848 réponses à ce sujet

[Darkly Tranquil]

Yes, because Origins wasn't slow and the companion AI's weren't stupid...

Slow is not necessarily a bad thing. Turn based combat is even slower, but can produce some fantastic tactical gameplay. All increasing speed does is move the focus of gameplay away from thought and strategy and towards reflexes. That's fine in action games, but this is meant to be a tactical RPG, isn't it?

Also, in the previous games you could set up tactics to offset the worst of the AI's stupidity by giving them tactics lines to respond if they were being attacked, to move way from danger, etc., all of which DAI lacks. The dumb AI wouldn't be so infuriating if we could make proper tactics scripts. Bioware's mistake was automating so much of what was previously customisable, and not improving the AI to take up the slack. If they couldn't make the AI better, they should have kept the old systems in place to help us wrangle the dumb AI. Instead they ditched the manual controls, and made the AI even dumber than before.

[AlanC9]

Even if my 1st paragraph were just what you say it is, you wouldn't be right, since only the fact that this game is not 2d is a significant difference in control and gameplay flow. But I'm sure you know this, despite your words. You conveniently forget to mention the other point, though, because you know it weakens even deeper your statement.

Even if In Exile knows that, I don't. How does 3D change the control and gameplay flow?
 

Stat allocation had a deep impact because it was scarce and only at the beginning -or with some very rare items. Inquistion revolves around artificial stat allocation with gear. The difference is radical, and relevant when you're trying to compare BG1 and Inquisition as similar, since both systems affect dramatically gameplay. The only "half truth" in that comparison is that none of the two games allow direct stat allocation ("half" because BG allowed some degree of direct allocation at the beginning).

I can see some truth in this, since DAI is about crafting and talent choice while BG1 is about loot. (I can't bring myself to add "and beginning stat allocation" since that's a fairly brain-dead process in AD&D.)

That final statement is plainly false. I played BG1 and BG2 multiple times, and always with clerics. And healing magic was essential, and affected the gameplay flow radically. Abusing rest or feeling that healing magic is not relevant depends mostly on your gameplay style. But, as before, you know this already, I'm pretty sure of it.

I'm not really sure what the substance of the dispute here is. Both BG1 and DAI are like each other in that you have to worry about taking too much damage over the course of the mission, although you don't have to worry about it too much since there are easy escape hatches. Obviously they achieve this in different ways, but both are even more different from DAO and DA2, where you don't have to worry about this at all.

[AlanC9]

Slow is not necessarily a bad thing. Turn based combat is even slower, but can produce some fantastic tactical gameplay. All increasing speed does is move the focus of gameplay away from thought and strategy and towards reflexes. That's fine in action games, but this is meant to be a tactical RPG, isn't it?
.

I don't follow this. I've still got a pause key, don't I?

[Cyonan]

Slow is not necessarily a bad thing. Turn based combat is even slower, but can produce some fantastic tactical gameplay. All increasing speed does is move the focus gameplay away from thought and strategy and towards reflexes. That's fine in action games, but this is meant to be a tactical RPG, isn't it?

Also, in the previous games you could set up tactics to offset the worst of the AI's stupidity by giving them tactics lines to respond if they were being attacked, to move way from danger, etc., all of which DAI lacks. The dumb AI wouldn't be so infuriating if we could make proper tactics scripts. Bioware's mistake was automating so much of what was previously customisable, and not improving the AI to take up the slack. If they couldn't make the AI better, they should have kept the old systems in place to help us wrangle the dumb AI. Instead they ditched the manual controls, and made the AI even dumber than before.

 

As much as I'd like to see the tactics menu return, in the previous games I feel like it kind of took away from the whole "thought and strategy" thing since it made my companions all able to play themselves just fine.

 

At that point I could do the combat in Origins like I was playing WoW with less abilities(kind of ironic, considering the complaints around here right now =P).

