68 réponses à ce sujet

[SwiftSweeper]

booke63 wrote...

Combat probably isn't the best aspect of the game though I like it. Plus it won't change much unlike the story and the char interaction. Odd though as BGII took more micro-management than DAO as I recall as "tactics" were useless in that game, yet that's on your list of playable games. I like micro-managing, but I do use the tactics in DAO for sure. I find that sword and board warriors and even 2 handers can be pretty effective on tactics alone. So that means I don't have to manage them very much at all. Rogues too except using stealth  and positioning them properly in battle are pretty necessary to maximize their effectiveness. That leaves mages which need extensive control to be effective--though healing can be effective via tactics.

All I can suggest is tailoring your party and using tactics effectively should cut back on the need for micro-managing. Still, your idea to go to the easiest mode might be most effective so you can get through for just the story. If you do that be sure to skip most or all the side quests and they are weak and don't do much to further the main story.

Thanks for help.  You probaly misread me.  I was not talking about Bioware's Baldur Gate.  Baldur Gate: Dark Aliance is Diablo style RPG.  I pretty much micromanage all my party members most of the time.   Since I auto leveled my party, I only have 4 tactic slots on each character

[Obtusifolius]

wowpwnslol wrote...

The OP admitted he likes JRPGs. That pretty much tells me all I need to know about his intelligence level.

The very fact that you would judge someone's 'intelligence level' on whether they like JRPGs tells me all I need to know about your intelligence level

[k9medusa]

As they level, you will get more tactic slot per person....

[Obtusifolius]

SwiftSweeper wrote...

Thanks for help.  You probaly misread me.  I was not talking about Bioware's Baldur Gate.  Baldur Gate: Dark Aliance is Diablo style RPG.  I pretty much micromanage all my party members most of the time.   Since I auto leveled my party, I only have 4 tactic slots on each character

I played Dark Alliance too, and for a long time I could never understand why everyone said Baldur's Gate was so good. It was only a couple of years ago that I realised they are not the same thing at all

I still have not played the REAL Baldur's Gate (very sad, I know, coming from a BioWare fan) - I decided to play Neverwinter Nights instead (big mistake).

[Sloth Of Doom]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

SwiftSweeper has an excellent point about the codexes, they have a terrible layout on PC and are even more cumbersome on the xbox. God forbid thy tell you the number you picked up, or do something crazy like list them in chronological order.

What's wrong with the PC layout?

Well, lets say I pick up a codex entry in the Circle Tower.  Right aftrwads I am attacked by a rage demon r something, so i dont have time to click on the tiny little 'nw codex entry' reminder at the bottom of the screen.   After I kill the demon I want to read that entry.  Makes sense, right?

Now lets assume i am an average person and not a hardcore codex reader or a sufferer of OCD, so my codex has a whole bunch of crap I haven't read, or didn't bother to read this playthrough because I saw it last time through or whatever.   Now I have a screen with a bunch of flashing categories.  Great....what the hell category is the entry I just picked up in?  I guess i will take a stab in the dark and pick um...history...because really it could be ANYWHERE.  

Ok,  I seem to recall the title  mentioning Tevinter, but I can't remember exactly since I had that demon to fight and everything.  Wait, it doesn't matter what the title was because all I have here are a bunch of flashing numbers.   What do these numbers mean?  Why didn't it tell me "You have pciked up codex enty #471"?  Maybe they are chronological in the order I picked thm up?  Hrm nope...my entry isn;t at the bottom of history, so I will go through all of the categories and check the last entry.   Nope......ok...so it isn;t chronological.  I guess i go back to history and click through each of these numbers until I find it.   Five minutes later I realize it isn;t in history at all.

Now I have to go through every single category manually, because I have no clue where it is.  Too bad I have to go to work, so I will leave this codex entry until later, or most likely just forget about it entirely.




...and that is what is wrong with the PC codex setup.

Modifié par Sloth Of Doom, 18 mars 2010 - 06:53 .

[Obtusifolius]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

...and that is what is wrong with the PC codex setup.

