Throughout the series, what have you found to be the biggest, lingering gameplay issue?

- i always liked the specialisation idea. but some specs were way better than others. (take care for balance and maybe introduce interesting new classes)

- i also liked the try of combinations between skills/spells but i always hoped they would improve on that further. (please improve this!)

- i really missed the tactical camera view of DAO in DAI. i REALLY hope they will bring it back in DA4!

- the skilltrees where always a bit too onedimensional with a lack of options (like e.g. reaching X skill not only through Y skill but also through Z skill for example)

- please no barrier (too much focus on barrier stuff in DAI in my honest opinion)

The combat system as a whole. I think the problem is they are trying to split the difference they have action combat and tactical combat, you choose. But in the end they just have 2 shitty shallow systems. Pick one, do it right.

Okay, I'll take another stab at trying to explain it.

DAO and DA2's tactics system was used by default. The only players who didn't use it are those who chose to turn it all off and manage everything manually.

Both of those games provide preset tactics packages from which the player could choose (Examples: Supporter, Controller, Defender, Scrapper). They automatically update when characters gain new talents/spells via level-up. All you ever needed to do was select which preset package you want each party member to use - or you could ignore it altogether and use the defaults automatically loaded by the games.

DAO & DA2 also provided the ability to create custom packages with detailed programming. Players could choose to use that ability or not.

Inquisition did strip the ability to create custom packages. You were left with the equivalent of a few presets.




The preset packages are designed to serve their needs.



It needs to be programmed somewhere by someone. I suppose the developers could program the AI to avoid hitting rage demons with fire, but there may be cases when doing less damage is better than doing none? Other than that, you'd need to provide the player with tactics programming that would be more detailed and complex than that provided in DAO & DA2.



That remark was in response to your comment:

... which I interpreted to mean that somehow allowing players to program tactics would impact the balance in encounter difficulty. Devs *always* have to consider difficulty levels in every encounter they design. Allowing players to program tactics doesn't really change that. Some players can program great tactics, others not so much. Some players may manually manage brilliant combat strategies, others don't do as well. The existence of programmable tactics does not change what devs need to do to make the game enjoyable for all players and present consistent difficulty depending on the difficulty level selected by the player.



I think it's pretty clear the devs went all-in on more action, less tactics in DAI. And they ended up with this weird sort of hybrid that didn't do either thing very well. OTOH, they went huge with crafting, but since it relies on RNG materials (and schematics) - and since armors look different on every follower and are class limited, I didn't like it at all.

<Snip>

You don't have to reexplain for me how the first two games worked. I've played them both several times. The important distinction I am trying to make is between an element used and a system utilized. Let me try a different analogy to illustrate. My father-in-law has a well stocked woodshop in his basement with all manners of presses, saws, routers and tools. If I get a hammer out to drive a loose nail back into the deck, I am using his shop, but not utilizing it. When he makes a fretwork clock, he uses several tools, skills, and thus utilizes his shop. What I would like to see are ways to make it easier for more people to do more with the 'wood shop' that is the extensive control of party AI. Is a huge, nested menu system still really the best way for Players to interact with the controls now 11+ years after that design?



Which the Player could choose to alter to his or her heart's content. To me, that is a customizable system . It is not as broad or deep as the Origins/Exodus system, but the Player can pick and choose not only which powers are use or avoided but is one or more are given preference. So, I could certainly understand the criticism "The Inquisition system wasn't as customizable as I would like". I cannot understand the statement that it isn't customizable at all. (That also ignores the fact that you can also control things like when healing potions are or are not consumed and how much stamina/mana reserves each character maintains.)



Or you could have a preset where a combo of say Cntl-F3 sets the F3 Spell (Fireball) to Disable, with the appropriate graphical feedback on the actual adventure screen. There's likely even better control methods. The point is the stacked menu interface may not be the best interface for all control options. Is there absolutely, in your mind, no way to entertain other interfaces besides the stacks of menus and scripts? Have you not played any game where you thought, 'That would be good to see in Dragon Age' as far as controls? Or have you never been working on a script and thought, "It would make my life easier if they did this"? If not, then I'm afraid we together don't have much to talk about on this. Nevertheless it has been good to discuss this with you.