[In Exile]

Yes, it's playable. Not so enjoyable, but I don't play these games for the combat anyway. I started out at hard, but despite fighting the UI more than the enemies, and being confused all the time, I haven't died yet. I switch between tactical and press-R as needed.

But they really should fix the PC-interface.

I've never had to press R to attack on PC (or the mouse button). I switch to RT "action" to trigger an ability and then switch right back to tactical mode to have the characters auto-attack.

My problem with the UI is more the AI and how I can't micromanage effectively than stuff like auto-attack which I've never had an issue with so far.

[In Exile]

Even if my 1st paragraph were just what you say it is, you wouldn't be right, since only the fact that this game is not 2d is a significant difference in control and gameplay flow. But I'm sure you know this, despite your words. You conveniently forget to mention the other point, though, because you know it weakens even deeper your statement.

The mechanics are different and that's irrelevant for the comparison? Wich comparison? You clearly don't understand what comparison I was judging. Stat allocation had a deep impact because it was scarce and only at the beginning -or with some very rare items. Inquistion revolves around artificial stat allocation with gear. The difference is radical, and relevant when you're trying to compare BG1 and Inquisition as similar, since both systems affect dramatically gameplay. The only "half truth" in that comparison is that none of the two games allow direct stat allocation ("half" because BG allowed some degree of direct allocation at the beginning).

That final statement is plainly false. I played BG1 and BG2 multiple times, and always with clerics. And healing magic was essential, and affected the gameplay flow radically. Abusing rest or feeling that healing magic is not relevant depends mostly on your gameplay style. But, as before, you know this already, I'm pretty sure of it.

I don't get how exploration in 3D is substantially different. In any event the criticism that the game has a z-axis is a pretty strange one. I would agree that it changed gameplay if it mattered in combat but its exploration only (at least as far as I've played).

The stat allocation comparison is meaningless because D&D is very loot driven. This is especially true when we're taking about 2e vs. 3e and we have the differential leveling curves for different classes.

Warriors and thieves (and the derivative kits from BG2 or TuTu or warrior-like classes such as Paladins and Rangers) are driven by loot.

Stat allocation matters in BG1 and BG2 because of the base bonuses, but there's no choice. It's just a choice between power gaming and not power gaming. I *really* miss stat allocation and I love systems like Fallout's SPECIAL but acting like the stat allocation itself is a big deal is silly.

I initially took your criticism to be that DAI doesn't have dice roll combat which is why I dismissed it as I did.

As for healing, again, you're wrong. In BG2 clerics were necessary and spells like "Heal" made a huge difference. In BG1 cleric class couldn't heal in combat effectively until around lv. 5 and even then it was very minor given the size of the party unless you had multiple clerics or abused the rest.

A level 6 cleric had what - 3-5 cure [X] wound spells? All Vancian casting is functionally identical to using items. To pretend there's a difference here is silly.

[Lebanese Dude]

 

At that point I could do the combat in Origins like I was playing WoW with less abilities(kind of ironic, considering the complaints around here right now =P).

 

The current iteration is decent enough. Most players simply used tactics to tell allies to keep sustained abilities up, cast certain abilities(typically at random), or drink potions when a resource pool is depleted.

So it's sensible to make the UI simpler for the majority's benefit, while encouraging those that avoided tactics to use them.

 

However that alienated some players who enjoy the tactic set up and seeing them play out more than directly controlling the combat itself. I see the appeal, but I also can see how that system can override difficulty.

 

Given the less forgiving nature of DAI in terms of recovery, I can see why reducing the complexity of tactics is a favor to those who were incapable of assembling perfectly synchronized conditions. Having your ally mis-cast an AOE spell when friendly fire is on has much more dire consequences than in previous iterations, for example.

 

Still, I don't see why they had to cut it out completely.The current system doesn't really allow you to control conditions enough.

There should be a sub-list on every ability with slots for extra conditions for those who want to use them.

 

It would be a good middle-ground I think.

