248 réponses à ce sujet

[Medhia_Nox]

@Elhanan:  And people who disagree with you about the importance of this, or that, they're not people who just "don't get how RPGs work" I'd hope.

 

Because the math has nothing to do with roleplaying for me - in fact, I could never play in a math intensive game - and appreciate, actually, that CRPGs do the math behind the scenes.  

 

I started in this discussion long ago saying I'm sorry people didn't get their mathematics... but what I won't shut my mouth about is when people talk about how RPGs are about math... because that is not true.  They "can" be about math to "some" - but are about storytelling to others.

 

"I" received MANY more options in the aspect of storytelling (I have not played the game, but if half of what I've read is true, then the storytelling has improved a hundred fold over something like DA:O) - I am sorry it was at the expense of your math.  

[Rawgrim]

We pick ONE thing when leveling up in this game. ONE. We get a skill or a spell. That's it. The game does the rest for us. Basically creating the character for us. And out of the skills and abilities we can chose, we can only use 8 of them. Simply because "You need to think". A very odd sentiment, really, given how they make it impossible to do anything wrong when leveling up your character. We get a cardboard character, that is tailor made for one single role. Zero freedom. A roleplaying game where the game levels up for you. The choice of skills is the next one to go.

[Elhanan]

@Elhanan:  And people who disagree with you about the importance of this, or that, they're not people who just "don't get how RPGs work" I'd hope.
 
Because the math has nothing to do with roleplaying for me - in fact, I could never play in a math intensive game - and appreciate, actually, that CRPGs do the math behind the scenes.  
 
I started in this discussion long ago saying I'm sorry people didn't get their mathematics... but what I won't shut my mouth about is when people talk about how RPGs are about math... because that is not true.  They "can" be about math to "some" - but are about storytelling to others.
 
"I" received MANY more options in the aspect of storytelling (I have not played the game, but if half of what I've read is true, then the storytelling has improved a hundred fold over something like DA:O) - I am sorry it was at the expense of your math.

For an example, look at the use of Avatars at BSN currently. They offer a wider range of customization than before, where one could choose from templates. And while many still choose the default look, others like to try various ones. Some do not care, as I do not on the Youtube forums; default is fine by me. If this choice were reversed, it would not affect me at all there, but can imagine the postings and criticism that would follow simply by removing the option of choice.

And I have already discussed elsewhere the notion that characters are not mathematical designs; are based from imagination. That said, the DA series uses Attributes to aid in those designs, but now limits the Player's role in choice; hence, the criticism.

It is not about math - other than less will likely never yield more - but about allowing as much customization of designing a character as adorning them. And now I am mindful of the single set of casual wear again for some reason.

[Muspade]

We pick ONE thing when leveling up in this game. ONE. We get a skill or a spell. That's it. The game does the rest for us. Basically creating the character for us. A roleplaying game where the game levels up for you. The choice of skills is the next one to go.

Not really. They are just trimming obligatory numbers.

P.S We have a 80 page thread on this already, linked In this thread.

[l7986]

Wait, we don't receive attribute points at level up? Where did this come from?

Probably got removed when Bioware realized min/maxers would make a mockery of multiplayer.

[Rawgrim]

Probably got removed when Bioware realized min/maxers would make a mockery of multiplayer.

 

So they decided to min\max for us instead.

 

And multiplayer did affect the single player game?

[Muspade]

When In doubt, blame multiplayer.

[Paul E Dangerously]

When In doubt, blame multiplayer.

 

When combat was designed in conjunction (read: handcuffed to) multiplayer, it's hard not to.

[In Exile]

We pick ONE thing when leveling up in this game. ONE. We get a skill or a spell. That's it. The game does the rest for us. Basically creating the character for us. And out of the skills and abilities we can chose, we can only use 8 of them. Simply because "You need to think". A very odd sentiment, really, given how they make it impossible to do anything wrong when leveling up your character. We get a cardboard character, that is tailor made for one single role. Zero freedom. A roleplaying game where the game levels up for you. The choice of skills is the next one to go.

 

That's not really different from other rulesets, like D&D. In 2e D&D we very, very rarely got an attribute point to assign, but that was it. If you played a fighter you got nothing. A mage never got anything on level-up beside spell-slot - you had to buy spells if you wanted to cast. A rogue got very limited increase to % of skills at level up. The only major exception to this were the Paladin and Ranger. 

 

Unless you're going to argue that 2e D&D was not an RPG, you're completely wrong about your characterization. 

