Dragon Age: Inquisition Pre-Release Thread

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Imagine DAO with TPS view (or play the console versions). See how much shittier it feels.

It plays just fine.

Is josh having tps view in PE? Otherwise, try harder.

In Neverwinter Nights 2 the camera has a bunch of different modes. If I remember correctly, the top down view is called 'strategic' and the third person view is called 'exploration mode'. Personally, that reveals the strenghts for each view. It doesn't really matter in a isometric game, but when it comes to 3D a closer more personal view can be really good for exploration whereas the top down is a must for combat. Unlike in NwN2 however, DA:O's camera is actually fine.

just got neuxcom huehue from roguey. As if someone not brain damaged will play exclusively in tpp in a strategy title.

But yeah I largely agree with you. I am not a fpp/tpp hater per se...but prefer iso perspective due to fallout and arcanum I suppose

 

[Jedi Exile]

And to bring the topic back to the actual topic:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/10/14/d...-sex-scenes-to-feel-more-mature-and-tasteful/

So Bio is now shamelessly copying Witcher 2? First CD Project copied BioWare games, now it is the other way around. Bio is so lame.

 

[hiver]

I dont know whats more pathetic and disgusting. Them talking shit about their previous game in the series or that pathetic interview on RPS where Ladlaw tried to jump on the Torment hype train and failed critically and hit himself in the ass for massive brain damage.

 

[Rake]

As an answer to the whole "what is gameplay" BS discussion here is one from a better poster than me:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...t-eternity-thread.75947/page-877#post-2910210

Furthermore, I think the challenge in an RPG should be in playing a character as closely to what their statistics dictate. If you try to play sneaky with a large brutish moron then you should fail miserably. If you succeed then the game presents no challenge, as you can effectively play any character in any way you want. It should be about your skill in playing characters according to their strengths and weaknesses. This should be the "game" in "role playing game". If you can't work out how to effectively use spells while playing a spell caster, you should be sucking.

And "correct" character building should be very important, with "correct" meaning to match up with the way you'll end up playing your character. "Wrong" character building is creating a character in a way that you don't intend to play him.

 

[hiver]

-edit-

 

[Delterius]

Needs more David Cage jokes.

 

[Declinator]

While I largely agree with this slider I do not see how player-skill centrism has anything to do with larping.

Surely you aren't suggesting that pure FPS games like Quake or Counter-Strike are about larping?

Or do you merely mean the games that portray themselves as RPGs but are almost totally about player skill? I remember that Oblivion fan ranting about how he larps while playing it but I don't think such things are the result of less concentration on character skill as they can just as easily larp while playing F1. Didn't Avellone larp while playing Wasteland or was that just hearsay?

 

[Delterius]

And to bring the topic back to the actual topic:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/10/14/d...-sex-scenes-to-feel-more-mature-and-tasteful/

Tasteful? Oh FFS

 

[hiver]

While I largely agree with this slider I do not see how player-skill centrism has anything to do with larping.

Surely you aren't suggesting that pure FPS games like Quake or Counter-Strike are about larping?

Or do you merely mean the games that portray themselves as RPGs but are almost totally about player skill? I remember that Oblivion fan ranting about how he larps while playing it but I don't think such things are the result of less concentration on character skill as they can just as easily larp while playing F1. Didn't Avellone larp while playing Wasteland or was that just hearsay?

agh... no, this is only RPG relevant chart.
The point isnt in that you can larp whenever you like while playing any game. The point is that RPG games that bend way too much towards importance of player skills over character skills are larping simulators where you larp youre playing an RPG game but youre actually not.

/

- wouldnt mind if a moderator would move all this into a separate thread

 

[DalekFlay]

Funny thing is that people used to Fallout's interface, tactics, etc. would say the player skill in a modern action RPG is too much, Fallout didn't require that much player skill, etc. Meanwhile a newfag console gamer whose first Western RPG was Oblivion would say Fallout takes too much skill to play, he can't understand it, it's too slow, etc.

What the player can comfortably do factors into both. Though I fully admit we can mock the latter quite justifiably.

