80 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

The hell are you talking about, BG allowed you to put stats where you wanted, going as far as having dice rolls that allowed for a wide range of stats in character creation, it had stat bonuses and penalties for race, it had alignment limitations for class, it had skill points, it had multiclassing, you could be a mage that could cast 80 fireballs or a mage that could cast 30 different spells once before resting, or a mage that had little control over what it cast and could through a cow at someone instead of a fireball. 

 

Fallout had stat points that allowed for any countless number of builds, it had perks with massive drawbacks for every advantage they gave, it had a shitton of skills you could use to resolve quests in different ways and influence healing and damage with weapons. 

 

Also DA:O is probably the most reactive game Bioware has ever done, the amount of choice and consequence you have "hidden" in the game and quests is enormous, you always had multiple ways to resolve issues, the story could widly diverge at key points, your companions could be affected in any number of ways, it so far surpasses DA:I in C&C department that there is no way we can even begin to compare both games. 

 

We all agree that BG1/2 and Fallout 1/2 didn't allow stat allocation on level up. Good news. See, common ground. Now we move onto a host of other things.

Racial bonuses are in DAI. Alignment mercifully is not that is an abomination of a concept that didn't matter in the game anyways - your Lawful Good Paladin could be as evil as he wanted to be and it meant nothing.  DAI obviously has skill points so we are on track there. Multiclassing well you got DAI there other than the KE who is really the twin class build. You could never throw 80 fireballs because you only had so many spells you could learn during the night. You might know 200 spells but if you can only cast 5-3-2-1 then that is what you've got. Limits imposing choices - always sucked to have learned Breach when you needed Pierce Magic didn't it?

 

I'm not gonna defend DAI, DAO or BG compared to the SPECIAL system which is to me hands down the best RPG system for CRPG's. I will say that in terms of attributes DAI allows a lot more manipulation of those than did FO because of the cap.

 

DAO's story never diverged. You still did all the same quests. You and played the same game all the way through other than some tiny class specific quests like the stealing thing in Denerim. DAI tosses in the Mages/Templar thing to give it a bit of the Witcher 2 vibe so unlike DAO there is a major story quest I won't play in my first playthrough. Plus, in DAO all that "choice" didn't matter in the end as you still got your armies so most of the choice was about the choice and not the consequence anyways.

[Eckister]

*sigh* that games with a fundamentally different rule set (which simply didnt allow you to improve your stats) didnt allow stat allocation DOES NOT mean that a rule set which allows it should have this feature prohibited... why talk about "this and that game doesnt allow it" when we can talk about "what can we do so this game allows it"?

 

you claiming the choices had absolutely no effect whatsoever just proves what Ive said earlier - you view things too superficially. there were companion options and choices, which could have left you with a minimal party. there were choices due to which the armies only followed you because they had to (sure, thats just symbolic, since youve had your army anyway). there were choices in which your forces lacked a certain element (dalish elves, mages or the legion of the dead). 

 

the "80 fireballs thing" was meant symbolically, not as an actual thing. but then again - there were ways to even make 80 fireballs happen, if you played a wild mage and were VERY lucky. which you wouldnt know, of coarse...

[K3m0sabe]

We all agree that BG1/2 and Fallout 1/2 didn't allow stat allocation on level up. Good news. See, common ground. Now we move onto a host of other things.

Racial bonuses are in DAI. Alignment mercifully is not that is an abomination of a concept that didn't matter in the game anyways - your Lawful Good Paladin could be as evil as he wanted to be and it meant nothing.  DAI obviously has skill points so we are on track there. Multiclassing well you got DAI there other than the KE who is really the twin class build. You could never throw 80 fireballs because you only had so many spells you could learn during the night. You might know 200 spells but if you can only cast 5-3-2-1 then that is what you've got. Limits imposing choices - always sucked to have learned Breach when you needed Pierce Magic didn't it?

