So in Fire Emblem: Awakening you focused on what you liked there, what if they took it away in that particular game?
If they took everything I liked from that game it would be a different game and I would not bother with it.
And really you don't need to make me understand. I'm not sure why you insist on it, since (for the third time) I do understand, I don't need to experience it to understand and it's not about "I don't care", not sure where you got that from either.
Yes you can. The implementation of tactics has nothing to do - or at least should have nothing to do - with the changes to combat. Put the DA:O/2 tactics into DA:I, and the game would be better full stop. The fact that some of the combat mechanics have changed is irrelevant.
Ah, I mean it in a different way. Yes of course you can theoretically do what you say. Would it be better? Sure, for those who would use it. It's not the mechanics that changed though, it's probably the environment that is one the issues here.
I played DA:O on both PC and Xbox. The console version of that game was indeed dumbed down. You notice it really well during the Sacred Ashes quest. That puzzle where you had to "solidify" that bridge. Once you stood on a bridge piece that was solid, it couldn't "de-solidify" if other characters moved away from the stones they were standing on. It made the whole puzzle extremely easy.
I don't know why Bioware simplified the puzzle for the console versions, but it is easy to think that they believed it would be too difficult for the console players.
The the term "dumbing down for consoles" is actually a valid one.
I played DA:O on both PC and Xbox. The console version of that game was indeed dumbed down.
The the term "dumbing down for consoles" is actually a valid one.
Concur. But I also suspect that some of the dumbing down was because of the multiplayer component added (skill tree limited to 8). I don't recall offhand if DA:O console version had the full tactic set available on the PC.
Don't remember why I got DA:O for the PS3 since all the other BioWare games had I played were on the PC up to that point. However, I was so unsatisfied with PS3 gameplay, I bought a copy for the PC. I never did get as far as the puzzle. And after researching DA:I between console and PC, I opted for the PS4 version.
There have been a lot of excellent games on the consoles that work very well with controllers. Examples, like Call of Duty, Killzone and Kingdoms of Amalur where the controller use seemed to be well thought out and implemented. And there were several games that the controller was just awkward to use or poorly designed to play easily.
And yet there were many poor console game ports to PC ignoring most of a keyboard. i.e. the famous one button run-jump-cover that usually did the wrong thing.
I wonder if some of the problems are actual limitations of the game engine.Or if programing for 4 console versions and PC trends towards simplification for production?
... And yet there were many poor console game ports to PC ignoring most of a keyboard. i.e. the famous one button run-jump-cover that usually did the wrong thing.
I wonder if some of the problems are actual limitations of the game engine.Or if programing for 4 console versions and PC trends towards simplification for production?
I always did like the combat of Mass Effect 3 
But that 'one button to handle everything' was dreadful. I have a KEYBOARD, you know, 100+ buttons 
I played DA:O on both PC and Xbox. The console version of that game was indeed dumbed down. You notice it really well during the Sacred Ashes quest. That puzzle where you had to "solidify" that bridge. Once you stood on a bridge piece that was solid, it couldn't "de-solidify" if other characters moved away from the stones they were standing on. It made the whole puzzle extremely easy.
I don't know why Bioware simplified the puzzle for the console versions, but it is easy to think that they believed it would be too difficult for the console players.
How easy was it to move the companions to previse locations on consoles?
You just had to solidify a stone, and step on it. Once it had been solidified, it couldn't be "undone". So just solidify step 1, move a character over to it to stand on it, do the same with step 2, repeat. No need to solve the puzzle in order to have all of them solidified at once.
You just had to solidify a stone, and step on it. Once it had been solidified, it couldn't be "undone". So just solidify step 1, move a character over to it to stand on it, do the same with step 2, repeat. No need to solve the puzzle in order to have all of them solidified at once.
That's not what I asked, you know.
You would have had to move someone, tell them to hold, then switch characters and repeat the process.
I don't remember if you could change the camera angle or not, but I don't think you could. I also remember (and I could be wrong) that the pieces solidified when someone stepped on them, even if you were wrong, so then you would have to go back and reset the puzzle to get the right ones.
But like I said, I could be wrong as it's been a long time.
I miss the days when I can say "Anders, wait until at least three enemies are clustered together before lanching a fireball. Merrill, hit anything I disorient with a stonefist"
Now I have to hope they don't hit my Inquisitor witih a barrier when no one else is in range.
"SUCK ON A FIREBALL."
Yes you can. The implementation of tactics has nothing to do - or at least should have nothing to do - with the changes to combat. Put the DA:O/2 tactics into DA:I, and the game would be better full stop. The fact that some of the combat mechanics have changed is irrelevant.
That's not what I asked, you know.
I do apologize. I was on the phone while posting, and I completely misread your post. Multi-tasking = bad.
Moving the companions on the console wasn't difficult at all. It worked pretty much the same way it did on the pc.
First played dao a year or so ago. great game. the tactics reminded me of the gambit system for ff12. why is it not in this game?
If you're not trying to speak for everybody, OP, why include a line like "Everybody here feels like this" in your first paragraph?
If I believed what I read on the forums for all the Dragon Age games, I would think DA2 and DAI were failures and DAO was the best game ever. I don't think that. You're certainly welcome to your opinion, as is everybody else who agrees with you. I have liked all three games. I was skeptical of DAI at first because I did not quite get the design, but now that I am playing through it again, I think it's very fine.
There are things about the current direction of Bioware RPG games that I don't love entirely; I'd prefer less voice acting and more complex storytelling and variety in the quests. Certainly the main story and the character relationships in DAI are complicated and well done, but I do agree that the background quests could have been stronger. This current game engine does not do cities very well. Thedas feels like a big wilderness with hardly any settlements.
But that's not a major problem when I think of all the things that this game gets right. While I don't like it as well as the Baldur's Gate series in terms of complexity of combat, I still like it very much. I don't miss the tactical settings of DAO very much; I did enjoy that game, but in terms of simplification, it was much simpler than the DnD-based games that preceded it, especially in terms of magic. While the lore of Thedas is strong, it does not compare with Faerun in terms of depth of the spell system and diversity of creatures. So if you are going to talk about the evolution of the games as a dumbing down, DAO is not the place to start. The games before it were harder; some of the fights in the BG and NWN series simply couldn't be won unless the player knew the right spell to use at the right moment. I do miss that.
However, I'm also aware that I'm older and harder to please in general and I refuse to be one of those people who thinks that looking backwards is worth very much. DAI is a good game and I will play it with a great deal of satisfaction for several more play-throughs, I expect. This second run-through has shown me how much depth there is to the characters and I have found lots of stuff I missed the first time. Now that I understand how barrier and guard work, most of my complaints from the first time I played are negated. This combat system is very dynamic and I find myself hardly needing the tactical camera at all. The fact that this is a change from previous games doesn't matter. I can accept the change.
Again, this is my opinion; I'm not speaking for anybody else. It doesn't matter what the developers do, they are going to get endless rants and complaints no matter what. So that leaves them free to do what they please in the end.
Retour en haut