Game News Bioware: Playing a DnD wizard is too complicated

[Sol Invictus]

Here's the bottom line: Dragon Age isn't Neverwinter Nights. Dragon Age isn't D&D 3.5. Stop trying to turn Dragon Age into D&D. There's always NWN for you since you like the memorization system so much. If you think it works in NWN and Baldur's Gate, fine - but that doesn't mean it has to be in Dragon Age. I don't like D&D, and I don't want to play another CRPG of D&D if I can help it. Not every damn fantasy game has to be based on those idiotic rules.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

You dolt. This isn't about trying to make DA into DnD. It's about stating our reasons for liking the DnD system over the gay ass consoleish mana system. Spazmo said it best in his last post. And, before you go calling me a moron, this is my opinion. You like the mana system? Well then beat your cock off to the glorifying orgasmic rhythms of the mana system all you want. Not like it's going to ruin my life or anything. I like the DnD way. Simple as that.

 

[PennyAnte]

PennyAnte: Care to elaborate on the Mage system and why it's better?

The "backstory" or "cosmology," if you will, behind the D&D magic system is essentially a hodgepodge of western European myths - witches, boiling cauldrons and mumbled incantations. I'm simplifying, but you get the point.

Mage is much more sophisticated. It's "backstory" is the human quest for enlightenment, ultimate learning, and transcendence. It ties together world religious ephiphanies the way Vampire: The Masquerade ties together different cultural vampire myths. It's deeply philosophically satisfying (bearing in mind that we're just talking about a PnP game here).

Unfortunately, the Mage system is probably impossible to represent in a game without dumbing it down dramatically. It does have a system of spheres, but they are each wide-ranging and permit great flexibility.

For example, a typical game might have the four elements for magic - air, wind, fire and water. But "Forces" was just one of Mage's nine spheres (in the last rulebook I read). Skill in it governed manipulation of everything from magnetism to fire and from electricity to cosmic rays. Players with max skill would naturally tend to "bend" the forces around them, causing lights to flicker, possibly their eyes to glow and so on.

Time, and everything about it, was another sphere. Other spheres included correspondence, or power over space in both the quantum and Newtonian senses, spirit, mind, life, and so on.

Each rank (five were possible) enabled a new degree of control over that sphere's effects. But the real meat of the system was in combining spheres for effects. This was limited only by imagination and role playing.

So you could have a neo-Buddhist monk who had, through meditation, developed such keen insight into the nature of time and space that he could blow out candles with a kick from across the room, or break the necks of 10 enemies in the blink of an eye with just one swipe of his hand.

It was a chillingly deep system, like the concept of the Kwisatz Haderach in Dune.

There were balancing factors, of course, the main one being a force called Paradox. Mages had something similar to the Masquerade to maintain, and I believe normal, unaware humans were called sleepers. Do magic they couldn't rationalize, and the universe would settle the dilemma between the two frames of reference (awakened vs. unawakened) with often deadly effects to the mage.

Vampire: The Masquerade is a gritty, thrilling, wonderful and satisfying game. But Mage: The Ascension is White Wolf's crowning glory, its pinnacle achievement. The version I read is a PnP work of art.

 

[axel]

You also have to prepare components.

Which is exactly what mana is: a component. It just happens to be an all purpose component, which just so happens to be freaquently implemented such that it regens over time. This is usually because most gamers don't tend to say to themselves "hey, my character looks a bit cranky, lets have him take a nap instead of saving the princess from the dragon" mid game.

But personally, I wouldn't mind being able to cast a spell as many timesas I wanted a day, as long as I had the apporaite component on hand (and promised to study my flashcards for an hour every night before going to bed). The reason why I'm sure it wouldn't bother me is because, I did the same thing in Fallout with my rocket launcher. Though, magic can do anything while rocket launchers are certainly limited in some respects, so it might be more prudent to use a mana/fatigue and/or cooldown system instead.

[...]as one D&D book put it, it's just that the magic disappears from your memory once you cast the spell--it's just a game mechanic.