[CronoDragoon]

Slow is not necessarily a bad thing. Turn based combat is even slower, but can produce some fantastic tactical gameplay. All increasing speed does is move the focus of gameplay away from thought and strategy and towards reflexes. That's fine in action games, but this is meant to be a tactical RPG, isn't it?

 

True turn-based combat is as slow or fast as the player wants it to be. The "slowness" of a player waiting to decide on a move is fundamentally different from deciding on a move and then the action taking far too long to take effect, which is the issue in Origins.

[ironhorse384]

This thread reminds me of when I first started a new game of Origins. Daddy Cousland had just told me to go find Fergus, so I walk out of the room to look for him, only for the game to zoom all the way out into this weird overhead view that made the game look like I was playing with lincoln logs.

 

I immediately thought to myself, "This is stupid. Why would anyone want to play like this?" I zoomed back in and then proceeded to completely forget about that view, all the way until after I had finished DA2, when I came here and people were complaining that it was gone.

 

Of course, objectively speaking, I can now understand the value that people who want that kind of view see in it. I just feel no desire whatsoever to ever play a game that way. If Bioware didn't include it in DA4 I wouldn't miss it at all.

I think having more choice is a good thing and having less of it is bad. For example, I chose to "hide helmets" because I like the way it looks and I don't like seeing ears clipping through the hoods. Some people might like having the helmets on and that's ok too. I certainly wouldn't begrudge having features in the game that I don't intend to use as long as I have the ability to turn stuff on and off. At the end of the day having the choice to customize the game to your individual playstyle is decidedly better then not having any choice at all.

[FKA_Servo]

I think it's time for us DAO lovers to admit the sad truth. BW is pandering to the mainstream. Every game they have made since ME1 and DAO has been pushing in that direction. With EA at the helm, this was bound to happen. So the beauty that was BW, games that were immersive and fun have been relegated to the realm of mainstream, made as action oriented as possible to keep up with current trends. They will never look back. They've proven this over several titles in as many years. No point in us hoping, wishing, praying or begging for the games we loved. This is the new BW direction. It works for the masses as you can see.

 

My disc is broken and in the trash. I'm done. Right now I'm just letting go of it - of wanting to play and find the fun that these other people see when I keep feeling like it is missing some key ingredient. Such a bummer. I played this game, started over so many times and only finished once and that was just to get it over with. There was some fun mixed in there but having to trudge through all the not fun stuff to get to it was tedious. I can feel it in my gut now as I think of it. Yes, I think of the fun stuff like killing dragons, giants, taking keeps, but that's so little of the game. I have to grind through the hinterlands first. Then grind through the storm coast. Haven was fun. Being under attack was fun. But right after? Not so much. I really wanted to love this game and enjoy it as much as I have others but as much as I tried, in the end, I always came to a point where I felt like I just couldn't be bothered anymore. It's like trying to find the good in a ragingly drunk partner. Sure, he's nice when he's sober. That just isn't very often. Most of the time dealing with him is a tedious thing. But still, he has some nice qualities. Sad thing is they are only present when he is sober, which again, isn't often. He keeps promising he will do better, be better. He is so believable until you realize you've heard it all before - that he cares, that he's looking into AA, that he's thinking about therapy... so many promises but so few ever kept. But you hope. You remember the good times. They weren't imagined. They were real. You cling to them and want to believe what you once had will return. You look into his eyes and try so hard to see if that person is still there but you've got no proof that he is. But you want him to be so you try and try and try until one day you make the sad realization that he's gone. Then you realize he's not even concerned about you at all. To make matters worse you discover he's been hanging out with his new friends who actually like this side of him. They think it's great! Reckless, drunk guy is awesome for them. They don't have to care too much about him. They just hang with him for the fun until they're bored or someone else comes along. And he likes that kind of attention. So you let go of the hope and settle into the fact that something that was once really amazing is long since gone and you've been hanging in there all this time while he's been lying to your face and headed out with a whole different crowd, more concerned about them than you.

 

This is hysterically over dramatic.

