46 réponses à ce sujet

[Lukas Trevelyan]

Because everything in the pc version smells like it's made to be played with controller, there aren't even tooltips on the goddam skills on your actionbar, how many pc games don't have em? literally none, except this one.If this is not a port then what is it? As it sure as hell isn't a  true "PC version".

The term 'console port' is infuriating because you're discrediting those who spent hundreds of hours coding the hell out of the game in order to provide graphics ranging from low to ultra; which in no way is easy, making the game look and function as best they can to work on PC. Basically, game having better controls for consoles =/= console port. 

[zeypher]

I disagree with the op, im fine with the combat in this game. I only wish the tactic system had more settings like ranged melee, passive, agressive etc.

[Razir-Samus]

I disagree with the op, im fine with the combat in this game. I only wish the tactic system had more settings like ranged melee, passive, agressive etc.

you mean... like we had in the previous games!

 

that's what the complaint is all about, because they simply gutted a system that was working perfectly fine for no real reason

 

oh it's fine... fine is generally something said with indifference, so you don't think the combat is working well!

[X Equestris]

If you ask me, Origins combat was excruciating. I think DAI found a happy medium between Origins and DA2 combat wise, and I am, for the most part, happy with it.

[errantknight]

they won't, or can't... take your pick

 

they have our money, they're focusing on fixing trivial sensationalist issues instead of the major ones that get in the way of enjoying the game

This is unfair. They listened to complaints about DA2 and made a much better game. The problem is, they're now trying to please 2 groups of gamers who have little in common, a problem they created for themselves with DA2. We llikely won't get the full origins system back, but if we we make a reasoned argument for it, we might get the companion ungrouping/hold position controls, full tactics and real isometric view back. The combat willl probably stay faster than many of us would prefer, but perhaps a middle ground can be found between this and origins. We may never get magic that feels as much like it's spell based as origins, but perhaps we can get less sillly animations and staffs that return to being a focus rather than a gun. In other words, the action fans can't be left in the cold, but there may be ways that the tactical rpg fans can feel less chillly.. Here, they gave us a veneer of Origins combat over action combat as opposed to the entirely action combat of DA2. We could do some of it, but it was too incomplete to be really useful. Give us Origins combat with a veneer of action.

[SulferCZ]

The term 'console port' is infuriating because you're discrediting those who spent hundreds of hours coding the hell out of the game in order to provide graphics ranging from low to ultra; which in no way is easy, making the game look and function as best they can to work on PC. Basically, game having better controls for consoles =/= console port. 

 

I guess you refer to Star Wars: Force unleashe port from console for PC. But I don't think there is talk about programmers did bad job or that they didn't put enough effort into the game. Main problem is even if you get used to controls on PC there is still lack of real Tactic Camera, Custom tactics, smart AI for companions and some life facilitating control tweeks such as posibility to click-to-move-with-mouse without being forced to tactic camera.

 

You can look at it like you want, but it still looks like console port without these features even if it's not precisly what console-port means like you said. If I should put example what it feels palying DAO and DAI on PC, so all console players could understand, it would be like if you had to hold Select button on your PS controller for movement...

[SulferCZ]

This is unfair. They listened to complaints about DA2 and made a much better game. The problem is, they're now trying to please 2 groups of gamers who have little in common, a problem they created for themselves with DA2. We llikely won't get the full origins system back, but if we we make a reasoned argument for it, we might get the companion ungrouping/hold position controls, full tactics and real isometric view back. The combat willl probably stay faster than many of us would prefer, but perhaps a middle ground can be found between this and origins. We may never get magic that feels as much like it's spell based as origins, but perhaps we can get less sillly animations and staffs that return to being a focus rather than a gun. In other words, the action fans can't be left in the cold, but there may be ways that the tactical rpg fans can feel less chillly.. Here, they gave us a veneer of Origins combat over action combat as opposed to the entirely action combat of DA2. We could do some of it, but it was too incomplete to be really useful. Give us Origins combat with a veneer of action.

 

DAI combat is nice with Guard and Barrier and tactic potential. Animation is just animation but control and AI is dumb and you die mostly because you don't have requested button or good way to control your party instead the game was hard to play.Combat doesn't have to be slow and without grace, it needs to be flowing without obstacles. Obstacles can be unbalanced builds, enemies, buggs, etc and in this case it's lack of way to control your party like you want.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

I guess you refer to Star Wars: Force unleashe port from console for PC. But I don't think there is talk about programmers did bad job or that they didn't put enough effort into the game. Main problem is even if you get used to controls on PC there is still lack of real Tactic Camera, Custom tactics, smart AI for companions and some life facilitating control tweeks such as posibility to click-to-move-with-mouse without being forced to tactic camera.