It wouldn't really bother me if it was just an arbitary excuse but it's not just arbitary, it's also stupid. And that does bother me. Especially because, think about it, if you have 100 spells to choose from and you only get to pick 10, how do you know which ten to choose? especially when you have a pleathora of utility and a plethora of damage spells. Am I going to need to pick any locks? Am I going to run into a big gang of hobos and need to cast Ice Skating Rink (rank 5)? Though mana isn't exactly a great system either, it works better (in the context of a computer game) because it gives you access to all your spells while still implementing the same limiting effect.

 

[Sol Invictus]

[16] <+Exitium> whats the point of having cure light wounds, cure moderate wounds, cure serious wounds, mend wounds and heal?
[16] <+Exitium> wouldn't a single spell that gets more powerful as you level up or upgrade it be better?
[16] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> the point isnt to have 50 cure spells
[16] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> its to have the power of curing increase as your ability increases, duh
[16] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> so you use the new one instead of the old one
[16] <+Exitium> ....why?
[16] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> but, you can also still use the olds ones, incase you dont need to heal any large wounds
[16] <+Exitium> that's fucking moronic.
[16] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> why waste 1 of 2 cure heavy wounds, when you can have like 4 cure mediums
[16] <+Exitium> It is redundant
[16] <+Exitium> It is like carrying non-lethal ammo.
[17] <+Exitium> The entire system is fucked, Patrick.
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> try figuring out what you're talking about and getting an opinion of your own besides saints, then we can keep arguing
[17] <+Exitium> Haha, nice cop out.
[17] <+Exitium> "I can't come up with a real reply so I will just say you dont know what you are talking about and ignore you! I WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> no, it's just boring because you're a retard
[17] <+Exitium> lol okay.
[17] <+Exitium> im posting this at the codex.
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> I DONT KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT SO I'LL JUST PASTE SAINTS POSTS AND USE RANDOM BUZZWORDS TO EXPRESS MY IDEAS
[17] <+Exitium> Now, dont be mad.
[17] <+Exitium> I can understand you don't know how to defend against the argument, so just call me a retard if that works for you.
[17] <+Exitium> There is no point in trying to talk to you.
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> you dont even have an argument to defend against
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> you're just 'hey, some people said it was bad, so its bad AND IM RIGHT'
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> then david gaider humps your face
[17] <+Exitium> lol okay.

edit:

[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> o mai, you posted a chatlog of mine on RPGCodex
[17] <+PatrickTheLlamaGod> i'm going to cry and get drunk now
[17] <+Exitium> k

 

[LlamaGod]

yeah, you do tend to get tired of arguing with someone who has no clue what he's talking about and only goes off other people's posts and uses Saint's opinions to back himself up.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Sure, whatever. Your only defense for D&D's memorization system is that 'it doesn't use mana, so it's necessary'. No shit, Sherlock. It's just a goofy gimmick.

 

[Visbhume]

About memorization vs. mana: one man's innecesary complication is another's engrossing gameplay. Having to memorize spells adds a level of strategy to the use of magic. It forces you to plan ahead. In BGII, I knew what spells to memorize before cleansing the vampire catacombs or battling the beholders. Of course, the designers must give hints about what type of enemies to expect in each quest.

The "backstory" or "cosmology," if you will, behind the D&D magic system is essentially a hodgepodge of western European myths - witches, boiling cauldrons and mumbled incantations. I'm simplifying, but you get the point.

Nope. As I have said, is based in a very sui generis form of magic described in a fantasy novel published in the 50's

Mage is much more sophisticated.

It's deeply philosophically satisfying

Mage is awesome, but I have a little nitpick with the system: its depiction of science. Doing science implies searching for universally valid thruths and the ultimate causes of things. But in the WoD, "science" is mere an opinion among others equally valid, thus not really science. The universal substrate of things is the quintaessence, not the phsycal laws. True science in the WoD would consist in studying quintaessence, not what the technocracy does.

 

[RGE]

I like playing wizards in NWN, and I usually play battlewizards who focus on buff spells, because direct damage spells are rather useless at the low levels I prefer to play at. What sucks is when my carefully minmaxed wizard has to work with others and I have to rearrange his 30+ spells so that he can buff the group with Empowered Bull's Strength and whatnot, and perhaps memorize some direct damage spells as well, since he may have warriors to tank for him. Too often I forget to go through this agonizing micromanaging before he rests, and then he's stuck with whatever he had until he can rest again.