 

Some people who have been Bioware fans for the better part of two decades do seem to love the game, though. So YMMV, of course. It's not at all clear that they're "pandering" to any "masses" in particular, however.

[Salaya]

As for healing, again, you're wrong. In BG2 clerics were necessary and spells like "Heal" made a huge difference. In BG1 cleric class couldn't heal in combat effectively until around lv. 5 and even then it was very minor given the size of the party unless you had multiple clerics or abused the rest.

A level 6 cleric had what - 3-5 cure [X] wound spells? All Vancian casting is functionally identical to using items. To pretend there's a difference here is silly.

 

You keep saying "abusing rest", and I don't think that's really a matter of discussion -or better, an important matter of discussion for this argument. The moment you say you could rest like hell to make healing relevant, you are assuming that there is relevant healing magic inside the game. Whether this is abusing, metagaming or whatever name you like... well, it is irrelevant. There is no analogue situation in Inquisition, also -you could "abuse" resting, but you can't cast healing magic for doing so.

 

I accept, though, that resting like there is no tomorrow in Inquistion have similar gameplay effects: rest like hell results in effective/relevant healing methods.

[AllThatJazz]

I think it's time for us DAO lovers to admit the sad truth. BW is pandering to the mainstream. Every game they have made since ME1 and DAO has been pushing in that direction. With EA at the helm, this was bound to happen. So the beauty that was BW, games that were immersive and fun have been relegated to the realm of mainstream, made as action oriented as possible to keep up with current trends. They will never look back. They've proven this over several titles in as many years. No point in us hoping, wishing, praying or begging for the games we loved. This is the new BW direction. It works for the masses as you can see.

 

My disc is broken and in the trash. I'm done. Right now I'm just letting go of it - of wanting to play and find the fun that these other people see when I keep feeling like it is missing some key ingredient. Such a bummer. I played this game, started over so many times and only finished once and that was just to get it over with. There was some fun mixed in there but having to trudge through all the not fun stuff to get to it was tedious. I can feel it in my gut now as I think of it. Yes, I think of the fun stuff like killing dragons, giants, taking keeps, but that's so little of the game. I have to grind through the hinterlands first. Then grind through the storm coast. Haven was fun. Being under attack was fun. But right after? Not so much. I really wanted to love this game and enjoy it as much as I have others but as much as I tried, in the end, I always came to a point where I felt like I just couldn't be bothered anymore. It's like trying to find the good in a ragingly drunk partner. Sure, he's nice when he's sober. That just isn't very often. Most of the time dealing with him is a tedious thing. But still, he has some nice qualities. Sad thing is they are only present when he is sober, which again, isn't often. He keeps promising he will do better, be better. He is so believable until you realize you've heard it all before - that he cares, that he's looking into AA, that he's thinking about therapy... so many promises but so few ever kept. But you hope. You remember the good times. They weren't imagined. They were real. You cling to them and want to believe what you once had will return. You look into his eyes and try so hard to see if that person is still there but you've got no proof that he is. But you want him to be so you try and try and try until one day you have the sad realization that he's gone. Then you realize he's not even concerned about you at all. To make matters worse you discover he's been hanging out with his new friends who actually like this side of him. They think it's great! Reckless, drunk guy is awesome for them. They don't have to care too much about him. They just hang with him for the fun until they're bored or someone else comes along. And he likes that kind of attention. So you let go of the hope and settle into the fact that something that was once really amazing is long since gone and you've been hanging in there all this time while he's been lying to your face and headed out with a whole different crowd, more concerned about them than you.

You broke your disc? Seriously? Isn't that a touch extreme? Though I have to say, the rest of your post also comes off as a bit hyperbolic.

 

Also, I became a Bioware fan in 1998 with the release of Baldur's Gate (good for me, right?). I tend to play few games, mostly niche stuff (RPGs, point and click adventures, Indie titles) and only the occasional massive hitter if there's a decent narrative in a world I like the look of (the Arkham series and Bioshock are the two most recent series), so I'm not sure what 'masses' I'm a member of to be pandered to. Nonetheless, I'm loving DAI, it's one of my top Bioware games. I find it both immersive and fun. Please don't assume the demographic that this game appeals to - it will (as both you and I have shown) simply appeal to some individuals and not others. 

