Aaryn Flynn says: We Have Learned From The Mistakes of Inquistion....

The point there was more about the fact that things which can't be CC'd are going to cause you damage that you are simply expected to heal through.



As I said before I'm mostly talking about the boss fights. If we're talking trash mobs, the same claim can be made of Inquisition mobs if I build my party around CCing entire groups of enemies.



It removes the need for long term tactical choices since you regenerate between fights, but the fact that neither regenerate during the fight makes for more tactical choices in the fights themselves. Blow all your mana in the first 5 seconds of an Origins fight you're either chugging potions or hitting things with your staff for the rest of the fight. Do that in Inquisition and you've got all your mana back in 5 seconds.

So when you say Inquisition encourages conservation of resources I'm not seeing it. Why conserve things which I can readily replenish for little to no cost?

If mana didn't regenerate(and I don't think it should have either), then you'd have more of a point but it does regenerate and it regenerates very quickly. Without infinite mana I also wouldn't be spamming Barrier on cooldown either, which is a big reason as to why my parties take little to no damage.



As somebody who was a hardcore raiding guild's main tank on WoW for years, that's a misconception you have about tanks.

We don't actually want to take damage and that's not our real objective. We do it because we're tougher than anybody else in the group and because, especially in MMOs, fights are sometimes designed around not taking damage being flat out impossible.

However we have two main objectives: 1. Hold the attention of the enemy so they're focused on us and 2. Take as little damage as possible from those enemies.

It's not all that different from how in D&D/Pathfinder you'd rather have your heavy armour wearing Fighter being the one getting attacked than your Mage, because they can take hits better. Your Fighter isn't specifically setting out to take the damage but in the event that somebody has to, they're better suited to being the one to take it. It's just that in MMOs, taking damage tends to be completely unavoidable.

In every MMO I've played Warriors are capable of just as much damage as Rogues are(maybe it was different back in EQ days, but WoW changed a lot of things), unless for some weird reason you're comparing a Warrior who put all of their talents/traits into more defense versus a Rogue who put everything into more damage. In WoW right now Arms/Fury Warriors(damage focused builds) can compete with Rogues in terms of damage output, and all damage oriented builds should be competitive in damage output.

Which again isn't really different from most RPGs. I can build a defense focused Fighter in D&D who wont put out as much damage as a damage focused Rogue. This is going to be a thing in any system that allows for a decent amount of customizability in your character.

The only real difference with MMOs is that raiding forces a need to have everybody performing a useful in-combat job. If Warriors were far better at dealing damage, nobody would bring Rogues to raids no matter how useful their non combat skills are.

I actually had to use the trick of having the party pop up next to me and then me quickly switching to another character so I could get up where they were standing.

                                                                                                 <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

Mass Effect Andromeda has an opportunity to show off Bio's facial expression technology. I believe that the studio will
take every opportunity to bring the character "to life".

Does anyone here believe that the facial expressions will only be shown during cut-scenes and NOT during game-play?
And, which of the MW races (in Andromeda) do you think have non-rigid faces? My take is Turian, Salarian and Krogan.

I'll add that the new Helius LI will be human like and thus will come with a smile and I love to see a cat race with their teeth
when the get angry!

My hypothesis is that mammals have both the emotional and facial expression range while egg laying species have
rigid faces (ie: amphibian, chitinous, insectoid, and lizard). 

Yeah that's what I was talking about. That's not considered a 'Triple-A' title though. Already knew about that game, not as interested in it as I was about PoE but then they are making a PoE2 as well at some point. That ones being funded by the people that helped them ship/advertise PoE which is a rather small publisher.

Curious if they have any projects in the works doing anything you know, larger.

From an article a few months ago.  


www.gamepressure.com/e.asp?ID=712

They kinda blew the biggest possible lore reveal they could have early, but I too am interested to see more.

I didn't need to pretend it. The content was never in the games. Implication, if it even exists, makes no material difference, and we know intent doesn't matter.

The fact is that the games now take away a bunch of player control over how his character behaves.

Ibsidian has shown to evidence that they are turning away from their heavy story-driven focus that ruined both NWN2 and KotOR2.

PoE was no different.

Ibsidian has shown to evidence that they are turning away from their heavy story-driven focus that ruined both NWN2 and KotOR2.

PoE was no different.[/quote]

There kinda has to be a story if you're going to play a role in it. Particularly in a cRPG

It's the agreement between a player and a GM, to work together to tell a good one. PoE managed. It told a story for grownups (and not just in a "t*ts and dragons" way) where your reputation, personality, and even race and class contributed to how the world reacted to you.

I'm referring to NPC's mostly though, over the player. 

Talk is easy we will see what they learned when we know more or when the game is out.

Really? I love him, even though he's a protagonist I should hate. Sounds like every other protagonist for for the past 20-30 years.

I hope not. I was greatly disappointed by the magic spell selection in Inquisition. The few new additions made sense for the more tactical-style menu they were creating (and multiplayer, for that matter) but it was simply not enough to capture the feel of the magic in Origins and 2.