The console codex is worse, trust me.

[Sloth Of Doom]

Obtusifolius wrote...

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

...and that is what is wrong with the PC codex setup.

The console codex is worse, trust me.

Yeah I know, I used to have an xbox version as well. The console version was designed in a very special level of hell and shall live forever in infamy. But that wasn't what he asked .

Modifié par Sloth Of Doom, 18 mars 2010 - 06:55 .

[MagicalSarai]

I think it has been said before, but it looks to me like you've mentioned a bunch of JRPGs and then Mass Effect. It's no wonder to me that you find this game different. It's nothing like a JRPG and it's not like Bethesda RPGs (which you really DO micromanage equipment) and Mass Effect is a different game altogether. IF you don't like it? Sorry... but it's a different kind of RPG... as someone said "dice roll". Nothing we can really do to help you. The main draw of DA:O for me was the character and story and the combat. Sounds like you liked the character and story... so you don't like the mechanics... that can't be helped.

[Obtusifolius]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

Yeah I know, I used to have an xbox version as well. The console version was designed in a very special level of hell and shall live forever in infamy. But that wasn't what he asked .

I apologise for replying so hastily, then. I just get all excited, you see, at the prospect of making complaints about Dragon Age

You should see me in action on the tech support forums

Modifié par Obtusifolius, 18 mars 2010 - 06:59 .

[SwiftSweeper]

k9medusa wrote...

As they level, you will get more tactic slot per person....

My characters are around level 12 now, and they all have 4 slots still.  I used auto leveling because I did not want to mess up my game by building my characters the wrong way.  I geuss that I will manually unlock some tactics slots when I level again.  This game' s combat reminds me of FFXI combat a lot.  Except, I have to manage all four characters instead of just one.

[SwiftSweeper]

Obtusifolius wrote...

wowpwnslol wrote...

The OP admitted he likes JRPGs. That pretty much tells me all I need to know about his intelligence level.

The very fact that you would judge someone's 'intelligence level' on whether they like JRPGs tells me all I need to know about your intelligence level

Yeah, KOTOR and DA have many things in common with JRPG to begin with imo(party based mechanic, turn based combat, quite linear with heavy emphasis on story), so I often find it perplexing that many hate JRPGs on these boards.  

If these were Bethesda boards when I could understand though since Elder's Scrolls/Fallout 3 are nothing like JRPGs.  I lot of very same people seem to dislike Bethesda games as well though.  Go figure!

[Sloth Of Doom]

SwiftSweeper wrote...


Yeah, KOTOR and DA have many things in common with JRPG to begin with imo(party based mechanic, turn based combat, quite linear with heavy emphasis on story), so I often find it perplexing that many hate JRPGs on these boards.  

DA combat is not turn based.

[Gill Kaiser]

It seems to me that you have never played a 'real' (for want of a better word) wRPG before... that is to say, one based upon rules evolved from the tabletop games that gave rise to the genre, such as DnD. JRPGs have always been a seperate genre from wRPGs, and they do things very differently both gameplay and story-wise. The other games you mentioned are action-RPGs or hack-and-slash dungeon crawlers (Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance had little similarity with BG1 and 2; it was more of a Diablo clone). Mass Effect 1 and 2 are a melding of the shooter genre and the RPG genre, that only Bioware has really attempted so far.

DA:O is meant to be a throwback to the classic RPGs of yore, and for those of us who miss such games it is a godsend. I can understand why you might find it difficult to get into at first if you've only played RPG subgenres, but IMO there's a lot to like once you get into it.

[Daeion]

May I suggest that you just stick with ME2? DA:O does not seem to be your sort of game, if you aren't liking it now, it isn't going to change from this point forward.

[SwiftSweeper]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

SwiftSweeper wrote...


Yeah, KOTOR and DA have many things in common with JRPG to begin with imo(party based mechanic, turn based combat, quite linear with heavy emphasis on story), so I often find it perplexing that many hate JRPGs on these boards.  

DA combat is not turn based.

You right.  DA is not turn-based.  Many JRPGs are not turn-based either so my point still stands.

