760 réponses à ce sujet

[TKavatar]

Spoiler

 
Just realised there's a checkbox for AI Tactics in the behaviour tab. If we turn that off maybe we'll get our old if-then system back!

[Sylvius the Mad]

Um... no, he isn't. Higher difficulties are supposed to be, well, difficult. That's why it's called the difficulty setting.

But that isn't the only reason someone might choose it. Therefore, playstyles that undermine the difficulty don't necessarily invalidate the difficulty setting, which is the claim to which I was objecting.

[Meltemph]

I think you are trying to mean it's being simplified, which isn't really synonymous with shooter-ified.

Ya, most shooters are far from simple, team wise if you want to be good. People seem to have some serious issues with shooters, that are RPG fans. I dont understand it. Although I'd say no auto-attack is the opposite of simplified(same with having to be more hands on with your companions, suppsoedly).

[CronoDragoon]

Ya, most shooters are far from simple, team wise if you want to be good. People seem to have some serious issues with shooters, that are RPG fans. I dont understand it. Although I'd say no auto-attack is the opposite of simplified(same with having to be more hands on with your companions, suppsoedly).

 

I think in this instance (and the auto-attack one) the complaint seems to be about the degree of control you have over your gameplay experience. Moreso than "simplified" and "shooter-fied" I think the objection makes the most sense when framed as a lack of customization. That obviously doesn't apply to the whole game as virtually everything outside of no auto-attack and the tactics has been a net plus in customization, especially the crafting system and Skyhold.

[Brogan]

Yes, and yes. Can't blame that on us, it's all Bioware.

 

Wasn't looking to blame consoles, just those specific console versions if they didn't have it.  However, it is very possible that no auto attack and now this are both results of self-imposed engine limitations because the console control scheme was clearly their primary design focus.

[CrazyMooNew]

So...not only did it not show the tactics, but what your describing doesn't sound bad...at all...I want to be made to go into tactical view, I want to be challenged...to think on my feet instead of having the A.I. take over completely.

 

Sounds more like this is your fear...not even really confirmed TC.

[Zatche]

I am disappoint.

I'm personally too excited about other stuff for it to derail my hype train, but I...well...grrr. I shall hope that the tactics turn out to be more involved than that one screenshot implies.

[CronoDragoon]

So...not only did it not show the tactics, but what your describing doesn't sound bad...at all...I want to be made to go into tactical view, I want to be challenged...to think on my feet instead of having the A.I. take over completely.

 

Sounds more like this is your fear...not even really confirmed TC.

 

Tkavatar has a SS of the Tactics screen in the first page.

[Shrayev]

Wasn't looking to blame consoles, just those specific console versions if they didn't have it.  However, it is very possible that no auto attack and now this are both results of self-imposed engine limitations because the console control scheme was clearly their primary design focus.

 

Nah, there's nothing to support the argument that console control schemes were the primary focus. There's plenty of evidence for the reverse, however. I'm playing on PC precisely because they went above and beyond regarding the PC UI. 

 

The lack of auto-attack is a design choice attributable to their redesign of combat, not to consoles. DA II likely would've seen auto-attack removed if that had been the case.

 

 

Tkavatar has a SS of the Tactics screen in the first page.

 

 

Right, but it's from an outdated build. We don't know enough to discuss Tactics yet -- at lest not with the depth suggested here.

[LtColSpear]

Considering how much better this game looks than DA2, I see no reason to complain about dumbing down the tactics for casual gamers. My only complaint is about the extra month delay.

[Zu Long]

But that isn't the only reason someone might choose it. Therefore, playstyles that undermine the difficulty don't necessarily invalidate the difficulty setting, which is the claim to which I was objecting.

What other reason might there be to choose a higher difficulty other than to make the game more difficult? Bragging rights is itself a function of having beaten a harder game, so that's out. What else is there?

[CronoDragoon]

Considering how much better this game looks than DA2, I see no reason to complain about dumbing down the tactics for casual gamers. My only complaint is about the extra month delay.

 

The game looks amazing. I just think it would look even better with a full-blown If-then tactics system. Now it's possible the tactics system is more complex than those screenshots let on, and I'll be reserving judgment until I use it. But if a battle system has crappy AI it can absolutely negatively impact the experience for me. See: Ni No Kuni.

[CrazyMooNew]

Tkavatar has a SS of the Tactics screen in the first page.

 

 

OOooh...a screenshot...well that there is all the evidence we will ever need, but again, simplifying that part of the game is a good move...

