320 réponses à ce sujet

[Bladenite1481]

I don't see the big deal with attributes since in DA:O (and other RPGs for that matter), players are indirectly forced to invest in attributes that coincide with their class unless they wish to make a character that is the definition of ineffective.

Then you have a limited concept of attribute awareness. Perhaps I want to sacrifice just a bit of Magic power to have more hit points? maybe I want pure Magic and screw the mana, I'll figure that out. It doesn't matter what it is, it used to be my choice to create my character and now i can only create the kind of character that Bioware says is right. Limiting choice is hardly ever a good idea when it comes to an RPG, it limits possibility. Since everything is tied into armor and abilities now, its almost impossible to build something original. Its all cookie cutter, that isn't fun to a lot of people. If it is to you, then more power to you, but I should have the option to build the character I want. 

[movieguyabw]

Then you have a limited concept of attribute awareness. Perhaps I want to sacrifice just a bit of Magic power to have more hit points? maybe I want pure Magic and screw the mana, I'll figure that out. It doesn't matter what it is, it used to be my choice to create my character and now i can only create the kind of character that Bioware says is right. Limiting choice is hardly ever a good idea when it comes to an RPG, it limits possibility. Since everything is tied into armor and abilities now, its almost impossible to build something original. Its all cookie cutter, that isn't fun to a lot of people. If it is to you, then more power to you, but I should have the option to build the character I want. 

 

My original build for Dorian had him with a high Cunning - accomplished through giving him items which boosted that attribute.  My Rogue (despite having high dex and cunning) had relatively high willpower as well.

 

Also, later on in the game you get access to materials so you can craft any armor for any class - the armor still maintains stats usually applied to the original class, though.  So yeah, you can certainly have original builds.  You just have to be a little smart about what you give your character.  Not to mention, with masterwork materials I was able to give Blackwall an armor that gives him Fade Cloak.  You have options.

 

Original PnPs lacked a point buy system as well.  Sure, you rolled for attributes at the start of the game rather than having them all at a flat 10 - but the buying of points is not necessary for character building.

[Fast Jimmy]

I think you're missing the point of a "roleplaying" game.  I wasn't aware that when playing DND one person makes all of the decisions for the entire party.     At least, that's how I usually look at it.  Not saying that your playstyle is invalid - if you want to constantly have control over all of your characters, you should certainly be able to.  Neither playstyle is "wrong" or "invalid" - I just personally find it more inkeeping with the spirit of roleplaying by sticking with one character.  Of course this would be much easier if we had more control over party AI, admittedly.  So I find myself using tactical at the start of most fights anyway, then just going back to my main character.

 

Still, I like the idea of them giving the option to play both ways to players.  Even if I prefer one style of gameplay, doesn't mean I think they should devote their games to one playstyle in the future.

 

Though I assume we'll have to agree to disagree on this matter.

 

I think you are missing the point of a party-based game. It is to play as the party. Most PnP are not a party based experience - you play as a single character (although there certainly are exceptions). So the comparison is invalid - it's not a matter of role playing, its a combat mechanics discussion.

 

Again - look at a party based game that is turn based. Most any old school RPG would apply - whether it be a JRPG Final Fantasy to the Ultima series up through six, or the Gold Box games that let you generate your own entire party, like Wizardry. All party-based games, all rotating combat through each character in a turn. 

 

Not that turn-based is the requirement of a party-based game, but it builds the foundation that each party member is to be used to their maximum effectiveness through the entire fight. RTwP gameplay allowed for that with decent AI options and frequent pausing. But never did you have the ability to barrel roll out of the way of an oncoming attack, so that your big, huge, burly tank could dodge attacks like a nimble thief just because the player had cracked the game's timing an animations or attack speed, nor could a character which was leveled and built to be the most agile character possible be subject to countless blows because the player's reaction speed was too slow.