[dreamgazer]

I think it's time for us DAO lovers to admit the sad truth. BW is pandering to the mainstream. Every game they have made since ME1 and DAO has been pushing in that direction.

Since? Mass Effect ditched KOTOR's gameplay for true third-person shooter controls, which fits perfectly with the "pandering to the mainstream" idea. Hell, doesn't BioWare taking on the Star Wars universe instead of their own lore classify as "pandering to the mainstream" too?

[ironhorse384]

It would be nice to rest in the wilderness with the threat of ambush. You now have your tent which eliminates all possibility of being harassed, unless of course, you include respawns but that too can be mitigated when you pacify an area.

[In Exile]

You keep saying "abusing rest", and I don't think that's really a matter of discussion -or better, an important matter of discussion for this argument. The moment you say you could rest like hell to make healing relevant, you are assuming that there is relevant healing magic inside the game. Whether this is abusing, metagaming or whatever name you like... well, it is irrelevant. There is no analogue situation in Inquisition, also -you could "abuse" resting, but you can't cast healing magic for doing so.

I accept, though, that resting like there is no tomorrow in Inquistion have similar gameplay effects: rest like hell results in effective/relevant healing methods.

I keep saying abusing rests because of Vancian casting. If you don't rest, then you have a maximum of like .. 12 unique heals with one high level (circa 7) cleric in BG1. You have more than that with one character with potions alone in DAI right in the hinterlands (8 potions + 5 regen potions). Even if you count healing potions in BG1 - which give you more healing - the difference is not great.

The only way to get constant healing in BG1 is very frequent rest to restore spells.

[Paul E Dangerously]

This is hysterically over dramatic.

 

Some people who have been Bioware fans for the better part of two decades do seem to love the game, though. So YMMV, of course. It's not at all clear that they're "pandering" to any "masses" in particular, however.

 

I've been a Bioware fan since the original Baldur's Gate, and I loved DA2 and ME3 - for what they were. That doesn't stop me realizing that they should have been better, and in Dragon Age's case, the complete abandonment of any sort of complexity is a bad thing. If you don't mind the horde of restrictions it's probably not that bad of an issue, but for those of us who do..

 

I really do like DAI, it's just..fulfilling in all sorts of ways. I can't help but think "Origins did this better" or even "DA2 did this better" with so many elements.

[sidspacewalker]

I would fully support this.

[WillieStyle]

I don't know why people keep insisting the AI is dumb. I've finished the game on Nigtmare as a dual dagger rogue while almost never controlling my party members. I occasionally used the "hold position", "attack my target", and "disengage" commands. But otherwise, the AI was smart enough that I didn't need to micro manage it.

Hell, if anything, my party members were way too quick on the draw with their detonators. I remember screaming "damn it Dorian! Letting me detonate frozen enemies with Deathblow will do a lot more damage than you doing it with dispel." But I'm too lazy to manually control their dispel usage, so I just took it as a fun game to see who got to detonate the frozen targets fastest.

The only exceptions were telling non-tanks not to stand in front of pride demons, telling ranged to run in during dragon wing buffets, and telling ranged to spread out while fighting lightening dragons. Also, I had to interrupt the despair demons wails because I couldn't always rely on party members to have interrups off of cool down.

Also, Pro Tip:
The AI isn't always great about moving out of the fire. But it is fantastic about using its "get out of trouble" buttons. Give mages Fade Step and/or Fade Cloak and watch their survivability skyrocket.

P.P.S.
A lot of the time, when people complain about party members dying, the real problem is that your dps sucks. Enemy rogues and mages are very dangerous. On Nightmare, they need to be blown up ASAP. If you let them live for minutes, they will reck your party. And it will be your fault (assuming that you're a dps).