In D&D and NWN wizards are also supposed to use their Scribe Scroll feat to scribe scrolls for special occasions. Load up with the spells that you know that you'll use, and then keep a few scrolls of spells that cover special occasions that you almost never encounter. That way you're covered, assuming that you remember your scrolls when one of those rare occasions comes knocking. I rarely remember anything beyond which spells I memorized. (Which is completely in character, since all my NWN wizards have wisdom 8.)

In the end I think that the system of having spell slots for different levels is primitive, just like levels and classes are primitive. I assume that this appeals to fantasy gamers because it makes the rules themselves appear to be written in the olden days, when everything was simple and illiteracy was even more widespread than it is today. But personally I prefer skillbased rules, and with such rules, spells should be skills too.

And while the idea of preparing spells in advance doesn't appeal to me, I understand how it works in the game world. The wizard actually casts most of the spell while 'memorizing' it, and when it looks like the spell is actually being cast, the wizard is merely doing the final touch before releasing the the whole thing. I'm not sure why there would be a limit to the number of spells a wizard could prepare like that, but I assume that it is because the wizard has to keep track of every spell and maintain a mental connection to it until the wizard is done casting it. So it's a trick to avoid having to spend several minutes casting a fireball in the middle of a battle. That's wizards for you, full of tricks, the lot of them.

 

[PennyAnte]

As I have said, is based in a very sui generis form of magic described in a fantasy novel published in the 50's.

And what were Jack Vance's influences in "Tales of the dying Earth?" What was he drawing on? An essentially western European cultural backdrop featuring mumbled incantations and so forth? Hmmmm? Perhaps?

Just teasing you a bit. But it would be helpful if you wouldn't mind expounding a little here, beyond your earlier three examples that included "fire and forget" and "naming spells after creators."

Besides, in the end, D&D's creators have drawn influences from everywhere they possibly can. Even if this one author was more important for D&D's exact magic mechanic, they're still pulling material from a range of places in the system overall.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

"I can't come up with a real reply so I will just say you dont know what you are talking about and ignore you! I WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I sense irony in the Force....

 

[Sol Invictus]

Eh? Patrick's arguments all consisted of "You're a retard" and "You don't know D&D" and then he goes on to explain how memorization is important when there isn't a mana pool. No shit!

 

[Visbhume]

And what were Jack Vance's influences in "Tales of the dying Earth?" What was he drawing on? An essentially western European cultural backdrop featuring mumbled incantations and so forth? Hmmmm? Perhaps?

In my opinion, the magic in Vance's work and in D&D has very little to do with the magic described in european folklore. It's more like a form of heavily empirical "science", that can be systematically studied and codified. In fact, Vance's fantasy work sometimes is referred as "science-fantasy". Can you imagine Merlin "researching" a spell ?

But it would be helpful if you wouldn't mind expounding a little here, beyond your earlier three examples that included "fire and forget" and "naming spells after creators.

The mage-as-scientist ethos of D&D is straight out of Vance's book. And take a look at this "Dying Earth spell name generator". Don't they sound pretty much like D&D spells to you ?

Anyway, Gary Gigax himself said it better in this interview.

 

[Araanor]

I've been tinkering with a magic system with two attributes - a mana pool and a channeling limit. All spells have a ground cost in mana and your channeling limit is as much mana you can spend in one go - hence an explanation for all of those useless wizards who can only do fireworks and cointricks (minimal chan limit). It makes every mage unique (not relying on what everyone knows to be the best spell for every level) and you can set up spells on line with what Saint mentioned.

That's pretty much the Master of Magic system - you had a mana pool and power. Power determined how much mana you were able to channel into spells each turn and how much you were able to use for spells in battles.

 

[Whipporowill]

No wonder I like the system then...

 

[EEVIAC]

Mage stuff...

I find it amusing that you don't go into the actual mechanics of what casting a spell in M:tA entails. The player basically tells the GM that he wants to cast Magnetic Teleporting Fireball with Forcefield Dragon Buff, the GM says "get fucked," then the player tries to roll a dozen tens on three times as many dice. If he fails (and he will, because the better you are, the better the spell you try to cast with old ST rules, the more likely you are to fail,) he gets a massive backlash of Paradox and is transported to an alternate dimension Venus.