Honestly some of the stats for weapons, armor, runes, and accessories need to make more sense. DA2 was IMHO the worse offender but the problem was in DAO and DAI that you could equip a rune that would do +587% to enemies or a ring that would protect Hawke with some weird random high number.

If BioWare wants to use a D&D inspired style system at least have stats that make sense to character classes and skills and abilities, along with weapons, armor, runes, accessories, sigils, and not just assign some weird high random number to a weapon, armor, rune, sigil, ring, belt, amulet, and etc to make more powerful when in reality it isn't doesn't make much of change.

All 3 games have parts that you can’t skip and add nothing to the game

Dao-the fade. This is fun but long and you are stuck. Overall it adds very little

Da2-can’t skip the varric tale in begining. It adds nothing to the gameplay. Should be able to skip after first time and go right to character creation

Dai-the aftermath of part 1. The walking in the snowstorm and the song. Love the song but after several times skipping would be nice. Especially the walking in the storm.

Some are cut scenes but others are just tedious. Would love to know the directors thoughts for the dai non skipping over. Why do
I have to walk for 2 minutes in a storm just holding a button wishing I could skip this useless

Perhaps, but those seasoned warriors did not choose their builds - you did, presumably with some sort of strategy in mind?



That sounds a lot like what is known as a strategy game, where you can send squads of units to locations. Regardless, that would still involve being able to command specific units to do a specific thing.



Yeah, I found that problematic on multiple occasions. Cora would go charging off and soon be laying in a pile until I figured out how to take out the turret that had dropped her. I vastly prefer the controls afforded me in MET - being able to prime and then detonate 'splosions, strategically positioning squadmates was part of role-playing Shepard as a savvy commander.



What I get from a lot of your posts is that you really want hard-core split second action combat and don't really gaf about any sort of team tactics.

Something thats in all three games that I'd like them to change/improve is the character build and fighting style variety.

And I don't mean just go classless, because I want more types of abilities, not just more combinations of the same ability trees.

The dragon age class system was already more limited than most in dao, having less classes, skills and weapon options then most class systems I've played. No feats or multi classing etc. Then da2 limited armour, weapons and associated trees by class. Removed skills. And DAI limited the combat styles of mages to primarily blasting primal. Making the da class system even more limited then it started.

I'd like to see more controlling and supporting options to match those AOE, single target damage and DoT spells. And have thematically different options too. The schools were good for this. But if they want to group by something else that's acceptable. Just don't make my every mage an elementalist. If they feel all thats too much for a single class then split the class up. Turn it into 2 or more classes chosen by mages representing the different ways you might have trained to use your magic.

Some more control and support options for other classes would be good to.

I'd like them to add more fighting style trees and weapons to match.
Eg
• A single weapon duelist style tree: for rapiers and such with off hand options for distraction and diversion.
• A Polearm tree: for Spears, Glaives, Halberd, and quarter staffs (it makes no sense that only mages get these)
• A Throwing dagger tree: Tallis did this in MotA and it was cool.

I'd like warriors to have a ranged option, a cross bow (regular, not varrics) would be good. But i don't care if they just chuck javelins or hands axes or whatever. I just want them to have a ranged option. Similarily I'd like mages to have a melee option, even if it's just switching from shooting to bonking enemies on the head when they get too close.

I'd also love if mages had more than one item type for focusing their magic. If they keep fighting/weapon style trees restricted by class the mage could still have say, an Arcane Focus tree that empowers their autoattack, with each branch giving a different focus item/weapon eg. staff, orb, wand, sword. The final ability in the tree could be unarmed casting. The Dark Fortress comic indicated that it's hard to concentrate on spells properly without a weapon to focus them. If it's something only very skilled mages can do then it would make an appropriate capstone for such an ability tree.