 

I'm not gonna defend DAI, DAO or BG compared to the SPECIAL system which is to me hands down the best RPG system for CRPG's. I will say that in terms of attributes DAI allows a lot more manipulation of those than did FO because of the cap.

 

DAO's story never diverged. You still did all the same quests. You and played the same game all the way through other than some tiny class specific quests like the stealing thing in Denerim. DAI tosses in the Mages/Templar thing to give it a bit of the Witcher 2 vibe so unlike DAO there is a major story quest I won't play in my first playthrough. Plus, in DAO all that "choice" didn't matter in the end as you still got your armies so most of the choice was about the choice and not the consequence anyways.

 

DA:I attribute manipulation happens in a very limiting way for players, you have to go down certain skill lines to improve your attributes, locking you to a skill you might not want just to get a bonus to a certain stat. The crafting attribute point customization also forces you into certain material choices to get the attributes you want. 

 

Why not give that choice to the player outright? as DA:O and DA2 did.

 

Why not give the player the chance to put points into non combat skills that influence crafting and dialogue choices? Instead of that we get inquisition perks that force you to grind fetch quests to level up the inquisition so you can unlock advanced lock picking? or added dialogue choices? or extra crafting recipes? It doesnt make sense and removes the sense that you are customizing your character. 

 

Take a gander over to Dragon Age Keep, look at the choices of some of the content that you can change in origins, and thats only a small part of the overall content that didnt get the import save treatment. Thats choice and consequence, thats adding depth to gameplay and narrative. Have you seen anything similar in DA:I? I got to choose between mage and templars, i got to choose if i wanted a companion or not, but that was an arbitrary yes or no choice, you get none of the more complex companion choices... and thats about it. 

[MiyoKit]

....Have you seen anything similar in DA:I? I got to choose between mage and templars, i got to choose if i wanted a companion or not, but that was an arbitrary yes or no choice, you get none of the more complex companion choices... and thats about it. 

 

Yes there are decisions you make in DA:I that have the same impact as decisions you made in DA:O. I'm probably a little over halfway through and have made a fair amount of choices (the latest being the most difficult in any game). You also make choices everytime you judge someone, that has knockon stories on the war table etc:

 

As for companions, so far they're more indepth than previous games. Sera's quests, for example, really made me think & laugh out loud - no other DA game has made me do that with a companion. Have you not got far in the game?

 

I think theres a lot of nostalgia affecting opinions on DA:I. DA:O had a great story, but the choices & consequences were rather superficial for the most part (with many only getting fleshed out in the ending credits).

[K3m0sabe]

Yes there are decisions you make in DA:I that have the same impact as decisions you made in DA:O. I'm probably a little over halfway through and have made a fair amount of choices (the latest being the most difficult in any game). You also make choices everytime you judge someone, that has knockon stories on the war table etc:

 

As for companions, so far they're more indepth than previous games. Sera's quests, for example, really made me think & laugh out loud - no other DA game has made me do that with a companion. Have you not got far in the game?

 

I think theres a lot of nostalgia affecting opinions on DA:I. DA:O had a great story, but the choices & consequences were rather superficial for the most part (with many only getting fleshed out in the ending credits).

 

Dalish, Landsmeet, Redcliff, those 3 major locations had at least 3 choices with reverberating effects through the story, I have spent probably 30 hours up to Skyhold, i have probably only seen half of the game, so i believe you that DA:I can have choice and consequences hidden away in the second half of the story...

 

But is it fair for the player to go through so many hours of mindless content to get to the best parts of the narrative? DA:O provided that upfront and at every location. So far, the swamp had nothing, the storm coast had nothing, the desert oasis had nothing, hinterland had nothing of note, orleais was much the same, haven as well, the prologue. 

 

Maybe a lot of my C&C gripes are down to the pacing of the story. 

[Eckister]

MiyoKit is probably right K3m0sabe, lets leave the choices out of the discussion for now. ;-) I dont know about you, but Im in only 35 hours into the game, currently campaigning to save my troops from the avvar (which is why I didnt want to judge on DA:Is judgement-and-consequence aspect for now). funny thing though - werent the avvar believed "extinct"?

