inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 15, 2020 1:28:17 GMT
I’ve been watching baldurs gate early access play through and da4 needs to copy what Parian studios is doing Every Encounter is unique and can be solved in multiple ways Dai only has these unique encounters when you have high friendship with companions. The opening Templar scenarios/mages Should have been more fleshed out. Unique encounters such as hinterlands grandfather zombie and the bandit keep needed more beef . The graphics were there but the creative writing is lacking. The storm coast/fallow mire mages( seriously this could have been 1000x more fleshed out) Environments can be used against enemies- I think dai aimed for this but ultimately failed. Larian/baldurs gate 3 gives you options to topple statues or break beams to hurt enemies. Also having party members stay behind while one sneaks ahead. Very few traps( the Templar quest has the fire traps within the demon taking over your mind) but it’s lacking in almost the rest of the game.This was clearly lost from dao to dai Treasure & Looting-in the base game. Treasure needs a serious overhaul. Kill a Templar and they have a piece of lambs wool!! Magic/skills-the mage and all classes need better passives. Instead of take thi skill to improve critical by % or magic better barrier why not say by taking this passive you can now also use a torch or light spell etc. you literally can’t open hard locks unless you take 4-5 war table abilities . Should have been alternatives for this . Same goes for knocking down walls. 2 handed warrior you spend 4-5+ points to get earth strike to realize it’s awful Creature library—lack of variety/character. I assume early game the demons are the showcase but other than the waterfall encounter most are boring at best. The waterfall in hinterlands is difficult but the combination of the 2 types makes it a memorable encounter. Way more variety is needed including colors such as the unique ram quest in hinterlands. How about a wolf pack leader with white fur etc Npcs that help you/accompany you but can die. Dai had the tower guard and mage that helped you and the wardens (Joey) etc. you could control these people and give them better items for encounters. You can’t even control hawke in dai . Bring this back I will admit I watched one vid of Baldur's Gate early access and noped the hell out of there but a lot of this does sound fairly descent. *** Anyways as for me sometimes its a bit of a trap with this game, coming out so long after DAI it leads to a lot of time for things like speculation and hype to build so its sometimes really hard to contain it and not speculate about things that should not be speculated about...like I want to avoid speculation/ wanting things about story or quest structure...and instead focus on GP and RP. Just a note before we get to the things I have been musing about recently. 1. Been playing Greedfall and I usually wait to make this kind of post until after I finish a game...but I really doubt Greedfall has anything else to wonder. Namely how they handle their attributes. Now I have in the past mentioned that attributes like Constitution and Dex if we get them assigned back to us again, or the ability to assign points as we level up, that they should be a greater emphasis on increasing the effects of investing but give you a hard limit on them, Fallout is also a good example. In other words essentially this gives your characters greater ability and flexibility to do some things that are typically outside of your class, like if you wanted a high cunning 'warrior' they could unlock the hard to unlock chests like in DAI and a high strength rogue could knock apart the walls. Also dibs for getting extra options in dialgoue/ cutscenes. The trick, of course, is that you can still solve the quests regardless if you don't have the right ability...I want to avoid the situation in FONV where I have to go basically tell the Rose of Sharon Cassidy that I have to have her wait a few hours while I go build up my speech. This will just give characters extra options and rewards for those who invest in them. Also, could do interesting things for party builds or multiplayer...depending on how they handle that. 2. As I have mentioned one of my complaints in DAI was that things were handed a bit too easily to us when we were leading an organization called the Inquisition, there should have been actual investigating/ inquiring to figure things out. Ubisoft games like Breakpoint and Odysssey have done one solution where you have to go hunt for clues in the world before certain things can be revealed to the player. I want to take it a step further: Basically I think that system should exist but them it becomes like a player where they/the player character can figure out 'well I know this goes here...so does this'...sort of thing. Bonus points where a high cunning score could lead to more information or hints being offered in each clue or investigation. 3. Player variable New Game Plus. Basically New Game + has always been kind of esoteric to me and I am a bit...odd...in it. So if they do bring it to Dragon Age 4 I want actual specific control of what imports over to a new character, and what does not.
|
|
coldsteelblue
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
PSN: coldsteelblue
Posts: 690 Likes: 1,033
inherit
264
0
Oct 11, 2024 18:25:21 GMT
1,033
coldsteelblue
690
August 2016
coldsteelblue
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
coldsteelblue
|
Post by coldsteelblue on Oct 15, 2020 10:53:35 GMT
Been watching streams of BG3 myself too, really looks like it's coming on well, I've been watching the guy from Fextralife & he states over & over again that the storytelling & the roleplaying are the best aspects of the game & I've gotta agree, when I look back on DA:I now, it was so lacking in these areas, yet this is what made BW the grandfathers of rpg's, I'd like to see them get back to it, instead of whatever the hell they've been doing these last few years.
|
|
telanadas
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 317 Likes: 619
inherit
11510
0
619
telanadas
317
May 2020
mistberry
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by telanadas on Oct 15, 2020 12:42:44 GMT
imo one of the weakest aspects of DAI is the combat, second only to the very bad story pacing. It's like they didn't know if they wanted it to be strategy based or action based so they tried to please everyone and as a result killing enemies felt like a very arduous chore in a very long, padded out game.