I actually like the M:tA system because its modular, but its not actually a system. Its a plot device more than anything.

 

[Volourn]

"what would have made it sig worthy Volly?"

If I had thought of it. I don't take other people's ideas and sue them as my own for sigs. That's immoral.


"Wizards are support characters. They aren't suppose to be able to cast a kagillion spells."

That's dumb. It solely depends on the wizard.


"I'm happy with magic being something you have to study towards, but having studied you should then know it and not have to relearn it every night."

It's not about relearning a spell; it's about rememorizing a spell. Once a wiard learns a spell; he *always* knows it. It's about refeshing the connection to the intricacies of a spell. It amy simple; but magic is complicated and is all about a connection to the 'weave' and understanding the workings of a spell. That's why a wizard has always been about study not about natural magic. You want that, play a sorceror.


"Really? Could you measurably say that they're equally useful? They're equally expensive to use, and they cause different effects. What if Cure serious wounds was changed to heal one less damage? Would they still be equally useful then? Since their effects are completely different, you can't really say which is more useful than the other, and therefore which spell level each should go in. It's not hugely balanced."

Just because 2 spells accomplish to varying things does not eman they're not balanced. That's just silly talk.


"So because most other mana systems have auto regen that means that DA will share the same flaw?"

Cosndieirng that 99.9% of mana systems have some form of insta regen; it shouldn't be shocking I dislike it. In fact, I think BL is the only one with a 'mana type system' that doesn't have insta regen. No surprise, it's the most tolerable of mana systems.


"Here's the bottom line: Dragon Age isn't Neverwinter Nights. Dragon Age isn't D&D 3.5. Stop trying to turn Dragon Age into D&D. There's always NWN for you since you like the memorization system so much. If you think it works in NWN and Baldur's Gate, fine - but that doesn't mean it has to be in Dragon Age. I don't like D&D, and I don't want to play another CRPG of D&D if I can help it. Not every damn fantasy game has to be based on those idiotic rules."

No shit sherlock. Who said I want DA to be NWN? I sure didn't. This has nothing to do with NWN. It has to do with the fact that i dislike the mana systm. If I were acting like you; i'd be like," OMG! DA is soooo like Diablo because they both have mana systems!" R00fles! I don't like mana magic systems in general so I would dislike it. Period.


"I don't like D&D, and I don't want to play another CRPG of D&D if I can help it. Not every damn fantasy game has to be based on those idiotic rules."

Bullshit. How many D&D games have you played? Quite a bit, most likely. If you hated the system so much you'd avoid the games that use it like a plague which i normally do with mana systems. However, unlike the D&D magic system; mana systems are never wholly uniform so I have to judge each one seperately. Stop crying about it.


"You dolt. This isn't about trying to make DA into DnD. It's about stating our reasons for liking the DnD system over the gay ass consoleish mana system. Spazmo said it best in his last post. And, before you go calling me a moron, this is my opinion. You like the mana system? Well then beat your cock off to the glorifying orgasmic rhythms of the mana system all you want. Not like it's going to ruin my life or anything. I like the DnD way. Simple as that."

Otaku wins. He may ignore me; but he wins this one.

 

[Spazmo]

And while the idea of preparing spells in advance doesn't appeal to me, I understand how it works in the game world. The wizard actually casts most of the spell while 'memorizing' it, and when it looks like the spell is actually being cast, the wizard is merely doing the final touch before releasing the the whole thing.

Yes! This is the latest D&D explanation for memorization and it makes a whole lot of sense, if you ask me. The reason why D&D has memorization tends to change every time a designer finds a better reason for it, but that's the best one WOTC R&D has come up with yet.

The whole memorization mechanic works very well for P&P D&D. The idea is to keep it balanced with other classes. Wizards ends up being the most powerful anyways, but if they had infinite spells, it'd be worse. Besides that, keeping track of mana and the regeneration thereof would be totally impractical in a P&P game.