The second you give preference to controlling an individual character over giving out orders to your party is when the entire structure begins to break down. DA2 did that, mildly, with faster auto-attack damage for players that mashed the controller and the ability to walk around insta-kill attacks like the Rage Demon's assassinate. DA:I takes it to an entirely different level with barrel rolls and jumping.

 

The game rewards the player for using a single character over managing the party. Which would skew it towards the single-character spectrum to begin with, but then it cripples the player's ability to easily and effectively manage the party with near zero tactics, AI that doesn't listen to commands and the tac cam issues. Playing as one character and occasionally checking on your other companions is clearly the preferred style of play for the design, so why not just scrap the entire ability to directly control your other companions, just like Mass Effect does. That was an ARPG which embraced its nature much better and before the end limped its way into being a semi-decent shooter with RPG leveling. 

The DA series should just aspire to that - become a decent whack-a-mole ARPG with leveling trees and equipment. The middle ground is not a good example of either a tactical game or an action one.

[Bladenite1481]

My original build for Dorian had him with a high Cunning - accomplished through giving him items which boosted that attribute.  My Rogue (despite having high dex and cunning) had relatively high willpower as well.

 

Also, later on in the game you get access to materials so you can craft any armor for any class - the armor still maintains stats usually applied to the original class, though.  So yeah, you can certainly have original builds.  You just have to be a little smart about what you give your character.  Not to mention, with masterwork materials I was able to give Blackwall an armor that gives him Fade Cloak.  You have options.

 

Original PnPs lacked a point buy system as well.  Sure, you rolled for attributes at the start of the game rather than having them all at a flat 10 - but the buying of points is not necessary for character building.

Yeah, I did all that. Sno leather Superior Prowler coat with the cowboy inquisitor hat. It's not above my abilities, its not something hard to figure out. It's tedious and again limiting. If I had it within my ability to do what I want from attributes alone then I would have more choice not less. Its not about what I can or can't do, I have no issues circumnavigating the poor design choices at hand. The principle is that I want control of the character and I see no reason why they took that control away. 

 

I don't see what level of argument you have. You like the decision choice, I don't. You can not prove that it's not limiting, all you can do is show how that there are other ways to achieve similar results by manipulating the system and forcing certain decisions. if I had control over ability and didn't need to get cunning only by de-classifying a leather coat then I could maybe chose another color or another resistance, or a plethora of other options. Giving people the attribute points costs nothing to the developers and gives the players a feeling of character control and agency, what is wrong with that? What liberation of mind does it give you to want your decisions to be more constricted?

 

Original PnP's rolled 3d6 or some other prescribe set of die. Some straight down the line and you had no choice of what class to play, then others followed and let you choose your stats so you could play what you wanted. Do you know why they changed that rule? Because they found that people liked control of their characters, even if it was only a psychological thing. So if you are right and you can do whatever you want either way, then what is wrong with giving people the attributes back?  That way both sides are happy. 

[AlanC9]

I think you are missing the point of a party-based game. It is to play as the party. Most PnP are not a party based experience - you play as a single character (although there certainly are exceptions). So the comparison is invalid - it's not a matter of role playing, its a combat mechanics discussion.
  

Missing the point? Perhaps. Or perhaps he doesn't really like the concept of a party-based game in the first place, and controlling the party is something he puts up with because the AI can't coordinate NPC actions and there's no way for the PC to suggest actions to them.

Or is that just me projecting?

[Draninus]

I haven't completely finished a full playthrough yet.  I'm roughly 75 hours into a knight enchanter playthrough and about 10 hours into a 2H warrior playthrough.  So, I'll save my final judgement for the shipped version of this game for when I completely finish a playthrough.

 

However, as of right now, I can say that I started off going "Wow, this is amazing." but have slowly regressed backwards throughout my 85 odd hours with the game.  I think DA:I is an excellent shell of a game.  It's huge with excellent scenery, however unfortunately when you dig down a layer beneath the shiny exterior, you find a mostly bland and shallow experience, in my opinion.  It's a shame that we won't be getting a tool set for this game.  Personally I think this game could be a modder's dream with a toolset.  Perhaps Bioware will take note of many of the issues being brought up both here and in various other places around the net and fix some of them.  I think we are going to be stuck with most of what we have now, however.  Time will tell on that front.