[SwiftSweeper]

Gill Kaiser wrote...

It seems to me that you have never played a 'real' (for want of a better word) wRPG before... that is to say, one based upon rules evolved from the tabletop games that gave rise to the genre, such as DnD. JRPGs have always been a seperate genre from wRPGs, and they do things very differently both gameplay and story-wise. The other games you mentioned are action-RPGs or hack-and-slash dungeon crawlers (Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance had little similarity with BG1 and 2; it was more of a Diablo clone). Mass Effect 1 and 2 are a melding of the shooter genre and the RPG genre, that only Bioware has really attempted so far.
DA:O is meant to be a throwback to the classic RPGs of yore, and for those of us who miss such games it is a godsend. I can understand why you might find it difficult to get into at first if you've only played RPG subgenres, but IMO there's a lot to like once you get into it.

Yep, I do not think that I played classic WRPGs before.  I figured that I came here and ask why people like this style of gameplay so much.  May be, I was just playing it wrong...  I saw people praising KOTOR and DA style combat before, so I was naturally curious why.

Of course, I spent $60 on the game, so I want to get my money worth also, and the story and the setting is interesting.  

[Haexpane]

I spent more time micromanaging gear in BGDA 2 than any other game (you can craft your own)



The codex on consoles is simply not even worth reading. I gave up at level 12.



At level 22 on medium, no tactics are required, I set the AI to use sustained, and chain cast spells... no battle has been even remotely close yet

[Haexpane]

Technically I guess you could call ME2 a RPG< but even Bioware had a slide at GDC stating how they planned to put in more "RPG Elements" into ME3.



If you need to start adding RPG "elements" into a game, that tells me it's not an RPG to begin with.



Even Bioware ME2 team stated their design of the game was to strip out all RPG elements and build a cover shooter first, then add in other features later.

From the ground up, it's an action game.

[Daeion]

SwiftSweeper wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

It seems to me that you have never played a 'real' (for want of a better word) wRPG before... that is to say, one based upon rules evolved from the tabletop games that gave rise to the genre, such as DnD. JRPGs have always been a seperate genre from wRPGs, and they do things very differently both gameplay and story-wise. The other games you mentioned are action-RPGs or hack-and-slash dungeon crawlers (Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance had little similarity with BG1 and 2; it was more of a Diablo clone). Mass Effect 1 and 2 are a melding of the shooter genre and the RPG genre, that only Bioware has really attempted so far.
DA:O is meant to be a throwback to the classic RPGs of yore, and for those of us who miss such games it is a godsend. I can understand why you might find it difficult to get into at first if you've only played RPG subgenres, but IMO there's a lot to like once you get into it.

Yep, I do not think that I played classic WRPGs before.  I figured that I came here and ask why people like this style of gameplay so much.  May be, I was just playing it wrong...  I saw people praising KOTOR and DA style combat before, so I was naturally curious why.

Of course, I spent $60 on the game, so I want to get my money worth also, and the story and the setting is interesting.  

Different people want different things from games.  Some people like to micromanage their parties and other don't, some like inventory systems and others don't, some like D&D based combat and others don't.  There's no right or wrong answer because it's all based on opinion.  I'm guessing you say ME2 is better then ME while I say ME is better then ME2, neither of us is wrong because we prefer different things.  I will say that I prefer KOTOR combat to DA:O because I didn't need to worry about setting up tanks and healers but I still love DA:O.

[SwiftSweeper]

Haexpane wrote...

Technically I guess you could call ME2 a RPG

If you need to start adding RPG "elements" into a game, that tells me it's not an RPG to begin with.

Even Bioware ME2 team stated their design of the game was to strip out all RPG elements and build a cover shooter first, then add in other features later.
From the ground up, it's an action game.

I would say that it is a hybrid like Borderlands.  It is leaning too much into action game teritory in some aspects imo.  ME1 exploration, customisation, and atmosphere + ME2 combat system = perfect game imo.

[SwiftSweeper]

Daeion wrote...