In a CRPG, though, mana is an attractive mechanic, but I think it's far too exploitable. Spellcasters need only sit tight for a minute or two to regain all their magic power and, if they have suitable spells, health. This is fine for action RPGs where the idea is to have fast-paced monster stompin' and lots of powerful spells whizzing off, but for regular CRPGs, mages need to be toned down a bit. Mana would work fine as long as mana regeneration is so slow that you'll want to rest anyways to get your magic power back.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You must be really fucking stupid if you didn't understand the point Darcy was trying to make, Vault Dweller

Exit, can't you maintain a normal conversation without resorting to name calling and turning every thread where I post opinions you disagree with you into flame wars? Just for the record, your stupidity is becoming legendary. Your ways of arguing and seeking attention are disturbing. You have a reputation of a moron, a hypocrite, and a flip-flopper. Your threads are the reason we have a "stupid" forum. Just think about it.

I think it's utterly crap that you have to memorize spells, and if you get the wrong ones, it renders you useless as a caster

Really? OMFG! What about Diablo 2 where if you invest into wrong skills your character is useless? What a crappy game it is. Now, unlike many games and systems, all you have to do is rememorize spells and you are no longer useless. As for getting the wrong spells, that's what brains that you are obviously lacking are for.

I agree that it is too complicated to enjoy

Fucking moron

The D&D magic system has absolutely no place in a CRPG. Going through a variety of menus just to cast a damn spell is pain enough as it is

What variety of menus? Ever played the Infinity Engine games?

Who really cares if I cast Magic Missile instead of Melf's Acid Arrow?

Ah, so you are a noob. Why didn't you say that you have no fucking clue about the magic system because you are too stupid to understand it? Someone would have wrote some easy guide for retarded for you. Anyway, first, Melf's Acid Arrow is useful to those who are vulnerable to acid (duh!), like trolls. Second, Magic Missile if implemented correctly (multiple targets) can allow you to disrupt several mages at once very quickly.

I wouldn't play a Wizard, not because it's too 'hard' as VD seems to think

Didn't you just say that "I agree that it is too complicated to enjoy"? Wow, it takes less and less time for you to flip-flop.

There is absolutely no fucking fun in memorizing your spells every day and selecting when to cast them, especially at the early levels. At some point you are just going to run out of spells and stand in the back while everybody else does the fighting.

I see. Because wizards can only cast spells, and can't use darts, slings, crossbows, etc and anything else that would go nicely with good Dex.

The game is going to feature a ton of spells regardless of the fact that it doesn't use a spell memorization system

Yeah, so does Diablo 2. Your point is?

Not many games use that system anyway. Why? Because it's crap

Ever heard about a little thing called copyright?

I rather like how some of you see fit to complain about the 'tyranny of choice' when Bioware decides to use a mana-pool instead of D&D's stupid memorization system. Funny how that never seems to come up in discussions of any other game

More unsupported bullshit.

Since when did D&D memorization = choice?

God, you are dumb! It's not the memorization, it's the mechanics that force you think and pick some spells, making strategies that go with them and trying to balance your offensive and defensive capabilities.

She was saying that D&D forced you to become some sort of 'rules lawyer'

Do you even know what "rules lawyer" refers to, noob?

If you came across a locked door and forgot to memorize a Knock spell you wouldn't be able to get past it until after you rested, again. Assuming you had no rogue and you were in a no-rest area, you'd have to leave to go back to town, memorize the fucking spell and come back again just to open the door. If you came across a group of monsters and didn't memorize your Fireball spell you'd be pretty useless, too.

Oh, horror, oh, horror. You can't cast any spellls you want all day long. Well, that's what that planning is all about. If you don't want to have a rogue in your party, and you really want to unlock every door you see, than you think about how you may substitute these abilities. You may double-/multi-class or you may reserve some of your spells just for that. That would limit your offensive abilities, but that's the choice WITH FUCKING CONSEQUENCES that you have to make.

It's unnecesarily complex and I fail to see how you, someone who doesn't even like D&D of all people can defend such a shitty game mechanic.

Because my evaluation of things isn't based on my current likes/dislikes.

Strategic? What's so fucking strategic about memorizing spells before you even know what to use the next day?

Figuring that out, which, btw, isn't a rocket science, and how you'd deal with that is the strategic part.

And Prince of Qin, Nox, Kult, Sacred, Bloodlines, Arcanum, Gothic 2, Seal of Evil, Deus Ex, etc. Nice way to make the game look bad by comparing it to Diablo which by the way kicks the shit out of NWN.

