Dragon Age 3: Inquisition announced

Page 98 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
You do realize if you just always hold the right mouse button, you move in any direction you want with mouse turning.

I cant' be bothered with that shit.


...no I did not realize that, and I changed long before discovering this.

Was trying to figure out tactical controls during prologue. They were so broken, and I could never get comfortable with them that I became completely frustrated.

....too bad it turns out that tactical combat is yet another thing jettisoned in this game. :D
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
So . . . hard . . . to move 1 finger. Must be as lazy . . . as possible. :lol:

exactly!

:colbert:

(thing is: I spend most of my day pipetting into microtubes with my right hand. I'm not going to spend those off hours moving a character with a right mouse button depressed all the time--especially in an open exploration game. That's rather painful)
 
Last edited:

you2

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2002
7,125
2,167
136
I mostly agree on the combat but at level 13 I still can't kill dragons :(


Just play the game on easy or normal. As a grown ass man, I have neither the time nor the inclination to worry about collecting junk in video games. I mainly play for the story. The combat in this game isn't that interesting anyway, and from what I understand, if you spend enough time you can upgrade yourself to the point where nightmare mode is a cakewalk anyway. So why bother?
 

ControlD

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2005
5,440
44
91
I mostly agree on the combat but at level 13 I still can't kill dragons :(

Honestly, I think I was around level 15 before I started hunting dragons. Even then, I think I did the last five dragons all in one day right before I started to finish off the story. I was a bit over leveled for those fights, but in general those battles are supposed to be hard.

The funny thing is, the Hinterlands dragon is the first one you have an opportunity to fight and I still think that was the hardest one for me.
 

Rhezuss

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2006
4,118
34
91
I killed my first dragon at level 12,
the Hinterlands one
. I tried at level 10 and 11 but couldn't do shit and never got the beast down 25% in HP. I was with Cassandra, Varric and Solas at that time.

When I got Iron Bull I switch Cass for him and also switched Solas for Dorian (but I think i'll bring back Solas).

So I went to that dragon in the spoiler tag at level 12 (as a S&S Tank) with Iron Bull (2H DPS), Varric (Ranged DPS with some sthealth stuff) and Dorian (in full Fire mage DPS mode). This time it went like a charm. Not an easy fight but went very well. Took about 10 minutes to down the thing and it was really satisfying. But two characters died during the combat.

I also killed my second dragon yesterday in
Crestwood
, this onw was not easy either and everyone died except Iron Bull that landed the final blow, it was awesome!

I know I should get other potions and maybe the upgrade to 3 potions carried/more potions but I always equip the Health Potion and the Regeneration Potion on all characters. Can't go out without them I guess. The Regen potion is very useful when your charcaters are at 50% HP, you pause and pop one on each low health characters and resume the fight.

Thing is, I found out I freaking HATE the "before combat prep" in these games. Popping some DPA boosting potions, some spells and go in...dunno but I find it boring as hell. Reminds me of my favorite class in the NWN series, the Cleric...but to be good and effective I had to cast 5-6 spells on the groups before going in, everytime, and then rest. It was mind dumbing and boring...but I loved the class lol.

So I tend to just bring HP/Regen potions and pop them when I need to.
 
Last edited:

cbrunny

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 2007
6,791
406
126
22 hours....

lol I lasted closer to 22 minutes before throwing it in on the first Witcher game. I know it was very early to quit but there were zero redeeming qualities in what I did play. I got it for free though, or hella cheap.

22 minutes is probably an understatement. Likely closer to an hour or so.... lemme check that steam db thinger...

9 minutes. I played the Witcher for 9 minutes and that was enough for me to quit.

Apparently I played The Witcher 2 for 3 hours though. I don't remember that.
 

ControlD

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2005
5,440
44
91
lol I lasted closer to 22 minutes before throwing it in on the first Witcher game. I know it was very early to quit but there were zero redeeming qualities in what I did play. I got it for free though, or hella cheap.

22 minutes is probably an understatement. Likely closer to an hour or so.... lemme check that steam db thinger...

9 minutes. I played the Witcher for 9 minutes and that was enough for me to quit.

Apparently I played The Witcher 2 for 3 hours though. I don't remember that.

I see I made it 33 minutes into my last try with Witcher (Enhanced Edition). I still plan on progressing a little further, but I started Far Cry 4 at the same time and that game won me over for the time being.
 

Kev

Lifer
Dec 17, 2001
16,367
4
81
Add me to the list of people who can't get into the Witcher games. I tried once for Witcher 1 but hated the combat and the engine ran like shit. Witcher 2 seems better but I have tried 3 times to get into it but haven't gotten more than a few hours in.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
lol I lasted closer to 22 minutes before throwing it in on the first Witcher game. I know it was very early to quit but there were zero redeeming qualities in what I did play. I got it for free though, or hella cheap.