[MiyoKit]

Dalish, Landsmeet, Redcliff, those 3 major locations had at least 3 choices with reverberating effects through the story, I have spent probably 30 hours up to Skyhold, i have probably only seen half of the game, so i believe you that DA:I can have choice and consequences hidden away in the second half of the story...

 

But is it fair for the player to go through so many hours of mindless content to get to the best parts of the narrative? DA:O provided that upfront and at every location. So far, the swamp had nothing, the storm coast had nothing, the desert oasis had nothing, hinterland had nothing of note, orleais was much the same, haven as well, the prologue. 

 

Maybe a lot of my C&C gripes are down to the pacing of the story. 

 

Skyhold isn't halfway through the game, iirc.

 

For me these choices were pretty meaningful (you should have already done them given your progress):

 

Spoiler

Who the cult in the Hinterlands should help (you see them as you wander around after making this choice). Mages or Templars (NPCs constantly refer to this, so do your companions / the continuing story). Challenging the bandit leader (I now have the bandit forces clearing out Storm Coast, I run into them a lot killing things). In Haven you raced to save people, and I managed to save them all so I have them to talk to in Skyhold.

 

Those are the 'stand out' big choices, but there were a great deal of small ones (who to recruit as an agent, sending people to help other people or not etc:). The Mire & The Oasis were pretty berift of meaningful choices, but I really enjoyed both zones (the story with the Mire & the beauty of the Oasis). I've made more choices than I did in DA:O in terms of % of story progression, but DA:I is a longer game (took me ~40hrs to do a full, loot everything, talk to everyone run of DA:O, I'm at 80hrs in DA:I and I'm probably just over halfway).

 

As Eckister suggested, I'll leave it at that! .

[ashwind]

What do you mean?

 

TES games have Health, Magicka and Stamina.

And skills.

 

No attributes.

 

Skyrim is but 1 of the TES games.

 

Its predecessors like Arena(didnt play, not sure), Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion all have attributes. [Str, Int, Wis, Agi, Endurance, Speedd, Personality & Luck]

[Sidney]

*sigh* that games with a fundamentally different rule set (which simply didnt allow you to improve your stats) didnt allow stat allocation DOES NOT mean that a rule set which allows it should have this feature prohibited... why talk about "this and that game doesnt allow it" when we can talk about "what can we do so this game allows it"?

 

you claiming the choices had absolutely no effect whatsoever just proves what Ive said earlier - you view things too superficially. there were companion options and choices, which could have left you with a minimal party. there were choices due to which the armies only followed you because they had to (sure, thats just symbolic, since youve had your army anyway). there were choices in which your forces lacked a certain element (dalish elves, mages or the legion of the dead). 

 

the "80 fireballs thing" was meant symbolically, not as an actual thing. but then again - there were ways to even make 80 fireballs happen, if you played a wild mage and were VERY lucky. which you wouldnt know, of coarse...

 

 

The rule set in this game doesn't allow it. See there, simple why aren't you talking about "this" game *sigh*

 

On your second point, I understand there were options and choices. Did I say there were no options? I said the story did not diverge which is what was being claimed. The choices are the point of the game not the divergence in the story. The story goes to rather great lengths to take all your choices and still converge back at several points and we all will play the same core game. There is no Witcher2 type second act.

 

BTW, come down off that high horse. Trying to prove you know more about minutiae a decades old game is sorta, no really, sad to watch.

[doctor michael]

It makes no sense to remove that choice for the players, and that is just one of many things that has me upset about this game. We went from one of the best games ever, aside from Mass Effect, and dumbed it down for little kids and brain dead morons, one of which you would have to be to think this was a better choice for the game. The adult sensuality and sexuality has been replaced with cookie cutter personalities, and everything which made this an enjoyable game for adults, by adults, has been thrown out the window by the PC, pre-school brigade!!