 

[hiver]

In that we come to a very important dichotomy that is rife in the current mindstream of players.

(of course, nobody should give a flying fuck what "modern" "RPG players" want or think since they never played an RPG, instead being raised on action RPGs, various hybrids and Larping simulators)

But the issue is this: They absolutely wrongly complain about TB combat on the basis that it is too slow or that it doesnt really transpire the feel and chaos of real combat.

Well... Turn Based combat was never ever meant to do that. At all.
TB combat is tactical, thinking affair. Instead of action and speed - its about thinking and trying to anticipate what will happen in the next turn or those after it. Its about player carefully judging the skillsets of his characters, their equipment, weapons and whatever else in the way of mechanics the game offers - against those of his enemies - and trying to figure out the best way how to utilize them. The time flow is heavily abstracted but thats because it never was supposed to portray real time at all.
What it actually does is it puts the player on a completely level field against the Ai of the game. Reliance on and importance of skills does the same thing. (Ai being the most undeveloped part of the games mechanics is another whole issue)
Even so, with introduction of various reactive moves a character can pull off automatically (like attacks of opportunity and such) depending on enemy actions - during their turn - the somewhat negative side effects of that abstraction are changed into additional layer of tactical options to consider.

Additionally, thinking that RtwP or just RT do portray speed and chaos of real combat is laughable in on itself.

In a True RPG player skills does factor in, of course - but through the skills of his character or group. Not over them or regardless of them.

And its not only combat related. In a True RPG there should be more then combat. (i think that is what VD meant with "full scale RPG")
There are or there should be whole different paths through the game based on your character build, skills, traits, dialogue choices and other choices you make during quests.

In a game where player skills negate character skills - there is only one path through the game that every seemingly different build gets to experience regardless of what they do.
If there is any difference then those are purely cosmetic.


/

anyway, this is why the games of bioware are shit. Not to mention cheap, shallow, schlock content of them that serves only to masturbate the egoes of its players in the most pathetic ways.

 

[Roguey]

Player versus character skill is a false dichotomy--the ever-brilliant Josh Sawyer

just got neuxcom huehue from roguey. As if someone not brain damaged will play exclusively in tpp in a strategy title.

There's a game called Valkyria Chronicles at which you might want to look.

 

[DalekFlay]

In a game where player skills negate character skills - there is only one path through the game that every seemingly different build gets to experience regardless of what they do. If there is any difference then those are purely cosmetic.

You seem to draw this "negates character skill" line pretty low, though, since you count Morrowind. Doing things you have zero skill at in Morrowind puts you at a massive disadvantage, if not makes it impossible to succeed. I agree with you when it comes to, say, Skyrim... very easy to use twitch skills to overcome stat deficiencies there. But Morrowind? No.

And all that is beside the core point people were making such as the screensaver comment, which is that if no player skill is involved then you're not interacting at all or doing anything. When people say "character skill not player skill" what they really mean is not twitch player skill, but rather cerebral skill. Knowing how to build a D&D character is a skill, for example. Knowing how to position combatants tactically is a skill, for example.

Outside cerebral skill, as soon as you go real-time in any way, even RtWP, you put some responsibility on the player to juggle powers, positioning, hotkeys and whatever else. That's a dexterous skill, even if it's very different from dodging and swinging swords.

All in all the point he was making about screensavers was that saying player skill isn't a factor in true RPGs means true RPGs are simple non-interactive simulations, which is bullshit.

 

[hiver]

And here ypu go being stupid again. Repeating the same retarded stupid shit that was already dealt with and explained in the very beginning - only you fail to understand it.
I even made a visual representation of the concept and you still revert to your stupidity? You revert to that same stupid single line that you intentionally misunderstand ... And now you expect me to explain the whole goddamn thing again to you?

just fuck off, imbecile.


-edit-

When people say "character skill not player skill" what they really mean is not twitch player skill, but rather cerebral skill.

 

[Kidd]

They absolutely wrongly complain about TB combat on the basis that it is too slow or that it doesnt really transpire the feel and chaos of real combat.

Well... Turn Based combat was never ever meant to do that. At all.