[Meltemph]

The game looks amazing. I just think it would look even better with a full-blown If-then tactics system. Now it's possible the tactics system is more complex than those screenshots let on, and I'll be reserving judgment until I use it. But if a battle system has crappy AI it can absolutely negatively impact the experience for me. See: Ni No Kuni.

Ya, me not caring about the removal of the gambit system is the assumption that their ai is not full on rtard.

[TKavatar]

 

Right, but it's from an outdated build. We don't know enough to discuss Tactics yet -- at lest not with the depth suggested here.

 

Nothing has changed in the newest build except for the addition of the behaviour tab.

[AlanC9]

The game looks amazing. I just think it would look even better with a full-blown If-then tactics system. Now it's possible the tactics system is more complex than those screenshots let on, and I'll be reserving judgment until I use it. But if a battle system has crappy AI it can absolutely negatively impact the experience for me. See: Ni No Kuni.

Or NWN?

[Zu Long]

Tkavatar has a SS of the Tactics screen in the first page.

I'd like to see a shot of a power that's active. It may be that we can only set tactics for powers that are active. The one in the SS is inactive.

[Brogan]

The lack of auto-attack is a design choice attributable to their redesign of combat, not to consoles.

 

That's an opinion that is trying very hard not to let anyone see that it's just an excuse.

 

New engine means new combat system, which means priority design programming.  We've got more than enough evidence to support the theory that platform specific control schemes do not port well from console inputs to mouse and keyboard inputs.

 

And they want to sell their product, so these limitations are not going to be publicly shown or even hinted at.  Please, let's not delude ourselves here.

[The Hierophant]

Profound sadness.

[Ashelsu]

Here is extract from one of the reviews.

 

"The standard sort of skill trees for each character were present, and players can still modify the AI for each party member during battle - things like ‘heal self at 50%' or ‘attack ranged targets first' and so on. It was hard to pick up the intricacies of the combat with such a relatively short playtime, but it still had a bit of the ‘mob rush' feeling that past Dragon Age games have had."

http://www.gamecriti...for-the-kingdom

 

So, it is up in the air again? This review is negative, btw.

I wish they just confirm it one way or another.

[Brogan]

Seems like we will have to wait till the 18th and find out for ourselves.

[Wulfram]

Here is extract from one of the reviews.
 
"The standard sort of skill trees for each character were present, and players can still modify the AI for each party member during battle - things like ‘heal self at 50%' or ‘attack ranged targets first' and so on. It was hard to pick up the intricacies of the combat with such a relatively short playtime, but it still had a bit of the ‘mob rush' feeling that past Dragon Age games have had."
http://www.gamecriti...for-the-kingdom
 
So, it is up in the air again? This review is negative, btw.
I wish they just confirm it one way or another.

That sounds like the stuff we can see on the behaviour screen. We'll still have a fair amount of control over how the AI acts, just not the fine detail we had before.

[devSin]

Now we're back in 1998, where we have to let the game do it, or take manual control, with nothing in between.

You could create your own PC scripts for Baldur's Gate (the script compiler was released alongside the game).

Now, the AI was extremely limited, but you had full access to the parts of it that actually worked (though there are some engine limitations with how scripts were run). It was direct control over companion behavior, whereas DA's control has always been indirect (and more limited).
 

I don't. I don't want a more intelligent AI. I want to program the AI myself.

Myth was actually going to have programmable AI for player forces, back in the day.

It would have been really cool.
 

Or NWN?

To be fair, NWN didn't really have a party.

The henchmen AI was quite complex, though (at least as far as scripting for Aurora). It just happened to be hopelessly stupid as well.

[Sylvius the Mad]

What other reason might there be to choose a higher difficulty other than to make the game more difficult? Bragging rights is itself a function of having beaten a harder game, so that's out. What else is there?

I offered an example above. I typically play BioWare games on Hard because it's usually the fairest setting. The abilities function in a broadly similar way for PCs and NPCs. And I want a level playing field for roleplaying reasons, not difficulty.

I don't particularly care whether my characters win fights. I only care that they fight them appropriately to their character, and in a way that I find interesting. As I said earlier, sometimes I'd set up suboptimal tactics just to see what happened - winning clearly wasn't my objective.

That you couldn't even imagine that someone might have his own reasons, though, disturbs me. Remember, the higher difficulty settings are not merely more difficult. They differ in a variety of ways. Any one (or combination) of those might be the reason that setting is chosen.

[Travie]

Can we get Dev input on this? Are there only four slots or not? The screenshots seem conclusive but I'd still like to hear it.