SwiftSweeper wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

It seems to me that you have never played a 'real' (for want of a better word) wRPG before... that is to say, one based upon rules evolved from the tabletop games that gave rise to the genre, such as DnD. JRPGs have always been a seperate genre from wRPGs, and they do things very differently both gameplay and story-wise. The other games you mentioned are action-RPGs or hack-and-slash dungeon crawlers (Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance had little similarity with BG1 and 2; it was more of a Diablo clone). Mass Effect 1 and 2 are a melding of the shooter genre and the RPG genre, that only Bioware has really attempted so far.
DA:O is meant to be a throwback to the classic RPGs of yore, and for those of us who miss such games it is a godsend. I can understand why you might find it difficult to get into at first if you've only played RPG subgenres, but IMO there's a lot to like once you get into it.

Yep, I do not think that I played classic WRPGs before.  I figured that I came here and ask why people like this style of gameplay so much.  May be, I was just playing it wrong...  I saw people praising KOTOR and DA style combat before, so I was naturally curious why.

Of course, I spent $60 on the game, so I want to get my money worth also, and the story and the setting is interesting.  

Different people want different things from games.  Some people like to micromanage their parties and other don't, some like inventory systems and others don't, some like D&D based combat and others don't.  There's no right or wrong answer because it's all based on opinion.  I'm guessing you say ME2 is better then ME while I say ME is better then ME2, neither of us is wrong because we prefer different things.  I will say that I prefer KOTOR combat to DA:O because I didn't need to worry about setting up tanks and healers but I still love DA:O.

Nope, I like ME1 better overall.  I like combat better in ME2 though.

[Moogliepie]

I enjoy DA:O, but the interface was poorly ported to consoles. It does require more tactical decision making than an action oriented game like Mass Effect. Having to hold down the trigger to pause it is also wears on your finger (and your controllers batteries). If you just don't like tactical games, this may not be your cup of tea, but since you listed several turn-based JRPGs, I imagine you would enjoy it with a better interface. I personally thought the mix between real time and turn-based was great in KOTOR, but it felt just shy of that for DA:O.



I don't know why people feel the need to insult people who play JRPGs. Some of them are excellent games, although with a very different style. I could equally ridicule you for engaging in fictional romances with video game characters.

[Phonantiphon]

There's nothing wrong with the PC layout - you just have to work through and read them. God forbid you should have to o something that's not handed to you on a plate. The game/s has/ve numerous faults but overall they are very nicely done imho - hampered by dodgy quality control but nicely done nevertheless.
I think the Codex layout was a good idea - but to be honest some of you will complain about anything. There are considerably more things to complain about - that are more serious - than whether the codex is laid out chronologically, alphabetically, or according to the blood type of the character that triggered the entry.

Modifié par bassmunkee, 18 mars 2010 - 10:15 .

[lawpel19]

SwiftSweeper wrote...

k9medusa wrote...

As they level, you will get more tactic slot per person....

My characters are around level 12 now, and they all have 4 slots still.  I used auto leveling because I did not want to mess up my game by building my characters the wrong way.  I geuss that I will manually unlock some tactics slots when I level again.  This game' s combat reminds me of FFXI combat a lot.  Except, I have to manage all four characters instead of just one.

Might be part of you dislike of the comabat system. when you auto level. the computer has it own way to level up the the class. But if you level your npc up yourself you can get Combat Tactics to get more slots. might mean more micro managing when a npc or you main levels up but less in combat. My healer has like 10 slots with many options to set up to heal or damage .

I agree with sloth codex is fine but maybe put a number on the screen when you get one so you know where to look.

Modifié par lawpel19, 18 mars 2010 - 10:18 .

[Gill Kaiser]

SwiftSweeper wrote...

k9medusa wrote...

As they level, you will get more tactic slot per person....

My characters are around level 12 now, and they all have 4 slots still.  I used auto leveling because I did not want to mess up my game by building my characters the wrong way.

Well, in my opinion, autolevelling is 'the wrong way'. If you're not controlling your squadmates' abilities, how can you make a cohesive party whose playstyles complement each other?