 

I'm still enjoying the experience, just not as much as I enjoyed something like DA:O.  It's perhaps not a completely fair comparison however as the version of DA:O that I immensely enjoyed was one that had been significantly massaged by the modding community.  Primarily with mods such as the advanced tactics, various rules fixpacks, dialogue bug fixes and atmospheric/character creation mods such as Dragon Age Redesigned, Improved Atmosphere, Natural Bodies, Grey Wardens of Ferelden, etc.

[Bladenite1481]

Sacrificing Magic for Constitution makes little sense though since mages are meant to be kept at a distance due to their weakness in close-quarters.  

 

And if one actually tries to make a mage who can take a lot of damage yet is ineffective when attempting to do what they are meant to do, everything, as you wrote, is tied into armour, enchanted jewellry, and other gimmicks in order to compensate for their lack of ability.

Then like I said when someone else wrote this. If it doesn't matter either way and it makes the customer feel better because they feel like they have more control, then why not give it to them?  That way both sides win.

 

I can min/max with the best of them. Its not hard to de-classify armor and wear certain jewelry. However tying it to jewelry, armor and abilities forces those abilities instead of simple attribute choices. It's there, but its clunky and there is no reason for limiting choices. Limiting choices is a poor way to artificially create difficulty. It also limits your aesthetic choices, which may not matter at all to you. But it means a lot to other people. 

[Corto81]

Sacrificing Magic for Constitution makes little sense though since mages are meant to be kept at a distance due to their weakness in close-quarters.  

 

And if one actually tries to make a mage who can take a lot of damage yet is ineffective when attempting to do what they are meant to do, everything, as you wrote, is tied into armour, enchanted jewellry, and other gimmicks in order to compensate for their lack of ability.

 

I don't want to min-max and be funneled into specific choices in an RPG.

 

I want to have freedom to build my character and my class to some degree that feels my own.

 

If I build I weak-DPS, high CON, ineffective mage, that's MY choice. Let me succeed or fail on my own merit.

 

I can't believe there are people defending lack of choice in character and class customization in an RPG lol...

[Zhen Dil Oloth]

I don't see the big deal with attributes since in DA:O (and other RPGs for that matter), players are indirectly forced to invest in attributes that coincide with their class unless they wish to make a character that is the definition of ineffective.

 

I guess you never made a High Dex Demarch of Mask in D&D that could sneak as well as any Rogue???

Imagine a Dual Wielding Rogue with Cleric/Healing spells. \

Nothing ineffective about that.

 

Heck in NWN I made what I dubbed the Super-Rogue.

A high Strength Rogue with just enough Dex for Dual Wielding. Wearing a Chainmail and Dual Wielding Bastard Swords.

 

Again.... nothing ineffective about it. It was a machine.

[Zhen Dil Oloth]

Sacrificing Magic for Constitution makes little sense though since mages are meant to be kept at a distance due to their weakness in close-quarters.  

 

And if one actually tries to make a mage who can take a lot of damage yet is ineffective when attempting to do what they are meant to do, everything, as you wrote, is tied into armour, enchanted jewellry, and other gimmicks in order to compensate for their lack of ability.

 Yes the plan usually IS to keep the Mage at a distance out of harm's way...... but..... sadly things don't always work according to plan.

 

So when things do go wrong and the Knights jump on your Mage and hack and slash him..... or he gets caught in the Dragon's Firebreath........ those extra HPs thanks to a high Con can make all the difference. 

 

In IWD2.... the best Mage I had was a High Con/High Str Half-Orc that was using a Great Axe as opposed to a staff and sling like most Mages.

 

One of the things I loved from 3rdEdition was how you could pretty much create any character you wanted.