You could also add more Customization through expanding specialisation content into flavourful subclasses. Or by having more classes than the three we have.

Some examples of classes I can think of -
Hybrid classes with their own flavour similar to what mass effect did:
• Illusionist - rogue/mage hybrid. illusion magic is a type that our pcs haven't been able to play with yet. But if we can summon fire and protect ourselves w/ shields i don't see why we couldn't summon an image to confuse, frighten or distract, or protect ourselves with Invisibility. This could be the focus, or one of the focuses of a mage/rogue hybrid class. Perhaps give them the ability to turn others invisible to further distinguish them.

• Scout - warrior/Rogue hybrid. A skirmisher. Less tough than a warrior, more tough than a rogue, I'd recommend giving them their own utility abilities instead of just the same as the rogues ones as other wise it could come off as just a tougher rogue. They could bring back the ranger spec from origins to be one of its specs.

• Battlemage - Mage/Warrior. Expand the Arcane Warrior/Knight Enchanter to a whole class. Focused on combat and defensive magic wielded through swords and other warrior weapons as your focus.

And some different class possiblities:
• Hedge Mage - the Arcanist derangement that results from mages being untrained. Unique powers can manifest in a variety of ways. This is an opportunity to make a new magic class that's not bound by the rules and expectations of regular trained mages.

• Stone Singer - a dwarf who's been made "pure" like Valta was and uses Titan magic instead of fade magic. Another opportunity to add a new unique class with different abilities and limits. This might not work story wise for da4, or if it does it might work better as a specialisation dwarfs have the opportunity to get.

(If they do change to a classless system then replace the above with profiles and their assigned ability trees that that let you achieve much the same thing)

Class neutral abilities can also provide more options. Inquisitions knowledge options and lock picking upgrade perks basically were it's version of the class neutral skills of dao and other systems. Attaching them to a whole other progression system instead of just getting a perk/skill point at certain levels seems unnecessary. Since it seems like the next protagonist won't have a whole organisation, they could dump organisation perks and expand the pc and party specific "perks" moving them to the leveling up process. Eg Ones that improve party effectiveness and ones that unlock conversation and exploration options.

I don't think they will remove class restrictions on weapons and armour but that would obviously add more build variety too.

_____

Something thats in all 3 games that I don't want them to lose is the ability to pause and issue commands to all my party.

Not only do I enjoy assessing the situation, to decide what the best strategy for my fully controlled party to try against the enemy, taking as much time as i like and continuing to make those choices about positioning and ability use throughout the fight. But whether i can pause and whether the character attacks and dodges on their own or requires my own response times/reflexes directly affects how much i can play the game. I'm chronically ill, a game that I can still play when I'm not at my best is a game I can play more and enjoy more. While I enjoyed Mass Effect Andromedas story I've only finished it once where usually i would play a bioware rpg many times. Having no pause button means spending alot of combat mashing buttons and having no time to give what few commands the squad still has. And not having the energy and concentration to do it often. The pause button and tactical menu makes the mass effect trilogy a lot more playable for me. So given that and given that dragon age's combat system is my favourite that I've played (inquisition less so but it still comes out ahead), you can imagine how disappointed i would be if they removed those features and dragon age became a game i can't play much and on story mode.

I don't know the big complaint about latest BioWare...well of the many...is that the disconnect between controller and PC when it comes to having different ability bindings and not being able to map the same...which creates an unbalanced system between the two or PC players lose out on the number of abilities they can equip at any one time.  Now there have been a lot of different suggestions around this which could all end up being viable but I would hesitate to have an increase in actual abilities...

Instead I do half wonder if maybe one way of going about it but instead have different combinations.  Things like GoW or Amalur or a fighting game or the LOTRs games back int he day where you press certain button prompts rapidly it can create a certain effect.  

-or- 
You have fewer overall abilities but more variety within the abilities of what you can do.  Now this might not be practical with mages but you can have different evolutions for each ability throughout that again can do different things with the abilities you have created.