There's nothing fun about fighting enemies in DAI and the battles are not memorable at all, except for maybe the Saarath fight but that was only saved because of the epic music in the background. There's no strategy, no balancing of party members, you don't even need to really look at item stats or abilties if you play on normal mode. Just equip the weapon with the highest DPS :/ Specialties didn't feel special because anyone could specialise in anything. Even if you play on Nightmare it's just figuring out the best item/stat combos and whittling down the HP by continuously spamming the attack button.
I am worried about the gameplay for DA4 because I feel like BW are leaning more towards the 'action' side of gameplay rather than a strategy based one. Battles start to look and play the same after a while and it just turns into a slog especially if you're just trying to progress the story ( I feel like AC falls into this trap too). Incorporating more strategy in the gameplay, item-wise or companion-wise would make it so much more fun and personal imho.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 16, 2020 7:14:48 GMT
@telanadas Has inspired me to make this little post. Something I have been thinking abotu for a while but maybe I said something like this in the past, but also wondering where to post it. I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: 1. Brutality/ weight/ immersion: Probably the most vague of the list on here but I want the combat to pull me in. I want the combat to have a certain fun quality to it where I can lose myself in it and it can start to feel 'epic'. Things like finishers could help with this although they aren't that mandatory. Probably DAIs weakest aspect. Good exs. Witcher 3, ACOD. 2. Efficiency: Especially on lower levels I don't want combat to take that long. I don't want too many enemies aside from bosses to be that meaty or tanky or health sponges. Especially with the right builds or the usage of the right abilities enemies should drop very quickly, and this can certainly apply to bosses as well even. This can also work for the player character when they do not have a lot of health. In this mind combat encounters should be fairly small. Good exs. Greedfall, ACOD, DAI, maybe Andromeda? 3. Fluidity: In regards to lack of realism perhaps but it just annoys me when your character gets knocked down by something which opens you up to a lot of fire as they just flop about on the floor. I want controls to be fast, responsive, and intuitive. With seamless transitions between melee and ranged combat. Also bonus for the above 3 combined basically should be able to go through and transition between combat very quickly taking on multiple targets. Like in Odyssey I came out of a cutscene surrounded by baddies and was able to execute three or four quick devastating shots to kill them all. Good examples include ACOD. 4. Tactical gameplay: Spending half an hour crawling through menus ala the good old days of Origins and 2 is not very fun to me. But doing things on the fly, assessing a combat situation and then telling your companions how to react accordingly...and let the AI figure out the rest...is. Not really a good example of this but the best in recent memory is Ghost Recon Breakpoint, the squad's AI was so stupid it didn't always do what you wanted it to, but when it worked it was a glorious site to behold.
|
|
telanadas
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 317 Likes: 619
inherit
11510
0
619
telanadas
317
May 2020
mistberry
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by telanadas on Oct 17, 2020 9:40:24 GMT
I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: I totally agree with your points. I would love to see finishing moves and unique weapons with their own animations. I do feel like enemies were way too buffed in HP in DAI and the fights were dragged out for no good reason. Fair enough if people don't want to play a tactical approach but at least make the weapons and armour more varied and interesting to play from a strategic pov. Make each companion have their own unique abilities and specialities. Make each boss encounter have their own attacks and weapons and magic...just something that makes it more memorable and something that requires a little more brainpower than spamming attack until they're dead lol.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 18, 2020 1:24:49 GMT
I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: I totally agree with your points. I would love to see finishing moves and unique weapons with their own animations. I do feel like enemies were way too buffed in HP in DAI and the fights were dragged out for no good reason. Fair enough if people don't want to play a tactical approach but at least make the weapons and armour more varied and interesting to play from a strategic pov. Make each companion have their own unique abilities and specialities. Make each boss encounter have their own attacks and weapons and magic...just something that makes it more memorable and something that requires a little more brainpower than spamming attack until they're dead lol. See this is my biggest point of contention, and the bizarre thing for me is this at least seems like a fairly common opinion to me but I had the exact opposite reaction. Combat in Origins and 2 were grind fests which either had waves of enemies, meaty, tanky bags of health...or both. Inquisition meanwhile on normal I was able to get to the point last PT where I was frequently one shooting mooks and guards and even some of the boss fights featured me dissolving their health bars with relative ease. That and the overall 'responsiveness' of DAIs controls made the combat, overall, much more enjoyable then either of its predescors. *** So I was having dueling conversations on Live Service yesterday and well there is a pretty big flaw that I find with LS games that I have been musing on for awhile on possible solutions. Now I think I have found one...so much so I am tempted to tag our local BioWare dev to make sure someone sees it. So one of the two big issues it seems with LS games is the whole idea behing the 'road map' and post launch content in general. Pretty much every single game with one where the company in question excitedly announces all of their plans with very specific detail on what is going to come post launch. And then things are cancelled, shifted, or delayed creating a lot of annoyed people because of any number of bugs or other issues with the game. The solution to this? In my mind hold your horses. Wait awhile to see if the game is A. first off worthy enough to give extra content to and B. to see what bugs or issues the game has before you announce any of your post launch plans, this could include even and up to fully waiting on releasing a plan for anything like seasons passes.