 

A High Strength Rogue??

A High Dex Cleric???

A High Con Mage???

 

Lots of options.

[Fast Jimmy]

Missing the point? Perhaps. Or perhaps he doesn't really like the concept of a party-based game in the first place, and controlling the party is something he puts up with because the AI can't coordinate NPC actions and there's no way for the PC to suggest actions to them.

Or is that just me projecting?

 

I'm not sure if that's you projecting or not, but I agree that there are definitely people who are fans of the DA series who put up with the party-based combat part of the design. And now there are fans of the DA series who are having to put up with the increasingly action-based combat part of the design. Both groups are simply putting up with the current design... why not just abandon one over the other so that one of them can be truly good?

[Martanek]

It is not surprising at all to see local console kids enjoy what they find "a deep, rich, engaging RPG experience with so many choices". After all, this game has been designed exclusively for them. I honestly wish all those excited console boyz and gals had played what most of us consider the golden age of RPG era, RPG's with deep gameplay systems and a soul. Looks like the era ended for good with the release of the first DA game as the last gasp.

To me, DA:I seems to be an action-oriented adventure with RPG elements and this modern cinematic feel. Actually, I was thinking of buying DA:I in a discount basket some time later after some major patches have fixed the most striking issues, but the more I read about it, the more I feel disgusted. Is the game really that bad, especially compared to DA:O?

[movieguyabw]

I'm not sure if that's you projecting or not, but I agree that there are definitely people who are fans of the DA series who put up with the party-based combat part of the design. And now there are fans of the DA series who are having to put up with the increasingly action-based combat part of the design. Both groups are simply putting up with the current design... why not just abandon one over the other so that one of them can be truly good?

 

Eh, I personally don't see why they need to choose one over the other.  It's possible to improve upon both systems - unless your argument is that you don't want people to have the option to play a more 'action-geared' style at all.  In that case, not sure what to say.  Bioware has made it pretty clear that they want to give players the option for both.  You might think that's impossible - I personally don't see it that way.

 

Give tactical autoattack, allow players to stack commands, find a way to fix how the camera works in certain areas; those sort of things seem like the main issues people have brought up in regards to tacticam.  As for my playstyle, the only thing I'm really looking for is more options when setting up our party's AI; and possibly enemies with smarter AIs themselves (I almost never see an enemy archer do something like Leaping Shot in order to get away from melee combat - unless they're a boss level character).  I don't really see how that would hamper your playstyle - I imagine you would see those things as an improvement as well.  Then again, what do I know?  *shrug*

[ColGali]

It is not surprising at all to see local console kids enjoy what they find "a deep, rich, engaging RPG experience with so many choices". After all, this game has been designed exclusively for them. I honestly wish all those excited console boyz and gals had played what most of us consider the golden age of RPG era, RPG's with deep gameplay systems and a soul. Looks like the era ended for good with the release of the first DA game as the last gasp.

To me, DA:I seems to be an action-oriented adventure with RPG elements and this modern cinematic feel. Actually, I was thinking of buying DA:I in a discount basket some time later after some major patches have fixed the most striking issues, but the more I read about it, the more I feel disgusted. Is the game really that bad, especially compared to DA:O?

 

I miss those times too. 

 

To answer your question: you probably won't like it. Consider buying a second hand version or borrow it from someone who already finished it.

 

Btw console itself is not to be blamed. It's the gamers who don't want BG2 quality anymore. 

[massive_effect]

I stopped playing after 20 hours, and then a week later I gave it a second chance. I decided to uninstall the game so I don't make that mistake again. This game is not fun in any way whatsoever. The reviewers who gave it 7+ have failed to protect their readers from a boring game.

 

I could point out the problems, but it really comes down two fundamental errors:

 

1) No innovation.

2) Boring ugly characters.

 

I give this a 5/10. (My 5 is a disastrous failure which is similar to a 0, like grade school.)

 

(I played Xbox One version.)