NWN was a crappy game, imo. All the other mana-games that you've mentioned have absolutely no strategy in the spell casting department. That was the weakest point in Arcanum, imo. And Deus Ex? You've gotta be kidding me.

It just doesn't work well. It didn't work well on paper, either. I'd have been so much happier if D&D's magic system featured individual spell timers and global timers (based on rounds or turns).

We appreciate your expert opinion, Exitium.

Now, before you reply, think about what arguing style to pick. I have no problem flaming your stupid ass, but I always prefer more intelligent ways of presenting arguments.

 

[jiujitsu]

[16] <+Exitium> wouldn't a single spell that gets more powerful as you level up or upgrade it be better?

That's what I like about a paladin's 'lay on hands' ability.

 

[Vault Dweller]

There are many, many spells that have damage/level or duration/level stats.

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD, I also repeat, again:

"In Dragon Age the spell caster still has a wide range of choices for spells,"

Yeah. Tyranny of Choice. OMG

That choice *does* matter. Unless you think it's better if you have just 5 spells. R00fles!

The choice does matter, you say. Ok. Let's see what Darcy criticized in DnD:

1. Complexity. (So, we can expect a simplier system. Since we know that DnD wasn't complicated at all, that means dumbing down)

2. Tactical elements (Do I really have to comment on this one?)

3. Counter-spell abilities (Which were easily deal with by many other spells, btw, that's what that whole tactics thing is all about.)

So, instead of all that there will be a "wide range of choices for spells". Forgive me for being skeptical about it. There are many games, like Gothic 2 or Diablo 2 that offered a wide range of choices, and the only real choice was "do I zap it with a fireball or an iceball".

In all the CRPGs I've played; D&D has easily had the best magic system in aplce. This is proven in TOEE, NWN, the IE games, the Gb games, and the list goes on. I cna only think of a few non D&D games that are even in the same league as D&D magic systems.
...

D&D's magic system has a lot more depth, and background to it than 99.9% of mana based magic systems do. It makes a lot of sense if youa ctually know what D&D wizards are intended to be.

Completely agree with both statements

 

[Vault Dweller]

Spell Mastery: A wizard (and only a wizard) can take the special feat Spell Mastery. Each time the wizard takes this feat, choose a number of spells equal to the wizard's Intelligence modifier (they must be spells that the wizard already knows). From that point on, the wizard can prepare these spells without referring to a spell book. The wizard is so intimately familiar with these spells that she doesn't need a spellbook to prepare them anymore.

Player's Handbook, 3rd Edition, page 54. And it's still there in 3.5 so shaddap.

Don't you have to, like, know how to read to learn all this stuff?

Edit:

You dolt. This isn't about trying to make DA into DnD. It's about stating our reasons for liking the DnD system over the gay ass consoleish mana system

Right on. I thought that was obvious, but I guess I was mistaken.

 

[Volourn]

"only real choice was "do I zap it with a fireball or an iceball"."

Eh. It's a tad early to say if BIo will go that anal. Afterall, he did say 'wide slection of spells' is their goal. I don't count choosing between a 10d6 fireball or a 10d6 iceball as much of a choice. I'm expecting real choices.

It's nice though you'd take his word for stuff that you dislike so you can whine but then go and pretty much ignore words that disprove your point. or better yet pretty much call him a liar.

R00fles!


"Completely agree with both statements"

I'm *almost* speechless.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"only real choice was "do I zap it with a fireball or an iceball"."

Eh. It's a tad early to say if BIo will go that anal. Afterall, he did say 'wide slection of spells' is their goal. I don't count choosing between a 10d6 fireball or a 10d6 iceball as much of a choice. I'm expecting real choices.

It's kinda hard to expect them assuming that what Darcy criticized won't be in the new system. Remove some level of complexity, tactical elements, and an option to counter a spell, and what's left? Click and cast "easy to use" system?

It's nice though you'd take his word for stuff that you dislike so you can whine but then go and pretty much ignore words that disprove your point. or better yet pretty much call him a liar.

That's not true. A "wide range of choices" doesn't really mean anything. Every game has this "feature". It could be meaningful or not. We don't know that and the only way to guess is to take a look at what Darcy criticized.