|
|
LukeBarrett
N3
BioWare Dev
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
Posts: 284 Likes: 3,988
inherit
BioWare Dev
324
0
3,988
LukeBarrett
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
284
August 2016
lukebarrett
|
Post by LukeBarrett on Oct 18, 2020 16:53:46 GMT
@telanadas Has inspired me to make this little post. Something I have been thinking abotu for a while but maybe I said something like this in the past, but also wondering where to post it. I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: 1. Brutality/ weight/ immersion: Probably the most vague of the list on here but I want the combat to pull me in. I want the combat to have a certain fun quality to it where I can lose myself in it and it can start to feel 'epic'. Things like finishers could help with this although they aren't that mandatory. Probably DAIs weakest aspect. Good exs. Witcher 3, ACOD. 2. Efficiency: Especially on lower levels I don't want combat to take that long. I don't want too many enemies aside from bosses to be that meaty or tanky or health sponges. Especially with the right builds or the usage of the right abilities enemies should drop very quickly, and this can certainly apply to bosses as well even. This can also work for the player character when they do not have a lot of health. In this mind combat encounters should be fairly small. Good exs. Greedfall, ACOD, DAI, maybe Andromeda? 3. Fluidity: In regards to lack of realism perhaps but it just annoys me when your character gets knocked down by something which opens you up to a lot of fire as they just flop about on the floor. I want controls to be fast, responsive, and intuitive. With seamless transitions between melee and ranged combat. Also bonus for the above 3 combined basically should be able to go through and transition between combat very quickly taking on multiple targets. Like in Odyssey I came out of a cutscene surrounded by baddies and was able to execute three or four quick devastating shots to kill them all. Good examples include ACOD. 4. Tactical gameplay: Spending half an hour crawling through menus ala the good old days of Origins and 2 is not very fun to me. But doing things on the fly, assessing a combat situation and then telling your companions how to react accordingly...and let the AI figure out the rest...is. Not really a good example of this but the best in recent memory is Ghost Recon Breakpoint, the squad's AI was so stupid it didn't always do what you wanted it to, but when it worked it was a glorious site to behold. I'll just chime in because you're touching on specific industry things so I can help focus the language a bit. 1) We call this combat presentation. That is, how combat feels and is presented to the User. There are games that have kinda boring combat, mechanically, that have really top quality combat pres and that can not only keep people playing longer but also reviews very well. Ideally games have both but unfortunately they are often competing (deathblow centric gameplay comes to mind). 2) Encounters and enemies typically have a TTK (time to kill) value that is used for balance. Games usually set a baseline they want an average combat to take (I think it was 2m in DAI). As we start to introduce rpg mechanics and encounter variation this number gets quite fuzzy but it's still useful to have something to aim at. One thing I've been starting to try to educate people on in the last couple years (not just for combat length) is that the intensity of gameplay can make 2m feel more like 4m (or vice versa in slower gameplay) so it's important to pick a time with intensity in mind. Fully agree with your point though, the game shouldn't feel like a grind and combats that end quick are totally fine if they are satisfying to the User. 3) Fluidity is usually only a focus for action games but it usually comes down to branch windows - areas in an action that allow jumping to a different action - and how tightly those adhere to the action's animation. You'll never notice when you're playing but if you record any game that feels really good to press buttons and play it back frame by frame you'll see a lot of bizarre animation blending and pooping. This is a constant push/pull between gameplay and animation. Again, I try to focus on User feel rather than what it actually looks like - they 'technically' look wrong but barely anyone ever notices. 4) An important distinction: strategy is pre-combat planning and high-level stuff whereas tactics are intentional choices made within the combat. So games can be tactical without requiring strategy customization though they typically have both. They both have their place, sometimes even together, but it depends on the gameplay feel the game is going for. 5) (secret bonus one to your other point) Live service roadmaps are basically a way for games to try to convince the Users to stay because new stuff is coming. Successful LS games (ex. fortnite, Warframe, path of exile) don't need to do this because they've already established this contract with their users: come back every X days for new content that is meaningful. It also requires the company to be experienced enough with their content delivery pipeline to be able to hit a consistent cadence (and one that is fast enough for the userbase to not have churned out). Fortnite almost always lands every 80 days and PoE is 13 weeks (91 days) as a data point.