[Eckister]

The rule set in this game doesn't allow it. See there, simple why aren't you talking about "this" game *sigh*

 

On your second point, I understand there were options and choices. Did I say there were no options? I said the story did not diverge which is what was being claimed. The choices are the point of the game not the divergence in the story. The story goes to rather great lengths to take all your choices and still converge back at several points and we all will play the same core game. There is no Witcher2 type second act.

 

BTW, come down off that high horse. Trying to prove you know more about minutiae a decades old game is sorta, no really, sad to watch.

funny request from someone who keeps bringing other products into a discussion about *this* game... 

 

the game did diverge, though minimally. look - of coarse there are products out there which make you feel your choices had a lot more impact and of coarse Dragon Age is pretty much a straight line. we all noticed, mind you. ;-) but claiming that the end result is always the same seems kind of shallow, since there were options to kill all the mages, the dalish, kill some of your own party or even your character, which reflected in the ending and later episodes. if your entire point rests on the fact, that you dont have an ending where the archdemon survives ....... then Im simply stunned... and not in a good way...

 

ummm .... claiming its sad that others point out minor details when you yourself point out, that "minor details" exist elsewhere just seems hypocritical, sorry...

[Ansa]

Im more worried about fact that game has half the skills of DA2, which in turn had half the skills of DA:O...

 

The increasing restriction of how you can build your character skill wise sucks big time. 

 

Yeah as I was saying in other threads - it seems the series will end up with a comic book + some action combat where you mash 1 button.

Dumbing down everything so any 2 y.o. can play it on daddy's iPad, you know, good marketing.

[AlanC9]

*sigh* that games with a fundamentally different rule set (which simply didnt allow you to improve your stats) didnt allow stat allocation DOES NOT mean that a rule set which allows it should have this feature prohibited...

This is not a workable argument. None of the DA games use the same ruleset. (Sidney mentioned this already, but you handwaved the point away.)

[Eckister]

AlanC9 - the point is, that it doesnt make sence to compare and wave a thing off just because "others have the same". the point isnt how things are elsewhere, the point of this discussion is to make things here different than they are. and based on that, bringing other games from other series is utterly pointless, since they have nothing in common with the Dragon Age world or series.

[Eckister]

and if we are going to talk about rulesets then lets mention that the rules used here are HIGHLY altered DnD rules, thus the option to change things is not in the hands of "the Wizards" (google who owns rights to dnd if you dont know what I mean) but in the hands of those who made the series, putting this discussion far from being pointless... if things were otherwise, then Origin would have its hands tied and the rules would be simply what they are - rules set universally for both this game and other franchises. the way things are - this game has its own rules which may be altered on the whim of its creators.

[Paul E Dangerously]

The funniest thing is that they took so many points from TES/Skyrim..without taking the largest point. It doesn't have goofy restrictions on armor or weapons. If you want to make an armored battlemage, do it. If you want a stout brawling rogue, no problem.

[Eckister]

so I was thinking the other day - what if there were the attribute points from passive skills and 3 points every 2-3 levels?

[PogueMT]

I'm a bit disappointed by the change too - for example in DA2 I built a rogue tweaked to effectively act as a dual weild warrior and had tremendous fun with her, I also like fiddling with the stats so I can mix and match parties based on their strengths and weaknesses, right now I'd love to be able to fiddle with Iron Bull's stats to up his DPS and survivability but can't, which is frustrating because I'm not using him as much as I'd like.

 

Will admit the change to all rogues being able to lockpick properly is welcome, but that's about the only benefit I'm seeing. By all means let people just level the stats automatically if they want, but we really should be able to fiddle with them as it's (to me) an integral part of the character building and is taking some of the fun out of the game for me

[Sidney]

The funniest thing is that they took so many points from TES/Skyrim..without taking the largest point. It doesn't have goofy restrictions on armor or weapons. If you want to make an armored battlemage, do it. If you want a stout brawling rogue, no problem.

