by selecting powers. 

 

Did you ever REALLY have a warrior max out his Magic skill in DA:O or 2?  REALLY?  Or a mage who had a max Cunning?  Or is this all just Theory Anger?

 

The story is about a leader, yes. And the player gets to create that leader through choice of class, gender, race, stats, and choices in game.

 

Adding stats via passive skills is good. No problem with it. The problem is that the game just takes the level up stats, and places them for me.

 

No I do not want to have a warrior with a high magic stat. In fact that stat should be blocked for non magic users. A warrior with high cunning is fun, though. Or a rogue with very high str.

[Rawgrim]

I always feel cheated when all the classes can equip the same things/level the same stats. It just feels like, what's even the point of having different classes in that case? I much prefer it this way. Gives me way more incentive to actually try all the classes, for one.

 

Diablo 3 must be your favorite game then.

[LonewandererD]

Wow, people know how to flip their s*** over the loss of three points. Can't wait to see what happens when the milk spills. The designers have made it clear that they are starting to move in a different direction with how the game plays so you have to expect losses along the way. Also, does it really matter. My warden could have had 50 magic or 70 and I still played the game the same, even on the highest difficulties. I never paid attributes too much mind beyond what was needed to access certain skills and equipment so the loss of 3 POINTS in exchange for a greatly improved crafting system is more than a fair trade off.

 

I think everyone needs to pop a chill strip and wait for the game to come out.

 

-D-

[Sifr]

The way I see it, each class and spec is different and so you build them in a different way, having the devs take that out of our hands ruins the fun of building your character, not to mention the fans figuring out all the different builds you can do with each class.

 

Take Mages in Origins and DA2 and just how many talented people came up with Spirit Healer builds, Arcane Warrior Blood Mages, Arcane Spirit Healers, Arcane Keeper Battlemages or DA2's ridiculously fun Primal or Elemental-Blood-Force-Mage builds.

 

Now imagine telling every single one of them that all of their time was ill-spent finding new and interesting ways to play the game, because there is only one correct way to play the game and they were going to release a patch for both games that forced you to do it that way.

 

I don't think they'd enjoy that one whit, nor do I think people would enjoy that in any game.

[Paul E Dangerously]

It's not. I think Bioware is responding to criticism that DA:O and DA2 were too easy. So they've balanced it more appropriately to provide a better challenge and in the process cut away junk builds that would have caused a great deal of frustration because they wouldn't have been viable.

 

Plus this. What's the point of classes if everyone can use everything? That's an Elder Scrolls thing.

 

..or a DAO thing. Or a BG/BG2/NWN thing. The latter three actually gave you new weapon proficiencies as you leveled up (or through feats/multiclassing for NWN).

[Rawgrim]

Wow, people know how to flip their s*** over the loss of three points. Can't wait to see what happens when the milk spills. The designers have made it clear that they are starting to move in a different direction with how the game plays so you have to expect losses along the way. Also, does it really matter. My warden could have had 50 magic or 70 and I still played the game the same, even on the highest difficulties. I never paid attributes too much mind beyond what was needed to access certain skills and equipment so the loss of 3 POINTS in exchange for a greatly improved crafting system is more than a fair trade off.

 

I think everyone needs to pop a chill strip and wait for the game to come out.

 

-D-

 

3 points per level. That is 60 points when you reach level 20.

[viperidae]

The story is about a leader, yes. And the player gets to create that leader through choice of class, gender, race, stats, and choices in game.

 

Adding stats via passive skills is good. No problem with it. The problem is that the game just takes the level up stats, and places them for me.

 

No I do not want to have a warrior with a high magic stat. In fact that stat should be blocked for non magic users. A warrior with high cunning is fun, though. Or a rogue with very high str.

the point about balance is that DAO was beatable with every **** build. This game is balanced so that if you were to gimp yourself by spamming up your STR on a rogue, you would be not just suboptimal but at a very very major disadvantage. Game balance doesn't have to regard to multiplayer.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Rawgrim:  But you can play a Warrior Diplomat... or a Rogue General.  That's what advisors do.  

 

If you want a "Cunning" Warrior - you take Josephine's perks.  And use Josephine most.

 

If you want a "Militant" Rogue - you take Cullen's perks. And use Cullen most.

If you want a "Deceptive" Warrior - you take Leliana's perks and use her the most. 

 

I simply can't understand how people can't make the character's they want.  

[Rawgrim]

..or a DAO thing. Or a BG/BG2/NWN thing. The latter three actually gave you new weapon proficiencies as you leveled up (or through feats/multiclassing for NWN).

 

Icewind Dale 1-2, Planescape Torment, + + +. There are actually very few western rpgs that doesn't let you do this.

[Paul E Dangerously]

the point about balance is that DAO was beatable with every **** build. This game is balanced so that if you were to gimp yourself by spamming up your STR on a rogue, you would be not just suboptimal but at a very very major disadvantage. Game balance doesn't have to regard to multiplayer.

 

No, it doesn't. If you weren't maining Daggers and had Lethality, STR was still the main damage stat. Depending on the build, you only needed DEX as far as Dual Weapon Mastery went, and CUN as far as the top lockpicking and convince skills.

[Blisscolas]

The way I see it, each class and spec is different and so you build them in a different way, having the devs take that out of our hands ruins the fun of building your character, not to mention the fans figuring out all the different builds you can do with each class.

 

Take Mages in Origins and DA2 and just how many talented people came up with Spirit Healer builds, Arcane Warrior Blood Mages, Arcane Spirit Healers, Arcane Keeper Battlemages or DA2's ridiculously fun Primal or Elemental-Blood-Force-Mage builds.

 

Now imagine telling every single one of them that all of their time was ill-spent finding new and interesting ways to play the game, because there is only one correct way to play the game and they were going to release a patch for both games that forced you to do it that way.

 

I don't think they'd enjoy that one whit, nor do I think people would enjoy that in any game.

 

We don't know for sure how many attribute points are assigned per level up nor their effects. You still get to do all of that stuff through your gear. I really don't see the problem here

[viperidae]

i'm talking about DAI, i'm assuming STR won't deal with dagger damage as in DA2 but then again, just an assumption. i agree the example might not have been perfect in that case, apologies as i never played rogue in DA:O

[Rawgrim]

@Rawgrim:  But you can play a Warrior Diplomat... or a Rogue General.  That's what advisors do.  

 

If you want a "Cunning" Warrior - you take Josephine's perks.  And use Josephine most.

 

If you want a "Militant" Rogue - you take Cullen's perks. And use Cullen most.

If you want a "Deceptive" Warrior - you take Leliana's perks and use her the most. 

 

I simply can't understand how people can't make the character's they want.  

 

The advisor's arn't part of the character. They are an outside, usable, asset. An item, really.