|
|
telanadas
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 317 Likes: 619
inherit
11510
0
619
telanadas
317
May 2020
mistberry
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by telanadas on Oct 18, 2020 17:08:56 GMT
See this is my biggest point of contention, and the bizarre thing for me is this at least seems like a fairly common opinion to me but I had the exact opposite reaction. Combat in Origins and 2 were grind fests which either had waves of enemies, meaty, tanky bags of health...or both. Inquisition meanwhile on normal I was able to get to the point last PT where I was frequently one shooting mooks and guards and even some of the boss fights featured me dissolving their health bars with relative ease. That and the overall 'responsiveness' of DAIs controls made the combat, overall, much more enjoyable then either of its predescors. I think I get what you mean...combat in DAO and DA2 did feel a lot more tedious and micromanaged. DAI combat was definitely a lot flashier and it was nice that you could just attack on the fly without having to micromanage every little thing. But after a while it just becomes grindy and every battle starts looking and feeling the same, especially in a game as long as DAI. Gear became redundant really quickly as well. Solas was even marketed as a healer when basically every mage in the party could learn the same spells as him. How can the Inquisitor learn the same abilities as Solas when he said himself it took him 'years to master' fade magic? I dunno the combat just didn't add up to me, at least in DAO and DA2 each companion had abilities that matched their story. I don't mind a rough road map idea with regards to live service games, at least you kinda know what your time investment will look like in the future. But yeah I agree it would be nice to play a solid base game on launch... I'm more worried about how online elements will be used to affect the overall game design...like in AC the cash shop totally put me off the game and company entirely. But if they are referring to paid add-ons or quests that enrich the world and the story then I would definitely think about supporting it.
|
|
inherit
ღ I am a golem. Obviously.
440
0
24,456
phoray
Dreadnaw Rising
12,654
August 2016
phoray
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by phoray on Oct 18, 2020 21:16:46 GMT
5) (secret bonus one to your other point) Live service roadmaps are basically a way for games to try to convince the Users to stay because new stuff is coming. Successful LS games (ex. fortnite, Warframe, path of exile) don't need to do this because they've already established this contract with their users: come back every X days for new content that is meaningful. It also requires the company to be experienced enough with their content delivery pipeline to be able to hit a consistent cadence (and one that is fast enough for the userbase to not have churned out). Fortnite almost always lands every 80 days and PoE is 13 weeks (91 days) as a data point. I am pleased to learn ya'll are studying how the other folks are doing it. I was just remarking to online friends yesterday that is only seemed like Ubisoft was capable of recurring continuous story based content that kept their player base engaged. But they have 40 studios. I keep forgetting that Bioware did SWTOR, as I can't play it on a PC with no game pad, as previous experience in continuous story based content released over time that was received mostly well by the player base. Which puts Anthem in kind of a "where did that go awry" but perhaps the inconsistency it paints Bioware in regarding Live Service is explained by it's being a new IP with difficulties in writing meaningful lore. Star Wars has 50 years of lore written by others to draw from, better or worse. Anyway, I meandered there, but I guess I'm just happy to see an honest mention that Bioware is thinking about it, how others are doing it, and finding chewy metrics about it to guide themselves with. Makes me feel less worried.
|
|
inherit
ღ I am a golem. Obviously.
440
0
24,456
phoray
Dreadnaw Rising
12,654
August 2016
phoray
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by phoray on Oct 18, 2020 21:17:52 GMT
Inquisition meanwhile on normal I was able to get to the point last PT where I was frequently one shooting mooks and guards and even some of the boss fights featured me dissolving their health bars with relative ease. I thought that was because even with the thing that slows down the levelling, you become overlevelled really quickly.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,073
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Oct 19, 2020 3:17:44 GMT
A spell that turns enemies to frogs and then I can squish or keep the frogs.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 19, 2020 5:35:27 GMT
@telanadas Has inspired me to make this little post. Something I have been thinking abotu for a while but maybe I said something like this in the past, but also wondering where to post it. I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: 1. Brutality/ weight/ immersion: Probably the most vague of the list on here but I want the combat to pull me in. I want the combat to have a certain fun quality to it where I can lose myself in it and it can start to feel 'epic'. Things like finishers could help with this although they aren't that mandatory. Probably DAIs weakest aspect. Good exs. Witcher 3, ACOD. 2. Efficiency: Especially on lower levels I don't want combat to take that long. I don't want too many enemies aside from bosses to be that meaty or tanky or health sponges. Especially with the right builds or the usage of the right abilities enemies should drop very quickly, and this can certainly apply to bosses as well even. This can also work for the player character when they do not have a lot of health. In this mind combat encounters should be fairly small. Good exs. Greedfall, ACOD, DAI, maybe Andromeda? 