[Rawgrim]

That's not really different from other rulesets, like D&D. In 2e D&D we very, very rarely got an attribute point to assign, but that was it. If you played a fighter you got nothing. A mage never got anything on level-up beside spell-slot - you had to buy spells if you wanted to cast. A rogue got very limited increase to % of skills at level up. The only major exception to this were the Paladin and Ranger. 

 

Unless you're going to argue that 2e D&D was not an RPG, you're completely wrong about your characterization. 

 

Weapon proficiencies and non-weapon proficiencies? You could learn to ride, be a lawyer, learn to dance, etiquette + + +. This got replaced by skillpoints in 3ed. Are you saying that getting 1 spell\ability in DA:I = more than this?

 

About 50 different weapons to chose from, and fighting styles.

 

2ed let you assign your ability points at the start, after rolling dice for it. Nothing after that. That was what the system was like. Do you think the D&D fanbase would be happy if they removed the player's ability to place the stats where he wants, in a later edition?

[In Exile]

Weapon proficiencies and non-weapon proficiencies? You could learn to ride, be a lawyer, learn to dance, etiquette + + +. This got replaced by skillpoints in 3ed. Are you saying that getting 1 spell\ability in DA:I = more than this?

 

None of those were in BG1. You couldn't learn any of those things. You could add 1 point for any class that wasn't a fighter/ranger/paladin, 2 for the paladin/ranger, and that was it. 

 

 

About 50 different weapons to chose from, and fighting styles.

 

You didn't get to chose any fighting styles. Was BG1 not an RPG? 

 

 

2ed let you assign your ability points at the start, after rolling dice for it. Nothing after that. That was what the system was like. Do you think the D&D fanbase would be happy if they removed the player's ability to place the stats where he wants, in a later edition?

 

It doesn't matter whether the fanbase is pissed. I'm pissed about DA:I's approach. But that's not what you said. What you said was that it wasn't an RPG. 

[Rawgrim]

None of those were in BG1. You couldn't learn any of those things. You could add 1 point for any class that wasn't a fighter/ranger/paladin, 2 for the paladin/ranger, and that was it. 

 

 

 

You didn't get to chose any fighting styles. Was BG1 not an RPG? 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't matter whether the fanbase is pissed. I'm pissed about DA:I's approach. But that's not what you said. What you said was that it wasn't an RPG. 

 

You couldn't add any extra points based on class in any of the BG games, mate. Besides: You said 2ed, not BG. Now you are just moving the goalposts.

 

Yes. You could dual wield, go for unarmed, weapon + shield, single weapon style, throwing weapons, and archery. It is right there on the level up menu. Google it.

 

Where did I say it wasn't an rpg? Stop lying. I never said DA:I or BG wasn't an rpg.

[Elhanan]

Thing is, the DA series ain't D&D; tis an IP created to help get away from control. And it is one that has Attributes, and did allow for Player allocation previously.

DAI still looks great to me overall, but am very disappointed at the numerous changes to rules, and added restriction; for the loss of Player control. And I hope they are empathetic to this.

[Mukora]

I just want to say, to the people who think this makes crafting mandatory, I understand where you're coming from, but it doesn't.

 

"Optional" means "You can beat the game without using it." Which I can't even begin to imagine won't be the case. Stats are allocated as you level up, and you'll certainly find equipment on the critical path that augments those stats. Crafting only becomes something you might want to look into when one of three things occurs:

 

1. You like the look of an armour or weapon, and want to use that design, but the stats don't fit your playstyle

2. You want to create very specifically statted equipment

3. You want a very specific build with very specific stats

 

Just because many of you enjoy creating a character that has specific stats does not make that any less optional.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Elhanan:  And it didn't allow you to be anything but a plucky adventurer before... this is not: "That game that tried to be old school to allow you to remember what it was like to have a character builder."  This is (presumably): "The game where you're something more than a plucky adventurer with a handful of stats - you're a world shaper." 

 

But don't worry - when DA:4 rolls around - if I lose all the story options for +3/lvl to stats I'll be in your shoes.  I won't be right - and it won't be destroying the fabric of gaming - but my opinion will be that it's a step backward.

[Rawgrim]

@Elhanan:  And it didn't allow you to be anything but a plucky adventurer before... this is not: "That game that tried to be old school to allow you to remember what it was like to have a character builder."  This is (presumably): "The game where you're something more than a plucky adventurer with a handful of stats - you're a world shaper." 