22 minutes is probably an understatement. Likely closer to an hour or so.... lemme check that steam db thinger...

9 minutes. I played the Witcher for 9 minutes and that was enough for me to quit.

Cripes . . . do you think its fair to judge a game when you didn't make it past the first section of the tutorial? You basically watched the opening studio logos of a movie and decide you didn't like the movie.
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
Well, this is one of my favorite games this year. But, I will say, if that is going to be a gamebreaker for you, if that is your primary fun, then you will hate it.

I tried the prologue on KB/M. couldn't do it.

tweaked my character, switched to 360 controller, and it was much better. I don't think there is any way to "fix" keyboard and mouse for this. combat, and the design of the skill system, was all about 8 buttons on the gamepad.

There are less skills, and even within those skills, you have stacked effects (basically--what would have been 2 or even 3 skills in DA:O or other comparable games, is combined into 1 skill in DA:I). Honestly, I don't think that's a horrible design choice, but I can see why people would balk over that. For one thing: passives tend to be far more powerful than active skills.

Mages are a good bit neutered in comparison to most RPGs

So, build design, far beyond combat, pretty much says that there is no hope for KB/M in this game. Now, people still use their KB/M--because they are stubborn, I guess--but even tolerating that means that you accept only moving in cardinal directions which, to me, is revolting. :D

DA:I is quite a bit of a shock when you see how much they change from previous DA games,no manual attribute assignment,stripped down mages,only 8 active skills slots.

As to K and M,well a lot of PC gamers prefer to use mouse and keyboard and most of us have a decent gaming mouse and in my case a good quality mechanical keyboard(QPAD) so why should we have to use a controller on good gear(K and M) we already have,also remember the first two DA games had pretty good M/K controls,but then DA:I came a long and turned the game upside down on its head.

Sorry I can't defend this game with all the bad things they have done to it.

I hope they do a 180 turn around with DA4.


I could also point out if I want to use a gamepad then I might as well go console and be 100% consolized,sorry it's not going to happen.

RPGs have been keyboard and mouse for a very long time especially on the PC,why should that change just because DA:I has been dumbed down and consolized.

For the record I hated playing mage in DA:I,what they did to DA:I was unforgivable IMHO.



Little rant by me ;) .
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
DA:I is quite a bit of a shock when you see how much they change from previous DA games,no manual attribute assignment,stripped down mages,only 8 active skills slots.

As to K and M,well a lot of PC gamers prefer to use mouse and keyboard and most of us have a decent gaming mouse and in my case a good quality mechanical keyboard(QPAD) so why should we have to use a controller on good gear(K and M) we already have,also remember the first two DA games had pretty good M/K controls,but then DA:I came a long and turned the game upside down on its head.

Sorry I can't defend this game with all the bad things they have done to it.

I hope they do a 180 turn around with DA4.


I could also point out if I want to use a gamepad then I might as well go console and be 100% consolized,sorry it's not going to happen.

RPGs have been keyboard and mouse for a very long time especially on the PC,why should that change just because DA:I has been dumbed down and consolized.



Little rant by me ;) .

I prefer KB & M as well--I have a nice mechanical keyboard and mouse--but I don't cry over such things.

If it plays better the other way, for me, I'll do it. It's just a game. It's not a lifestyle decision.

Now, if it's a shooter that wants you to use a gamepad...I probably wont' play it. Then again, I don't play that many shooters. :\
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
DA:I is quite a bit of a shock when you see how much they change from previous DA games,no manual attribute assignment,stripped down mages,only 8 active skills slots.

As to K and M,well a lot of PC gamers prefer to use mouse and keyboard and most of us have a decent gaming mouse and in my case a good quality mechanical keyboard(QPAD) so why should we have to use a controller on good gear(K and M) we already have,also remember the first two DA games had pretty good M/K controls,but then DA:I came a long and turned the game upside down on its head.

Sorry I can't defend this game with all the bad things they have done to it.

I hope they do a 180 turn around with DA4.


I could also point out if I want to use a gamepad then I might as well go console and be 100% consolized,sorry it's not going to happen.

RPGs have been keyboard and mouse for a very long time especially on the PC,why should that change just because DA:I has been dumbed down and consolized.



Little rant by me ;) .

I actually agree with all of this. It is particularly evident because I have just played all 3 games back-to-back-to-back. I am now enjoying Inquisition, but it has taken longer to get into and there are still many things which annoy me. I am also nowhere near as invested in it as I was in the first 2 games.

KT
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
I prefer KB & M as well--I have a nice mechanical keyboard and mouse--but I don't cry over such things.

If it plays better the other way, for me, I'll do it. It's just a game. It's not a lifestyle decision.