3. Fluidity: In regards to lack of realism perhaps but it just annoys me when your character gets knocked down by something which opens you up to a lot of fire as they just flop about on the floor. I want controls to be fast, responsive, and intuitive. With seamless transitions between melee and ranged combat. Also bonus for the above 3 combined basically should be able to go through and transition between combat very quickly taking on multiple targets. Like in Odyssey I came out of a cutscene surrounded by baddies and was able to execute three or four quick devastating shots to kill them all. Good examples include ACOD. 4. Tactical gameplay: Spending half an hour crawling through menus ala the good old days of Origins and 2 is not very fun to me. But doing things on the fly, assessing a combat situation and then telling your companions how to react accordingly...and let the AI figure out the rest...is. Not really a good example of this but the best in recent memory is Ghost Recon Breakpoint, the squad's AI was so stupid it didn't always do what you wanted it to, but when it worked it was a glorious site to behold. I'll just chime in because you're touching on specific industry things so I can help focus the language a bit. 1) We call this combat presentation. That is, how combat feels and is presented to the User. There are games that have kinda boring combat, mechanically, that have really top quality combat pres and that can not only keep people playing longer but also reviews very well. Ideally games have both but unfortunately they are often competing (deathblow centric gameplay comes to mind). 2) Encounters and enemies typically have a TTK (time to kill) value that is used for balance. Games usually set a baseline they want an average combat to take (I think it was 2m in DAI). As we start to introduce rpg mechanics and encounter variation this number gets quite fuzzy but it's still useful to have something to aim at. One thing I've been starting to try to educate people on in the last couple years (not just for combat length) is that the intensity of gameplay can make 2m feel more like 4m (or vice versa in slower gameplay) so it's important to pick a time with intensity in mind. Fully agree with your point though, the game shouldn't feel like a grind and combats that end quick are totally fine if they are satisfying to the User. 3) Fluidity is usually only a focus for action games but it usually comes down to branch windows - areas in an action that allow jumping to a different action - and how tightly those adhere to the action's animation. You'll never notice when you're playing but if you record any game that feels really good to press buttons and play it back frame by frame you'll see a lot of bizarre animation blending and pooping. This is a constant push/pull between gameplay and animation. Again, I try to focus on User feel rather than what it actually looks like - they 'technically' look wrong but barely anyone ever notices. 4) An important distinction: strategy is pre-combat planning and high-level stuff whereas tactics are intentional choices made within the combat. So games can be tactical without requiring strategy customization though they typically have both. They both have their place, sometimes even together, but it depends on the gameplay feel the game is going for. 5) (secret bonus one to your other point) Live service roadmaps are basically a way for games to try to convince the Users to stay because new stuff is coming. Successful LS games (ex. fortnite, Warframe, path of exile) don't need to do this because they've already established this contract with their users: come back every X days for new content that is meaningful. It also requires the company to be experienced enough with their content delivery pipeline to be able to hit a consistent cadence (and one that is fast enough for the userbase to not have churned out). Fortnite almost always lands every 80 days and PoE is 13 weeks (91 days) as a data point. Thanks for the response Luke. 2. As far as TTK is concerned do you guys/ game devs in general set it up on a per encounter basis or a per enemy basis? (Or both?) Also is it different for each level of difficulty, IE TTK on Casual may be 1:45 but Normal might be 2 minutes and Hardcore might be 2:15 or something? I suppose I am just curious but if its the latter case my Inquisitor was really punching outside her weight class. 5. Fascinating. I was going to say something but then I did the math and 91 days actually sounds a bit right based on what we have gotten for DLC expansions from BioWare in the past. Though I do still expect that in this case you'll still be expected to develop and release smaller/ less 'meaningful' content more often by TPTB...? *Foley raises his eyebrow curiously* Otherwise there wouldn't seem to be a difference between the way things will be done in the future and the way things have been done basically since ME 2. (Not that I would mind it if that were to be the case but I still get the feeling, based on the things I have read and experienced with LS that there might be a little bit more to it then releasing content the way it has been released, otherwise why advertise a change?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
11672
0
Oct 13, 2024 11:20:25 GMT
Deleted
0
Oct 13, 2024 11:20:25 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 8:46:08 GMT
imo one of the weakest aspects of DAI is the combat, second only to the very bad story pacing. It's like they didn't know if they wanted it to be strategy based or action based so they tried to please everyone and as a result killing enemies felt like a very arduous chore in a very long, padded out game. There's nothing fun about fighting enemies in DAI and the battles are not memorable at all, except for maybe the Saarath fight but that was only saved because of the epic music in the background. There's no strategy, no balancing of party members, you don't even need to really look at item stats or abilties if you play on normal mode. Just equip the weapon with the highest DPS :/ Specialties didn't feel special because anyone could specialise in anything. Even if you play on Nightmare it's just figuring out the best item/stat combos and whittling down the HP by continuously spamming the attack button. I am worried about the gameplay for DA4 because I feel like BW are leaning more towards the 'action' side of gameplay rather than a strategy based one. Battles start to look and play the same after a while and it just turns into a slog especially if you're just trying to progress the story ( I feel like AC falls into this trap too). Incorporating more strategy in the gameplay, item-wise or companion-wise would make it so much more fun and personal imho. God, when I played The Descent and first ran into the ogres, it felt like it took SO LONG to kill them. They weren't hurting the party much, they were just damage sponges and it was so boring to fight them. The hurlock emissary fight also was a bit of a slog but it did have the waves of darkspawn coming in to make it a bit more interesting.