I'd just like to add to this that TB can very well be those things as well. It doesn't necessarily need to, but it can be. At least the whole speed aspect can definitely be fast paced in a TB game. As long as there are no stupid Final Failtasy-length magic sequences and the game generally allows you to make inputs at your own pace at all times, it is decidedly faster than any realtime game. Even Devil May Cry has you waiting a few moments every now and then.

But a fully TB system has no need to make you wait. You can theoretically proceed exactly as fast as you want to. Which gives you ample time to think and play it as quickly as the fastest action game out there depending on your grasp of the situation at hand.

 

[hiver]

Well... yes, i guess. But a TB system doesnt really need to try to be faster. What it needs to be is fuller.
To me, there is no "waiting" in good TB combat. Because you are engaged at all times. You dont "wait" - you observe, follow and rearrange your plans as situation develops and changes.
The fuller the system is, the more options you have to consider - more engaged you are.

Of course it is nicer when things are fluid and animations quick and there is no unnecessary lag of irrelevant features.
But thats all a secondary concern, if that.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Player versus character skill is a false dichotomy--the ever-brilliant Josh Sawyer

just got neuxcom huehue from roguey. As if someone not brain damaged will play exclusively in tpp in a strategy title.

There's a game called Valkyria Chronicles at which you might want to look.

Well you could argue iso is third person. but i meant gothic tpp or ots popamole tpp

 

[DalekFlay]

And here ypu go being stupid again. Repeating the same retarded stupid shit that was already dealt with and explained in the very beginning - only you fail to understand it.

Well I'm pretty tired of your arguments as well, which can be summed up as "HAHA YOO STUPID FUCKER I KNOWS WHAT THE RPGS IS!"

 

[Declinator]

Well... yes, i guess. But a TB system doesnt really need to try to be faster. What it needs to be is fuller.
To me, there is no "waiting" in good TB combat. Because you are engaged at all times. You dont "wait" - you observe, follow and rearrange your plans as situation develops and changes.
The fuller the system is, the more options you have to consider - more engaged you are.

Of course it is nicer when things are fluid and animations quick and there is no unnecessary lag of irrelevant features.
But thats all a secondary concern, if that.

In good TB combat there is still sometimes a lot of waiting. Even pinnacles like KotC or ToEE still had this though maybe some imaginary great RPG does not. Let's consider something like the final battle(s) in KotC where you have a considerable number of enemies that perform somewhat simplistic things in a sequential order which results in a lot of waiting around with the situation not changing significantly enough for me to consider changing my plans. This is less than optimal and often quite boring.

The late Chaos Chronicles was set to offer some alleviation to this by grouping weak enemies together which would mean they move simultaneously. They would not have grouped all weak enemies together of course but small pockets of enemies, for example if you have 9 kobols they would have become 3 groups of 3. That is, if I remember correctly how it was supposed to be.

Also, animations are a major concern in some games. Especially the aforementioned JRPGs which are just excruciating sometimes.

In a game where player skills negate character skills - there is only one path through the game that every seemingly different build gets to experience regardless of what they do. If there is any difference then those are purely cosmetic.

You seem to draw this "negates character skill" line pretty low, though, since you count Morrowind. Doing things you have zero skill at in Morrowind puts you at a massive disadvantage, if not makes it impossible to succeed. I agree with you when it comes to, say, Skyrim... very easy to use twitch skills to overcome stat deficiencies there. But Morrowind? No.

And all that is beside the core point people were making such as the screensaver comment, which is that if no player skill is involved then you're not interacting at all or doing anything. When people say "character skill not player skill" what they really mean is not twitch player skill, but rather cerebral skill. Knowing how to build a D&D character is a skill, for example. Knowing how to position combatants tactically is a skill, for example.

Outside cerebral skill, as soon as you go real-time in any way, even RtWP, you put some responsibility on the player to juggle powers, positioning, hotkeys and whatever else. That's a dexterous skill, even if it's very different from dodging and swinging swords.

All in all the point he was making about screensavers was that saying player skill isn't a factor in true RPGs means true RPGs are simple non-interactive simulations, which is bullshit.