Now, if it's a shooter that wants you to use a gamepad...I probably wont' play it. Then again, I don't play that many shooters. :\

Gamepads have there place ie racing games and I'm one of the first to use them in those but nothing wrong with mouse and keyboard with RPGs unless you let Bioware mess with it.

Problem with DA:I as a PC gamer is they are trying to force you to use gamepad,they want you to only use eight skills slots and no more,I could go on but you see my point,as I stated earlier they can get mouse and keyboard decent on DAO and even DA2 but DA:I sorry best played with gamepad,wtf?..
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
I actually agree with all of this. It is particularly evident because I have just played all 3 games back-to-back-to-back. I am now enjoying Inquisition, but it has taken longer to get into and there are still many things which annoy me. I am also nowhere near as invested in it as I was in the first 2 games.

KT

I can buy that. I hadn't played DA:O in 2 or 3? years. never played DA2.

Nothing felt different o me, as I really didnt' recall what DA:O was like. I just recalled pausing all the time and sending out commands during fights and eventually, it got to be quite repetitive as I became rather overpowered as a backstabbing Rogue (stealth in ahead of party, stab 2 goons, bring the rest in to finish off the scraps, repeat)

After finishing DA:I, I started a new game of DA:O, briefly, and was shocked at how different it was. ...it is actually hard! I think my person got destroyed 6 times straight on the first fight in the prologue. That, on top of gearing and character builds with DA:O, I downgraded my DA:I impression from a 9 to a ~7.5 out of 10.

Still...miles better than what I am currently seeing in Mass Effect 3. Yes, it's an older game now, but wow--those games seem to jump off several cliffs between each sequel.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
Gamepads have there place ie racing games and I'm one of the first to use them in those but nothing wrong with mouse and keyboard with RPGs unless you let Bioware mess with it.

Problem with DA:I as a PC gamer is they are trying to force you to use gamepad,they want you to only use eight skills slots and no more,I could go on but you see my point,as I stated earlier they can get mouse and keyboard decent on DAO and even DA2 but DA:I sorry best played with gamepad,wtf?..

I don't think there is anything wrong with M&K for RPG either, as I have said several times. much preferred, as you don't have to navigate through several useless menus to get to the one that you want, for example.

I also don't mind being limited to 8 skills, though. It's certainly not unprecedented and, quite frankly (as I've said over and over), I find the typical MMO style of plastering your screen with dozens of skills you don't need to be terrible design. I like design around something like 8 or 9 well-synced skills, given a choice of dozens of skills to pull from. it allows for much greater diversity and solid build choices in the end, and isn't as mindless as just running out with everything blasting from your arsenal.

That being said, DA:I doesn't really provide such diverse skills, and in great number, because they are so repetitive from tree to tree. I don't know--I guess I am both for it and against it in this case. :D
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
Mass Effect 3's combat and RPG mechanics were better than ME2 or ME1, in my opinion.

But yeah, I would really prefer the game to have better KB&M controls. Reducing the power bar to 8 slots is just lazy. But all of that's not enough to really spoil my experience with the game in the face of everything else I enjoy about it.

I guess the game is sort of easier than DAO was on its normal difficulty. But really, I don't expect or want the normal difficulty to be punishing. There's two higher difficulty settings in DAI if you want to want to get destroyed. Plus, you can enable friendly fire to force you to think more tactically. Friendly fire was enabled automatically from the normal difficulty up in DAO, while it's a separate gameplay setting in DAI.
 

cytoSiN

Platinum Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,262
7
81
I don't think there is anything wrong with M&K for RPG either, as I have said several times. much preferred, as you don't have to navigate through several useless menus to get to the one that you want, for example.

I also don't mind being limited to 8 skills, though. It's certainly not unprecedented and, quite frankly (as I've said over and over), I find the typical MMO style of plastering your screen with dozens of skills you don't need to be terrible design. I like design around something like 8 or 9 well-synced skills, given a choice of dozens of skills to pull from. it allows for much greater diversity and solid build choices in the end, and isn't as mindless as just running out with everything blasting from your arsenal.

That being said, DA:I doesn't really provide such diverse skills, and in great number, because they are so repetitive from tree to tree. I don't know--I guess I am both for it and against it in this case. :D

Part of the problem, for me anyway, is that there's really no synergy or rotation to skill use until level 15+, when you've gotten deep enough into a specialization to really have a powerful rotation where the skills actually feed each other. I like that many abilities are passive, so I don't mind being limited to 8 skills. But until I was halfway down a specialization (or more on some characters) I didn't love the approach they took. That said, at level 20, with my builds the way I want them, I find the combat to be really synergistic and fun. Too bad it took so long to get to that point.
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
I don't think there is anything wrong with M&K for RPG either, as I have said several times. much preferred, as you don't have to navigate through several useless menus to get to the one that you want, for example.

