It is likely most reading this thread understand a normal distribution. Unclear to me that a performance distribution for gamers would even be symmetric, but whatever.
When you have 5 difficulty settings, it should not be outside the realm of possibility to cover a wide number of people. It's just binning and contingent on how much change there is between levels.
I get the impression that Bio combat systems don't go through enough iterations before release; DLC battles are always a lot more interesting. Which I guess is kind of predictable, considering the way Bio games always change up combat.
What I never understand is how BioWare can make these iterations in the DLC and then completely discard them in the next game. I suppose it's up to the game development cycle, i.e. ME3's gameplay was already too far into development to be affected by LotSB, but I have to wonder if it's more because DLCs have much smaller scopes. BioWare just have more time to tighten up the few enemy encounters present in the DLC.
There might also be a greater obligation to innovate in a DLC. The devs have to come up with neat gameplay hooks within the existing systems rather than invent totally new gimmicks, so they stretch the base mechanics in cool ways. This obligation doesn't really exist in the base game once the combat mechanics are finalized, so developers have no incentive to constantly freshen up late game content.
If only there was a clean way to retroactively enhance the base game's level and enemy design with every release of a DLC.
It needs to stay the way it is. They really got it right with the combat system in ME3.
yeah keep it as it is both systems Boiware use for their games seem to work well for their respective series so I vote to keep it that way as I don't think the difficulty curve is too hard or too easy. Yes you can get that a bit with DAI if you wander out of the prescribed zones for youir level but if your careful and clever you should be able to avoid it if you wish as well just by staying on the path the game lays out for you.
What I never understand is how BioWare can make these iterations in the DLC and then completely discard them in the next game. I suppose it's up to the game development cycle, i.e. ME3's gameplay was already too far into development to be affected by LotSB, but I have to wonder if it's more because DLCs have much smaller scopes. BioWare just have more time to tighten up the few enemy encounters present in the DLC.
There might also be a greater obligation to innovate in a DLC. The devs have to come up with neat gameplay hooks within the existing systems rather than invent totally new gimmicks, so they stretch the base mechanics in cool ways. This obligation doesn't really exist in the base game once the combat mechanics are finalized, so developers have no incentive to constantly freshen up late game content.
If only there was a clean way to retroactively enhance the base game's level and enemy design with every release of a DLC.
Player skill should never be removed or become inconsequential. You are playing a game. Without player skill involved it ceases to be a game and becomes a mundane task combined with a story.
Retour en haut