The chart hiver posted didn't have True RPG with movies at the "totally about character skill" part but instead a little towards the player-skill side of things so he must acknowledge that some amount of player skill is involved. Of course the chart didn't say how much player skill should be involved in an optimal True RPG but the cut is pretty clear if you consider it.

The tactical parts of a game are practically always seen as belonging to the player. So at least that is about player skill. Equipment handling also comes to mind, and of course, managing the character skills themselves is also a player skill.

Generally speaking, you could say that player skill decides what to do and character skill decides how well it is done.

What else is there in a True RPG that would be about player skill? Maybe nothing else.

 

[Roguey]

Well you could argue iso is third person. but i meant gothic tpp or ots popamole tpp

Looks like I actually have to link to screenshot of VC
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2008/233/942165_20080821_screen003.jpg
This is a tactical RPG.

 

[Lancehead]

Generally speaking, you could say that player skill decides what to do and character skill decides how well it is done.

That's not quite correct. Character skill determines what can be done and that too in a context-less manner. It is the player that determines what's to be done with the character skill and it is his skill that determines how well it is done. If the best RPGs require tactical decisions and make the player put on his thinking cap, then such RPGs are the ones that require the most player skill, since simply pressing A ("what to do") and watching the character do awesomely ("how well it is done") is not possible.

This is why player skill-character skill dichotomy is fallacious. In a good RPG, neither should work without the other. Character skills are simply tools at the character's disposal, and tools shouldn't be effective without a resourceful user (player).

 

[Declinator]

Generally speaking, you could say that player skill decides what to do and character skill decides how well it is done.

That's not quite correct. Character skill determines what can be done and that too in a context-less manner. It is the player that determines what's to be done with the character skill and it is his skill that determines how well it is done.

What I said is not quite correct which is why I said "generally speaking."

I could have said "you could say that player skill decides what to from the list of things that can done which is sometimes, but not always, decided by character skill, and character skill then decides how well it is done" but to honest that somehow seems a bit less concise...

If the best RPGs require tactical decisions and make the player put on his thinking cap, then such RPGs are the ones that require the most player skill, since simply pressing A ("what to do") and watching the character do awesomely ("how well it is done") is not possible.

This is why player skill-character skill dichotomy is fallacious. In a good RPG, neither should work without the other. Character skills are simply tools at the character's disposal, and tools shouldn't be effective without a resourceful user (player).

Tactical decisions do not automatically require more player skill than RPGs that require, for example, dexterity. The notion is ridiculous though you probably did not mean it like that.

Player skill-character skill dichotomy is fallacious only if you include tactical decision making in the mix. You take it out and the dichotomy makes sense again. You can call the newly formed dichotomy something else if that makes you feel better.

 

[Delterius]

Player versus character skill is a false dichotomy--the ever-brilliant Josh Sawyer.

That sort of felt like the build up to a quote.

 

[Lancehead]

Tactical decisions do not automatically require more player skill than RPGs that require, for example, dexterity. The notion is ridiculous though you probably did not mean it like that.

Player skill-character skill dichotomy is fallacious only if you include tactical decision making in the mix.

Player skill can include decision making, twitching or creativity. I just used "best RPGs" as containing tactical decision making since that's the prevailing thought on the Codex.

You take it out and the dichotomy makes sense again.

No, it doesn't. How effective would you say you are with a weapon without any investment in its skill in Deus Ex?

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Well you could argue iso is third person. but i meant gothic tpp or ots popamole tpp

Looks like I actually have to link to screenshot of VC
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2008/233/942165_20080821_screen003.jpg
This is a tactical RPG.

You selectively ignored my bolded question whether that 3rd person see pc butt view was the only view available. So i will repeat it

There is no optional zoomed out iso/iso-like view?

Jesus fuck that looks horrible camera to pla n stuff like flanking, aoe attacks etc. Is it exclusively in that perspective or just for those 30 sec animations japfags like so much? No overhead/iso view?

At least DAO pc version had zoomed out iso view along with the 3rd person.

Tried arghest wars, was a piece of shit. Looks like the Souls series is the only good non porn games from Japan in recent times.