But yeah, so much of the combat in DAI just felt boring and a chore. Whittle down health, oh crap it put up a barrier, whittle that down- no, stop it! Not another barrier!
@telanadas Has inspired me to make this little post. Something I have been thinking abotu for a while but maybe I said something like this in the past, but also wondering where to post it. I guess we can call this the 'principles of combat', what I hope they focus on and bring to the table for the next Dragon Age game: 1. Brutality/ weight/ immersion: Probably the most vague of the list on here but I want the combat to pull me in. I want the combat to have a certain fun quality to it where I can lose myself in it and it can start to feel 'epic'. Things like finishers could help with this although they aren't that mandatory. Probably DAIs weakest aspect. Good exs. Witcher 3, ACOD. 2. Efficiency: Especially on lower levels I don't want combat to take that long. I don't want too many enemies aside from bosses to be that meaty or tanky or health sponges. Especially with the right builds or the usage of the right abilities enemies should drop very quickly, and this can certainly apply to bosses as well even. This can also work for the player character when they do not have a lot of health. In this mind combat encounters should be fairly small. Good exs. Greedfall, ACOD, DAI, maybe Andromeda? 3. Fluidity: In regards to lack of realism perhaps but it just annoys me when your character gets knocked down by something which opens you up to a lot of fire as they just flop about on the floor. I want controls to be fast, responsive, and intuitive. With seamless transitions between melee and ranged combat. Also bonus for the above 3 combined basically should be able to go through and transition between combat very quickly taking on multiple targets. Like in Odyssey I came out of a cutscene surrounded by baddies and was able to execute three or four quick devastating shots to kill them all. Good examples include ACOD. 4. Tactical gameplay: Spending half an hour crawling through menus ala the good old days of Origins and 2 is not very fun to me. But doing things on the fly, assessing a combat situation and then telling your companions how to react accordingly...and let the AI figure out the rest...is. Not really a good example of this but the best in recent memory is Ghost Recon Breakpoint, the squad's AI was so stupid it didn't always do what you wanted it to, but when it worked it was a glorious site to behold. I'll just chime in because you're touching on specific industry things so I can help focus the language a bit. 1) We call this combat presentation. That is, how combat feels and is presented to the User. There are games that have kinda boring combat, mechanically, that have really top quality combat pres and that can not only keep people playing longer but also reviews very well. Ideally games have both but unfortunately they are often competing (deathblow centric gameplay comes to mind). 2) Encounters and enemies typically have a TTK (time to kill) value that is used for balance. Games usually set a baseline they want an average combat to take (I think it was 2m in DAI). As we start to introduce rpg mechanics and encounter variation this number gets quite fuzzy but it's still useful to have something to aim at. One thing I've been starting to try to educate people on in the last couple years (not just for combat length) is that the intensity of gameplay can make 2m feel more like 4m (or vice versa in slower gameplay) so it's important to pick a time with intensity in mind. Fully agree with your point though, the game shouldn't feel like a grind and combats that end quick are totally fine if they are satisfying to the User.3) Fluidity is usually only a focus for action games but it usually comes down to branch windows - areas in an action that allow jumping to a different action - and how tightly those adhere to the action's animation. You'll never notice when you're playing but if you record any game that feels really good to press buttons and play it back frame by frame you'll see a lot of bizarre animation blending and pooping. This is a constant push/pull between gameplay and animation. Again, I try to focus on User feel rather than what it actually looks like - they 'technically' look wrong but barely anyone ever notices. 4) An important distinction: strategy is pre-combat planning and high-level stuff whereas tactics are intentional choices made within the combat. So games can be tactical without requiring strategy customization though they typically have both. They both have their place, sometimes even together, but it depends on the gameplay feel the game is going for. 5) (secret bonus one to your other point) Live service roadmaps are basically a way for games to try to convince the Users to stay because new stuff is coming. Successful LS games (ex. fortnite, Warframe, path of exile) don't need to do this because they've already established this contract with their users: come back every X days for new content that is meaningful. It also requires the company to be experienced enough with their content delivery pipeline to be able to hit a consistent cadence (and one that is fast enough for the userbase to not have churned out). Fortnite almost always lands every 80 days and PoE is 13 weeks (91 days) as a data point. On point 2, does that not work better for games with preset enemies rather than randomly spawning ones? The Deep Roads in DAO had darkspawn at specific locations and we could choose to approach from different angles in some places. We could ration resources and set up a strategy. 2 minutes of that is fun.