[Bioware-Critic]

They should focus on what they are good at, and just gradually, one game at a time, try and add in new gameplay elements and new stuff. There are so many areas where they are good at and they are simply neglecting them all too often! And instead of focusing on their strength they are trying out tons of new stuff at which they are not good enough at, not proficient enough at just yet and then tell us: „here you go - this will replace everything you know and love about our games from now on - have fun!“ That **** is not polished, not capable to stand on its own two feet! Especially not without giving us what we really want first! We are not given the opportunity to ignore the new stuff if we so desire !!!!! Many of us just do not care about their unfinished experiments and Bioware needs to act responsibly and deal with this immediately. They really have to get this trough their thick skulls, that we are not their BETA-testers and guinea-pigs! We pay 70 Euros - That’s 80 US-Dollars (standard price in Germany) and more for these games. That money I could BURN MORE CREATIVELY elsewhere, Bioware! And they need to explain to EA that you cannot simply wave a „magic wand“ and transform something like the RPG genre into a fully mainstream compatible money machine over night. If AAA RPG’s will advance in this direction, this will take decades, not years. I am convinced of that! You cannot breed chimpanzee’s into human being’s in one or two generations. That SHOULD be obvious! Games like Skyrim often also have a bit of luck on their side. You cannot „plan“ massive success. That’s not possible!

 

(This passage is an excerpt of a VERY LONG review/summary of mine about Inquisition.

I wrote this in a thread called: "Problems I noticed so far with Dragon Age: Inquisition ..." by Lilacs.

If you don't mind reading longer passages give it a try - see if it reflects your stance and feeling towards Inquisition.

Here is the link: http://forum.bioware.../#entry17945693 )

[Gundar3]

Well, I think we can all agree that this game was not released with the "Bioware polish" we've come to expect.

[northsidelunatic]

Doomsayers in full effect. Whatever.

 

This game is freaking amazing and I love it to bits. Great job Bioware and keep up the effort. This game is well worth the wait and I thank you for your continued hard work.

I wish this game had some doomsayers to kill like that one I did back in redcliffe, instead in this game we got drone npc that say the same thing is evrey  city that sound like their on valium

[taranoire]

When's the last time any of you have actually PLAYED Origins? 

Honestly the more time I spend on this forum the more baffled I get. I've never understood the gratuitous backlash towards ME3 and DA2 to begin with, but now even DA:I is apparently a grievous sin against the gaming community? Do you even like video games or is it just a hobby you keep up to fulfill some lost sense of nostalgia you're never going to get back? 

Origins happened. It was a good game. It had flaws. Just like the rest of Bioware's collection. Seriously, do some soul-searching and figure out if the problem is actually just you. 

[Razir-Samus]

When's the last time any of you have actually PLAYED Origins? 

Honestly the more time I spend on this forum the more baffled I get. I've never understood the gratuitous backlash towards ME3 and DA2 to begin with, but now even DA:I is apparently a grievous sin against the gaming community? Do you even like video games or is it just a hobby you keep up to fulfill some lost sense of nostalgia you're never going to get back? 

Origins happened. It was a good game. It had flaws. Just like the rest of Bioware's collection. Seriously, do some soul-searching and figure out if the problem is actually just you. 

WOMANNNNN!! WOMANNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!

 

 

ehem... i'm on the same boat regarding DA2 and ME3, a few features were dumbed down but overall they were still decent experiences that didn't shift too far from what i expected to see in both sequels

 

DA:I is most certainly a sin, they changed far too much and in 5 years what we ended up with was a sub-par action rpg experience with many gutted and outright broken core features

 

I won't take your quip about the problem being "just the complainers" as an insult, because that's just another nail in the coffin, look at any other high profile release and you get the folk that provide negative feedback get mashed into the ground, get called trolls and haters, and for what? this is a meaningless and entirely asinine response to valuable feedback that many of us are passionate about giving, but end up being ignored and get frustrated in return...