 

You can look at it like you want, but it still looks like console port without these features even if it's not precisly what console-port means like you said. If I should put example what it feels palying DAO and DAI on PC, so all console players could understand, it would be like if you had to hold Select button on your PS controller for movement...

I'm sorry but when I'm playing in an "action camera" I expect action controls, that means no point to click, no auto attack, no auto-loot. Tactical Camera is very real albeit bad but they will address it in a future patch. AI is smart enough considering how limited the options you have, removing advanced tactics was a flawed design choice and most probably has nothing to do with consoles and more to do with the focus on action gameplay, I do hope they add it if possible. 

Again these features have little to do with consoles and more to do with the design decisions that were made in order to balance the action part of the game, with the strategic part. Splitting them up may have complicated matters a bit but I don't work at Bioware and I have no idea what their plans/ statistics/ capabilities are so...

[errantknight]

DAI combat is nice with Guard and Barrier and tactic potential. Animation is just animation but control and AI is dumb and you die mostly because you don't have requested button or good way to control your party instead the game was hard to play.Combat doesn't have to be slow and without grace, it needs to be flowing without obstacles. Obstacles can be unbalanced builds, enemies, buggs, etc and in this case it's lack of way to control your party like you want.

To agree with you entirely, I'd have to think that Origins combat was slow and without grace, which I don't. The 2 hander was too slow, yes, but I think the rest needed only minor tweaking. This is what I mean when I say that they now have 2 groups of fans who want opposite things. Finding a balance is problematic, and I don't think we're there yet, although it's getting a whole lot better.

[otis0310]

removing the combat tactics and behaviors we had was an unnecessary backhanded method of dumbing the game down for a mystery audience (not the consoles as they also enjoyed the tactics systems of the previous titles if i'm not mistaken), it's all a bit bemusing, none of the changes pushed forward make sense, none of them were asked for, it's like they jumped to the extreme at every possible angle

 

 

I played this game on a controller and on the kb/m and to be hoentst, I have no idea who they were targetting this game for.  It is like they wanted to turn the franchise into an arcade game in order to bring in the action fans.   I mean this game has a reputation for being a complex rpg with tactical combat, the console users know this as well as we do.  So I honestly doubt the decision was to appeal to consoles as much as it was some mystery audience that would never be interested in this game anyways.

 

Anyone who has a long memory might remember the Ultimas, best selling RPGs of the 80s and 90s.  EA tried to turn them into a generic action game with Ultima 8.  The result is that it pissed off the consumers who didin't want to play an action game. It also failed to bring in new customers which, combined with it being rushed, led to a huge drop in sales.  They ended up making one last attempt at an Ultima and then cancelled the whole franchise thinking nobobdy wanted to play that type of game.

 

They are doing the same thing here.  This game, like Ultima, has a reputation and people know whether or not they would like the game based on the reputation.  Changing the game to appeal to new audience at this point is futile, it will not change the reputation of the previous games, and if they didn't like what the previous games offered they won't like this one.  What was EA thinking, that if they made it more action oriented people who like Call of Duty will buy this?   Why would they buy a game that has a reputation for having a combat system they don't like when they could just go buy another shooter instead?

 

EA is repeating it's own mistake here.  Changing a well established RPG to be a generic action game. They are even getting the same results, making people upset over it.  And they might end up having the same long term effect, killing their own franchise.

[mLIQUID]

commands fail because you fail to establish a confirmed target. the AI attack at will, but to direct a skill you need a target. You can't move party members out of a logical range. You want to fight dragons from another zipcode that's a personal issue. if you want to keep AI from gathering on your position turn off the targeting, lol.... hold position. Sounds like nobody can be bothered with trying. 6 months from now they'll be 100 videos with exact ways to do everything then everyone has to eat these words. Most likely they'll be on to the next game that's too "broken" for them to deal with.

[Nerevar-as]

I'm not crazy about the thought of going back to Origin's fight system no matter how much I like the game for various reasons.