When I'm walking through the Hinterlands trying to get to Point B for a quest and 50 bears spawn one after another, 2 minutes quickly becomes longer and more tedious.
|
|
LukeBarrett
N3
BioWare Dev
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
Posts: 284 Likes: 3,988
inherit
BioWare Dev
324
0
3,988
LukeBarrett
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
284
August 2016
lukebarrett
|
Post by LukeBarrett on Oct 20, 2020 4:52:28 GMT
So TTK is typically per unit but it's usually informed by goals for encounters in general. Some you want longer, some you want shorter but as a project it's good to have a baseline. Again, this is all just in service of having a starting point for feel, we don't use it in a pass/fail sense, at least not on games that have as much variance as ours typically do. It also assumes all combats are equally enjoyable which is the goal but is rarely the cases (see bear spawn spam in Hinterlands). I personally find combat in DAI really doesn't hold up to the length of the game but what game does at those lengths? It definitely could have been better but we had a lot of 'best decision at the time' situations so... things to improve on in the future I had a few different responses to the liveservice comment but they all started digging in to specifics I'm not comfortable discussing, sorry .
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 20, 2020 5:36:41 GMT
So TTK is typically per unit but it's usually informed by goals for encounters in general. Some you want longer, some you want shorter but as a project it's good to have a baseline. Again, this is all just in service of having a starting point for feel, we don't use it in a pass/fail sense, at least not on games that have as much variance as ours typically do. It also assumes all combats are equally enjoyable which is the goal but is rarely the cases (see bear spawn spam in Hinterlands). I personally find combat in DAI really doesn't hold up to the length of the game but what game does at those lengths? It definitely could have been better but we had a lot of 'best decision at the time' situations so... things to improve on in the future I had a few different responses to the liveservice comment but they all started digging in to specifics I'm not comfortable discussing, sorry . If it helps personally I think DAIs combat held up the most for its length of game then either of the other games in the series. There were only two real issues I had with its combat when it started to get really frustrating and that was basically when you first start the game and get to the Hinterlands (especially with challenges) some of the enemies were really difficult because I didn't at least have good gear yet and then after we get to Skyhold for largely the same reasons, I don't typically like crafting weapons and armor until I had good Fade Touched Materials which could take awhile...and also the boss battle in the Descent versus the Guardian was probably the worse fight in the game but that is a specific instance. Also fair enough.
|
|
telanadas
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 317 Likes: 619
inherit
11510
0
619
telanadas
317
May 2020
mistberry
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by telanadas on Oct 20, 2020 7:04:23 GMT
I had a few different responses to the liveservice comment but they all started digging in to specifics I'm not comfortable discussing, sorry . Thank you for actually taking the time to listen to feedback and providing your own perspective. I know you don't have to, and I really appreciate the insight. Honestly I think as a whole DAI still holds its own even by today's standards. I just hope that by providing my two cents as a player it might help make DA4 even better than it could be. But yeah, I get there are constraints and lots of things at stake in a game as big as this one. Please keep up the awesome work.
|
|
inherit
1853
0
Sept 27, 2024 17:42:44 GMT
440
kalreegar
395
Oct 26, 2016 11:04:07 GMT
October 2016
kalreegar
|
Post by kalreegar on Oct 20, 2020 7:28:10 GMT
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character.
The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities)
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 20, 2020 9:04:02 GMT
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character. The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities) I rarely play as anyone other then my protag in DA so I wouldn't mind, however it is a pretty distinct feature of the franchise at this point.
|
|
inherit
1853
0
Sept 27, 2024 17:42:44 GMT
440
kalreegar
395
Oct 26, 2016 11:04:07 GMT
October 2016
kalreegar
|
Post by kalreegar on Oct 20, 2020 10:00:11 GMT
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character. The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities) I rarely play as anyone other then my protag in DA so I wouldn't mind, however it is a pretty distinct feature of the franchise at this point. in appearence only. the tactical pause, strategy planning (or pre-setting default strategies), the use of abilities or objects, becomes useful and decisive only if you play at hard (in inquisition, I would say nightmare). Since 90% of people (even fans or friends who I know love the saga) play at normal, dwe facto it's all useless stuff (except maybe during a couple of boss fight) Unfortunately DA now as gameplay is neither fish nor fowl. Tactical combat is good but becomes complex and useful only at high challenge levels (so only a small minority uses and can appreciate it), while technical combat (hit, block, dodge, use skill, pam pam, timing, cold blood) sucks compared to the competition. IMO they should make a clear choice.
|
|
Norstaera
N3
Stealth Swooper
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 387 Likes: 748
inherit
Stealth Swooper
1178
0
748
Norstaera
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
387
Aug 24, 2016 16:13:41 GMT
August 2016
norstaera
Bottom
http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/3ead/s5mkgfa593ihxkkzg.jpg
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Norstaera on Oct 20, 2020 14:52:33 GMT
Thanks LukeBarrett for the explanations. I always appreciate dev responses and respect the boundaries they set for what they will and will not discuss. Hmmmm, does that sound courteous as intended or rather fangirling? Check my wish list posts for balance, .