 

...and to answer your question, i last played origins just a month before DA:I released, i went through DA:O then DA2 in anticipation of needing a new import character, they were both full experiences that didn't last too long and didn't have too much filler, my honest opinion... you're welcome

[samuelkaine]

Well, I think we can all agree that this game was not released with the "Bioware polish" we've come to expect.

Like DA:O with the day1 DLC and the DLC salesman in your camp, or like DA:2 and its half-dozen repeated dungeons? Or let's take it right back to Baldur's Gate 2 and a bug in the Athkatla cemetry that made it impossible to complete the game. 

 

When was this "Bioware polish" exactly?

 

I'm playing on the PC on a two year old rig. The only trouble I've had is the camera being a bit dodgy. This is one of the most polished games I've ever played. 

[taranoire]

WOMANNNNN!! WOMANNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!

 

 

ehem... i'm on the same boat regarding DA2 and ME3, a few features were dumbed down but overall they were still decent experiences that didn't shift too far from what i expected to see in both sequels

 

DA:I is most certainly a sin, they changed far too much and in 5 years what we ended up with was a sub-par action rpg experience with many gutted and outright broken core features

 

I won't take your quip about the problem being "just the complainers" as an insult, because that's just another nail in the coffin, look at any other high profile release and you get the folk that provide negative feedback get mashed into the ground, get called trolls and haters, and for what? this is a meaningless and entirely asinine response to valuable feedback that many of us are passionate about giving, but end up being ignored and get frustrated in return...

 

...and to answer your question, i last played origins just a month before DA:I released, i went through DA:O then DA2 in anticipation of needing a new import character, they were both full experiences that didn't last too long and didn't have too much filler, my honest opinion... you're welcome

 

I enjoyed DA:I, even despite the faults that have been well-outlined here. I wouldn't call it sub-par by any means, though I agree that it isn't what we were promised. It's GOTY quality only because there really weren't any other contenders. I think I'm just concerned because the general attitude in the gaming community lately seems to be that if it a game isn't absolutely perfect, it should be damned and cut down. You didn't see that kind of quality demand even ten years ago. 

 

If DA:O came out today, it would be picked apart and destroyed. That we hold it in such high esteem (which, don't get me wrong, it certainly deserves) seems to come from a place of nostalgia more than anything. 

 

I apologize for coming across as if I don't think feedback, negative or not, is valuable. I'm just a little concerned about what it means for the industry as a whole, and for Bioware especially. Because they did listen to the forum consensus on DA2 and ME3, and they overcompensated trying to "fix" some of those issues--which is where some complaints about DA:I come in, such as that it was "too safe" (and I wholeheartedly agree with that). 

[Gundar3]

Like DA:O with the day1 DLC and the DLC salesman in your camp, or like DA:2 and its half-dozen repeated dungeons? Or let's take it right back to Baldur's Gate 2 and a bug in the Athkatla cemetry that made it impossible to complete the game. 

 

When was this "Bioware polish" exactly?

 

I'm playing on the PC on a two year old rig. The only trouble I've had is the camera being a bit dodgy. This is one of the most polished games I've ever played. 

 

Then consider yourself ridiculously lucky, or play some other games.  Check out the bug reports thread sometime.  Just for myself, my Skyhold was all over the place buggy.  I had the DX error until changed to fullscreen windowed, seen my characters spawn in the air and take huge damage exploring... This game has had terribad bugs - dont even get me started on the "post game" bugs.

 

The "Bioware polish" also takes into account things like fleshed out features.  Its not just "can you play it to completion" which is a ludicrously low bar for ANY company.  People expected things like Skyhold, strongholds, and the crafting to be fleshed out.  Not this "its technically in the game so... have fun!" design that we got.

 

People go on and on about the keyboard bugs, but I dont know what they expect for a "fix".  Combat on PC was designed with an mmo concept in mind.  Either you like mmo combat or you don't, so I don't know what there is to fix.