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I would have loved it, if Dragon Age had continued in the vein of Origins. No doubt many would have.

 

But the truth is, that ship has sailed. Within the framework of the way things are now, the best we can do, is encourage them to do the best work they can, with the direction that they're going in. Returning to Origins is no longer a realistic possibility.

 

(I'm honestly not sure of OP is referring to ret-conning, or to the nature of the adventure world/storytelling, but I think my answer applies in either case.)

[In Exile]

I don't know why people keep insisting the AI is dumb. I've finished the game on Nigtmare as a dual dagger rogue while almost never controlling my party members. I occasionally used the "hold position", "attack my target", and "disengage" commands. But otherwise, the AI was smart enough that I didn't need to micro manage it.

Hell, if anything, my party members were way too quick on the draw with their detonators. I remember screaming "damn it Dorian! Letting me detonate frozen enemies with Deathblow will do a lot more damage than you doing it with dispel." But I'm too lazy to manually control their dispel usage, so I just took it as a fun game to see who got to detonate the frozen targets fastest.

The only exceptions were telling non-tanks not to stand in front of pride demons, telling ranged to run in during dragon wing buffets, and telling ranged to spread out while fighting lightening dragons. Also, I had to interrupt the despair demons wails because I couldn't always rely on party members to have interrups off of cool down.

Also, Pro Tip:
The AI isn't always great about moving out of the fire. But it is fantastic about using its "get out of trouble" buttons. Give mages Fade Step and/or Fade Cloak and watch their survivability skyrocket.

P.P.S.
A lot of the time, when people complain about party members dying, the real problem is that your dps sucks. Enemy rogues and mages are very dangerous. On Nightmare, they need to be blown up ASAP. If you let them live for minutes, they will reck your party. And it will be your fault (assuming that you're a dps).

People really have trouble with the AI targeting on non-even terrain where the AI will rush up in melee range. The problem is that they don't have the emergency escape button. I've had Solas run up like an idiot and then escape with Fade Step pretty often.

[Googleness]

I'll give my 2 cents.

In origins I enjoyed the game and played many times over and over just to see the different plot outcomes and the different classes I can play.

 

In Inquisition I enjoyed the game but it's so full of clutter and fillers and the plot is so much framed and not opened to changes like you could make in different bioware games I didn't had a 2nd playthrough.

I'll probably wait for last dlc in the future to be released before I'll have another go but for now I'll stick to the mp mode.

[ironhorse384]

Also, Pro Tip:
The AI isn't always great about moving out of the fire. But it is fantastic about using its "get out of trouble" buttons. Give mages Fade Step and/or Fade Cloak and watch their survivability skyrocket.

.

I'm also playing a dw rogue, nightmare with ff on, and I've yet to see Dorian use fade step. It could be that I'm otherwise engaged and haven't noticed but what I have seen is him and Sera for that matter get to close to the melee combat and have had to take control myself and move them out of harms way. At first I had them set to follow the tank then I changed it to follow themselves. Do you have fade step and or evade set to preferred? Right now I find that they just stand there in the face of melee.

[Sondermann]

 

 

 

I'm also playing a dw rogue, nightmare with ff on, and I've yet to see Dorian use fade step. It could be that I'm otherwise engaged and haven't noticed but what I have seen is him and Sera for that matter get to close to the melee combat and have had to take control myself and move them out of harms way. At first I had them set to follow the tank then I changed it to follow themselves. Do you have fade step and or evade set to preferred? Right now I find that they just stand there in the face of melee.

I think "follow" is the more aggressive choice so I set my ranged characters to "defend self" though I agree that they nevertheless often get too close. Oh well, it's not as though they'd make winning the fights impossible by that behaviour. 

Spoiler for mage quest before Skyhold:

Spoiler

Though I remember the time you are sent to the future with Dorian and in that first encounter with the Venatori he used up all but the two health potions that were set to be reserved. And the first resupply crate is far away in that dungeon...Was fun though :-)