 

"Everyday I'm shuffling, shuffling"

Preferable to everyday I´m reloading, reloading, becuase the suffling is still around, only this time the mechanics mean you´ll die for not connecting in time.

[Nerevar-as]

 

 

 

I played this game on a controller and on the kb/m and to be hoentst, I have no idea who they were targetting this game for.  It is like they wanted to turn the franchise into an arcade game in order to bring in the action fans.   I mean this game has a reputation for being a complex rpg with tactical combat, the console users know this as well as we do.  So I honestly doubt the decision was to appeal to consoles as much as it was some mystery audience that would never be interested in this game anyways.

 

Anyone who has a long memory might remember the Ultimas, best selling RPGs of the 80s and 90s.  EA tried to turn them into a generic action game with Ultima 8.  The result is that it pissed off the consumers who didin't want to play an action game. It also failed to bring in new customers which, combined with it being rushed, led to a huge drop in sales.  They ended up making one last attempt at an Ultima and then cancelled the whole franchise thinking nobobdy wanted to play that type of game.

 

They are doing the same thing here.  This game, like Ultima, has a reputation and people know whether or not they would like the game based on the reputation.  Changing the game to appeal to new audience at this point is futile, it will not change the reputation of the previous games, and if they didn't like what the previous games offered they won't like this one.  What was EA thinking, that if they made it more action oriented people who like Call of Duty will buy this?   Why would they buy a game that has a reputation for having a combat system they don't like when they could just go buy another shooter instead?

 

EA is repeating it's own mistake here.  Changing a well established RPG to be a generic action game. They are even getting the same results, making people upset over it.  And they might end up having the same long term effect, killing their own franchise.

 

You are assuming the people in charge know how gamers think. It´s like with movie studios, they have no ****ing idea but think they do. Have a look at Larian´s blog old entries, are very inlluminating and in a way chilling.

[SulferCZ]

I'm sorry but when I'm playing in an "action camera" I expect action controls, that means no point to click, no auto attack, no auto-loot. Tactical Camera is very real albeit bad but they will address it in a future patch. AI is smart enough considering how limited the options you have, removing advanced tactics was a flawed design choice and most probably has nothing to do with consoles and more to do with the focus on action gameplay, I do hope they add it if possible. 

Again these features have little to do with consoles and more to do with the design decisions that were made in order to balance the action part of the game, with the strategic part. Splitting them up may have complicated matters a bit but I don't work at Bioware and I have no idea what their plans/ statistics/ capabilities are so...

 

I don't even know who came with this "action-camera" but that's wierd name. It's just zoomed camera to controled character. If it were meant to be action there would be no targeting and pure hack and slash, parry and dodge on unique "buttons".

 

AI is smart enough considering how limited the options you have = dumb AI at the end

 

no auto-loot = is there any auto-loot? Why would be there?

 

that means no point to click = but you have to click with your both mouse-buttons to rotate camera and Attack  

 

People who are used to play with controler (on console or PC) won't simply understand the struggle playing on keyboard.

[Xralius]

Let me stop you right there. This is a console port. We arent discrediting the programmers who did their job. We are discrediting the backstabbing company called Bioware who told us it would be made for PC, who told us it would be more like Origins, and didn't even apologize when that turned out to ve a straight up lie. The programmers should be just as angry as us that the game they worked on turned out to be awful.

[MagisterMaximus]

Has anyone, who claims that all the flaws of the game are because it's a "console port", considered that certain things are limited due to the following:

1. It's a new engine.

2. They may not have the knowledge to fully develop all aspects they wanted to, on this engine yet.

[Razir-Samus]

Has anyone, who claims that all the flaws of the game are because it's a "console port", considered that certain things are limited due to the following:

1. It's a new engine.

2. They may not have the knowledge to fully develop all aspects they wanted to, on this engine yet.

they had a year and a month longer to develop the game and this is what we got... they wasted time on filler content to "lengthen the experience" while gutting several features that existed and worked perfectly fine in the previous games

 

your points are valid but there's simply no denying how dumbed down they made the entirety of the AI control

[hafiznero]

Don't ever try Guild Wars 2...theres even less skills. Learn to make builds. Learn to adapt.

 

gw2 is the best game ever

[In Exile]

they had a year and a month longer to develop the game and this is what we got... they wasted time on filler content to "lengthen the experience" while gutting several features that existed and worked perfectly fine in the previous games

your points are valid but there's simply no denying how dumbed down they made the entirety of the AI control

You can't gut features that didn't exist in the first place. Bioware had 3 years to re-create and improve on features it took them 6 years to do while learning a new engine in a much more challenging technical setting.