 

But don't worry - when DA:4 rolls around - if I lose all the story options for +3/lvl to stats I'll be in your shoes.  I won't be right - and it won't be destroying the fabric of gaming - but my opinion will be that it's a step backward.

 

You know. all they had to do was to add a toggle on character creation. Auto-level up the stats, or manual.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Rawgrim:  I don't disagree.  I have no idea why they did not.

[Elhanan]

@Elhanan:  And it didn't allow you to be anything but a plucky adventurer before... this is not: "That game that tried to be old school to allow you to remember what it was like to have a character builder."  This is (presumably): "The game where you're something more than a plucky adventurer with a handful of stats - you're a world shaper." 
 
But don't worry - when DA:4 rolls around - if I lose all the story options for +3/lvl to stats I'll be in your shoes.  I won't be right - and it won't be destroying the fabric of gaming - but my opinion will be that it's a step backward.

Actually, the previous games allowed one to play as a Noble from Ferelden or Orzammar, a secondary citizen, an imprisoned Mage, as a displaced nomad, or as a refugee from the Taint. They simply became adventurers due to the circumstances presented to them.

And it is my hope that the trend reverses as it has for items and faces; that the Players also regain control over their characters.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Elhanan:  And if the Origins were the actual stories you played it would have been far, FAR less of a generic RPG...

 

I loved DA:O - but I felt that the Origins were a terribly missed opportunity for something new. 

 

I have high hopes for Skyhold, Judgements, Perks, NPCs as I feel those are "true" RP elements (that is opinion)... whereas I feel that stats are "abstract" RP elements. If I have to chose - I'd gladly trade all the abstracts for true elements to RP.

 

I have no idea "why" they did what they did... but more than one thread spanning pages and pages over months... is overkill for stating one's opinion.

[Elhanan]

@Elhanan:  And if the Origins were the actual stories you played it would have been far, FAR less of a generic RPG...
 
I loved DA:O - but I felt that the Origins were a terribly missed opportunity for something new. 
 
I have high hopes for Skyhold, Judgements, Perks, NPCs as I feel those are "true" RP elements (that is opinion)... whereas I feel that stats are "abstract" RP elements. If I have to chose - I'd gladly trade all the abstracts for true elements to RP.
 
I have no idea "why" they did what they did... but more than one thread spanning pages and pages over months... is overkill for stating one's opinion.

A few months towards the end of the Dev cycle out of four yrs is not a lot, at least not from me.

I am a self-proclaimed Bioware fanboy, and have enjoyed almost every title they have created; consider NWN1 and DAO as my top RPG's of this Century. But being informed of more loss of character control while customization is highly touted seemed like a great opportunity to present the notion that it could have been greater.

And it is a bit ironic that 'generic' is used as a descriptor for the past games, when it also may apply to the characters of this new one, IMO.

[Morroian]

I just want to say, to the people who think this makes crafting mandatory, I understand where you're coming from, but it doesn't.

 

"Optional" means "You can beat the game without using it." Which I can't even begin to imagine won't be the case. Stats are allocated as you level up, and you'll certainly find equipment on the critical path that augments those stats. Crafting only becomes something you might want to look into when one of three things occurs:

 

But will we be able to beat the game on harder difficulties without it?

[Mukora]

But will we be able to beat the game on harder difficulties without it?

Possibly? Most likely, I imagine you could beat Hard without much issue, but maybe not Nightmare.

 

But playing on harder difficulties is also optional. As far as I'm concerned, something is only non-optional if you can't beat the game on the baseline difficulty (normal) without it.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Elhanan:  I didn't say the game was generic - I said the story after the Origins was generic:  "Plucky group of adventurers save the world" is a tried and true story.

 

BTW - generic isn't bad to me - figure I'd put that out there.

 

This is (presumably):  "Band of elite gather to form a massive world spanning organization to save the world."  Not at all an overdone story because it's tough to do.

[Elhanan]

@Elhanan:  I didn't say the game was generic - I said the story after the Origins was generic:  "Plucky group of adventurers save the world" is a tried and true story.
 
BTW - generic isn't bad to me - figure I'd put that out there.
 
This is (presumably):  "Band of elite gather to form a massive world spanning organization to save the world."  Not at all an overdone story because it's tough to do.

I know that; reason I said it was ironic that the term was used as a description at all. And I love generic Hot Cocoa, or did back in the day. But the very basic labels do make generic products less than unique.