TES doesn't have classes. I still think that is the strength of the TES ans SPECIAL systems. For class based games, well you get the restrictions and specializations so the classes have meaning.

[Wifeaggro]

Its a horrible example of a RPG for PC or Console. My guess is they were saving development dollars. in there quest to stream line and dumb down for consoles they made it bad for both.

[cruggero22]

I cannot level with the gripes here. I too was not expecting restriction on the ability to allocate points to stat columns, but it doesn't ruin the game for me in any way. And it certainly doesn't lower my opinion of the game overall. There are novel ideas within DA:I which were absent in the earlier titles, (e.g. customizable weapons and armor). Most certainly it takes away from some of the thought behind the builds and lessens freedom. Still though, not an earth shattering variable to be lacking. It's finer points out shine it. Beautifully crafted maps and codex entries, for example. I haven't played yet on the hardest of difficulties yet some I can't comment on whether the gameplay panders to the slow witted strategists just yet. But what I have seen amounts to an emphasis on ability usage to maximize synergy and map control. The ability restriction forces you to careful select those whom you go into combat with. For example, specifications toward ice, fire or electric damage mages.   

[Lee T]

Stat allocation is a thing of the past. This is just another of those 80's pen and paper RPG shticks that the video game industry cling to. Pen and Paper RPG have since the 90's gone beyond these stuff and invented a lot of cool and interesting ways besides things like attributes value, class, skill percentages and levels to define and customise a character.

I' m glad they are thinking of letting that go. However I'm sad they did in the typical Bioware style "let's fix it by getting rid of it and not replace it by anything.

The bare minimum would have been to use their skill trees to replace attributes. Having a few select choices modifying attributes is a cope out. Having full fledge new skills based on what attributes used to do and best of all in specialised tree available to all characters whatever their class, would have been far more interesting than what they did.

Remeber that before skill trees we had things as interesting as a precentage to define a capacity to attack. just imagine what you can do with attributes if we go beyond a tedious numerical value.

Unfortunatly I' m guessing the guys who actually make those video games do not have the time to play pen and paper RPG and see all the good stuff those designers invented in the last twenty years.

The days of Basic D&D rules should be long gone by now.

[gingeranna]

Time to face reality, guys.

 

Bioware are never going to implement a deep, stat-driven RPG when their core audience is console. Console gamers, by and large, want wham-bam. They don't want to stare at stat screens, which to be fair would be far too fiddly considering the resolution and the distance to the screen.

 

This will be the very last Bioware game I buy. I believed them fully when they said they'd learned from their DA2 mistakes...

 

http://www.techspot....s-mistakes.html

 

They are liars. There's literally no other word that suits them. DA:I is so far removed from every other DA game that I don't think it can seriously sit within that IP any longer. It's dumbed down, console-centric trash and any RPG gamer, especially those coming from the PC, will be devastated when they see what Bioware have done here.

 

Luckily for me, games like Divinity Original Sin still prove there's a healthy, eager market out there for lovingly created, crafted, deep, immersive, interesting, funny RPG games. 

 

DA:I will never sit in the same league as that. Nor will any other Bioware game from now on in.

 

Edit: And just so that everyone is crystal clear on Biowares statements in the above link...

 

"We've visited message boards, read reviews, and we've gone to events to have direct face to face conversations with some of our most passionate fans. We've been listening, and we will continue to listen," Darrah said. He reassured gamers that Inquisition is in good hands, citing his professional background with Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age: Origins as well as personal interests in D&D and pen and paper games."

[Raven1Fist]

I don't mind not have attrib points to build up, but I do find it annoying that I can't build a warrior mage for example. Yeah sure magicing things is fun, but I like to get in with a bit of hack and slash also. 

I mean classic spell casters can use a sword or knife, and wear light to medium armour. That is how I want to build a character, with true RPG.

[dragonflight288]

attributes increase when we put points in passive abilities. For example, it says "magic + 3" in most of the fire passive abilities.