[pasmith31]

commands fail because you fail to establish a confirmed target. the AI attack at will, but to direct a skill you need a target. You can't move party members out of a logical range. You want to fight dragons from another zipcode that's a personal issue. if you want to keep AI from gathering on your position turn off the targeting, lol.... hold position. Sounds like nobody can be bothered with trying. 6 months from now they'll be 100 videos with exact ways to do everything then everyone has to eat these words. Most likely they'll be on to the next game that's too "broken" for them to deal with.

Ahhh...So all this time its been the players fault that we haven't found the correct ONE way of doing things. 

 

I think I made a mistake playing DA:O and DA2 in the months leading up to DAI being released as nothing worked as expected and to be honest it took me a lot of time in game to get past all the unexpected changes made to the combat, changes that in the end I simply didn't enjoy.

 

Also to be honest I think Bioware and game reviewers should have been honest and mentioned these changes before the game was released. I still would of bought the game but instead of blaming EA/Bioware for misleading me I'd be blaming myself. I mean even now reading reviews hardly any of them mention the changes to the combat system and those that do are mostly the small independent reviewers on youtube. Its not even worth reading the pro reviewers these days, they have all sold out and only tend to mention the bad things in one or 2 lines with a line like "the game has a few issues" but neglects to go into any details on what those issues are.

 

This reply grew into more than the one or two lines I had planned and went off topic to boot

[Razir-Samus]

You can't gut features that didn't exist in the first place. Bioware had 3 years to re-create and improve on features it took them 6 years to do while learning a new engine in a much more challenging technical setting.

arguing technicality, wonderful...

 

the base for the tactics system we used to have is already there (just incredibly watered down), they need to open it up and add a fully customizable list, why they didn't do this already i don't know...are you saying that this is the limit to their professional acuity, when they designed a far superior system in the previous 2 titles? i can't accept that it's not possible to re-create what we had, nor the state they shipped of said system when the game launched, it's deplorable

[Kielbaldo]

 

 

 

I played this game on a controller and on the kb/m and to be hoentst, I have no idea who they were targetting this game for.  It is like they wanted to turn the franchise into an arcade game in order to bring in the action fans.   I mean this game has a reputation for being a complex rpg with tactical combat, the console users know this as well as we do.  So I honestly doubt the decision was to appeal to consoles as much as it was some mystery audience that would never be interested in this game anyways.

 

Anyone who has a long memory might remember the Ultimas, best selling RPGs of the 80s and 90s.  EA tried to turn them into a generic action game with Ultima 8.  The result is that it pissed off the consumers who didin't want to play an action game. It also failed to bring in new customers which, combined with it being rushed, led to a huge drop in sales.  They ended up making one last attempt at an Ultima and then cancelled the whole franchise thinking nobobdy wanted to play that type of game.

 

They are doing the same thing here.  This game, like Ultima, has a reputation and people know whether or not they would like the game based on the reputation.  Changing the game to appeal to new audience at this point is futile, it will not change the reputation of the previous games, and if they didn't like what the previous games offered they won't like this one.  What was EA thinking, that if they made it more action oriented people who like Call of Duty will buy this?   Why would they buy a game that has a reputation for having a combat system they don't like when they could just go buy another shooter instead?

 

EA is repeating it's own mistake here.  Changing a well established RPG to be a generic action game. They are even getting the same results, making people upset over it.  And they might end up having the same long term effect, killing their own franchise.

 

 

BW said all time that they want to return to DA:O, game will be for PC`s. With all respect to all console players. . Some people like new system cause of lots of action, their choose.  For PC cRPG fans animation, speed of combat. graphics are not most important like for console users. Universal game for console and PC is a dud, impossible to create. And they proved it. Ofc  there is a simple reason why it happened

 

$.$ SUCKERS! $.$

 

They ALL TIME LYING PC DA community and now pretend that all is ok.

 

What I want the most is RPG with TACTIAL combat. When I want plan something, when my char lvl up they got attribute point (not for skiils), char cards made like in famous paper rpg (D&D in DAO). BW has very poor designers and programmer failed also cause of large amount of bugs. i assume they really don't understand what is GOOD rpg.