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 20, 2020 17:51:55 GMT
Thanks LukeBarrett for the explanations. I always appreciate dev responses and respect the boundaries they set for what they will and will not discuss. Hmmmm, does that sound courteous as intended or rather fangirling? Check my wish list posts for balance, . I know the feeling. Every time I quote him I'm all like. "Am I being too pushy?" *clutches Pearl's to chest*
|
|
Hrungr
Twitter Guru
ღ N-Special
More coffee...? More coffee.
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Hrungr
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: Hrungr
Prime Posts: 18,258
Prime Likes: 65,767
Posts: 30,870 Likes: 112,430
inherit
ღ N-Special
151
0
112,430
Hrungr
More coffee...? More coffee.
30,870
August 2016
hrungr
Hrungr
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Hrungr
18,258
65,767
|
Post by Hrungr on Oct 20, 2020 18:18:47 GMT
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character. The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities) I rarely play as anyone other then my protag in DA so I wouldn't mind, however it is a pretty distinct feature of the franchise at this point. See, this is why I find it difficult to come up with any kind of wishlist for combat. Depending on which direction they go, combat could change significantly. If DA moves to a more action-oriented playstyle, the more autonomous the rest of the party has to be. But at the same time, a large part of having a D&D-style party in the first place is so that you can strategize and tightly coordinate your efforts. Will we be able to fully control our party members? Limited control? Very limited control? None?
|
|
LukeBarrett
N3
BioWare Dev
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
Posts: 284 Likes: 3,988
inherit
BioWare Dev
324
0
3,988
LukeBarrett
Game Systems Director for Dragon Age
284
August 2016
lukebarrett
|
Post by LukeBarrett on Oct 20, 2020 18:25:34 GMT
Thanks LukeBarrett for the explanations. I always appreciate dev responses and respect the boundaries they set for what they will and will not discuss. Hmmmm, does that sound courteous as intended or rather fangirling? Check my wish list posts for balance, . I know the feeling. Every time I quote him I'm all like. "Am I being too pushy?" *clutches Pearl's to chest* Be happy in the knowledge that if you are talking about things I don't feel comfortable answering I just won't - I don't feel obligated in any way Most of the time the reason I won't be able to answer is because it would be too revealing one way or the other about the current direction we're taking. That's for Mark to accidentally give away on twitter or something, not me.
As a very specific example:
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character. The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities)
If I were to say an opinion of this, regardless of which way I personally lean, it would be taken as direction for the next game. It's a very delicate process trying to communicate without Users inferring things about projects in development. That's why you usually see me chime in about industry specific things rather than DA/Bioware/EA specific ones.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Oct 13, 2024 11:19:12 GMT
35,469
colfoley
18,539
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Oct 20, 2020 18:51:28 GMT
I know the feeling. Every time I quote him I'm all like. "Am I being too pushy?" *clutches Pearl's to chest* Be happy in the knowledge that if you are talking about things I don't feel comfortable answering I just won't - I don't feel obligated in any way Most of the time the reason I won't be able to answer is because it would be too revealing one way or the other about the current direction we're taking. That's for Mark to accidentally give away on twitter or something, not me.
As a very specific example:
what would you think of a combat system like witcher/sekiro/ghost of tsushima/god of war? fast, technical, with rpg progression and levels but you always control only your main character. The companions are there with you but they are like in mass effect (cannot be directly controlled by the player, except when you use the tactical pause to use their abilities)
If I were to say an opinion of this, regardless of which way I personally lean, it would be taken as direction for the next game. It's a very delicate process trying to communicate without Users inferring things about projects in development. That's why you usually see me chime in about industry specific things rather than DA/Bioware/EA specific ones. and from my perspective too trying to word my questions as vaguely as possible and not specific to a game that has not *really* been officially announced so at least I learn something about game development while at the same time trying to parse any meaning that could potentially, maybe, relate to DA.
|
|
telanadas
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 317 Likes: 619
inherit
11510
0
619
telanadas
317
May 2020
mistberry
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by telanadas on Oct 21, 2020 4:49:36 GMT
If DA moves to a more action-oriented playstyle, the more autonomous the rest of the party has to be. But at the same time, a large part of having a D&D-style party in the first place is so that you can strategize and tightly coordinate your efforts. Exactly, this is what confuses me about the action style combat DAI went for because it makes so much of the four party system redundant. If the PC was the only one you could manage it would probably make the gameplay feel a lot different.
|
|