I also don't mind being limited to 8 skills, though. It's certainly not unprecedented and, quite frankly (as I've said over and over), I find the typical MMO style of plastering your screen with dozens of skills you don't need to be terrible design. I like design around something like 8 or 9 well-synced skills, given a choice of dozens of skills to pull from. it allows for much greater diversity and solid build choices in the end, and isn't as mindless as just running out with everything blasting from your arsenal.

That being said, DA:I doesn't really provide such diverse skills, and in great number, because they are so repetitive from tree to tree. I don't know--I guess I am both for it and against it in this case. :D


I had the opposite experience with only having eight slots,just spamming same ones,no point getting new skills because no room on skill bar so you go for passive ones that help,however you do spam those same eight skills when only limited to eight skill slots,my mage got boring really quick and felt so restricted,infact I did not really enjoy the game that much because of the changes for the worst,crafting was ok however,as for "game of the year" far from it IMHO,but hey it's a Bioware game so comes with lifetime guarantee of game of the year sticker regardless.

I did miss manual assigning of attributes as well(again were in previous DA games),all these little things add up and it's like "here have a dumbed down game and get on with it",thanks for nothing Bioware.

At least we will have Witcher 3 to the rescue :) .
 

ControlD

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2005
5,440
44
91
Part of the problem, for me anyway, is that there's really no synergy or rotation to skill use until level 15+, when you've gotten deep enough into a specialization to really have a powerful rotation where the skills actually feed each other. I like that many abilities are passive, so I don't mind being limited to 8 skills. But until I was halfway down a specialization (or more on some characters) I didn't love the approach they took. That said, at level 20, with my builds the way I want them, I find the combat to be really synergistic and fun. Too bad it took so long to get to that point.

I think the way the synergy was intended to work was not within one character but rather within the party of four. You as a mage are the setup character with a spell like freeze. Your warrior/rogue/other mage then unleashes the detonator ability to finish the combo off. At least that's how I tried to approach the more difficult battles.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
I had the opposite experience with only having eight slots,just spamming same ones,no point getting new skills because no room on skill bar so you go for passive ones that help,however you do spam those same eight skills when only limited to eight skill slots,my mage got boring really quick and felt so restricted,infact I did not really enjoy the game that much because of the changes for the worst,crafting was ok however,as for "game of the year" far from it IMHO,but hey it's a Bioware game so comes with lifetime guarantee of game of the year sticker regardless.

I did miss manual assigning of attributes as well(again were in previous DA games),all these little things add up and it's like "here have a dumbed down game and get on with it",thanks for nothing Bioware.

At least we will have Witcher 3 to the rescue :) .

I think that's a mage specific issue in this game. I wanted to play one, but after fiddling with my companion mages, you realize that nearly every skill is the same. each elemental class pretty much has the same exact skills, just different colors/elements: mines, wall, AoE blast as your actual active skills....that is pretty terrible, imo.

I do like the use of passives though, and adding the secondary effects, but yoiu still end up spamming the same type of skill throughout the game.

As a Warrior, I was on cooldown for all of my skills all of the time, so I had no trouble using them...but it seemed to me that they broke down into two categories: taunts/guard building, or rush/smash/guard break skills. It didn't feel all that diverse, even though I was using everything.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
Mass Effect 3's combat and RPG mechanics were better than ME2 or ME1, in my opinion.

I cant' imagine how that is possible! :eek:

though..It does seem that the game is designed around run 5 feet this way, talk to this one person for 10 minutes, run this way, talk for 10 minutes, run down this tunnel and shoot about 5 people, run back (that's the first main mission that I finished--rescue the Turian diplomat dude). So, if good RPG means standing in long conversations, interspersed with a few minutes of combat and non-explorable tunnels with bright shiny things to activate for random XP that is never explained, then I can buy that

Does it get better? :D
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
This game seems like it could be good, especially since I'm a fan of pc RPGs like Baldur's Gate/Neverwinter series, but all the SJW pandering inserted into the game has entirely turned me off from buying it. It's a shame.
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
I cant' imagine how that is possible! :eek:

In ME1, what did spending an ability point get you? Increase assault rifle damage by 2%, increase duration of biotic abilities by 3%, etc. Whoop-dee-flippin'-doo. Ability points in ME3 (and ME2) are more meaningful. They give you larger increases at once rather than dozens of tiny increases. There are also more varied abilities, with more noticeable differences in behavior when progressed. Weapon upgrades have more tangible differences to your weapons (plus, weapons are much more varied than ME1 as well). Classes are more differentiated through unique abilities.

though..It does seem that the game is designed around run 5 feet this way, talk to this one person for 10 minutes, run this way, talk for 10 minutes, run down this tunnel and shoot about 5 people, run back (that's the first main mission that I finished--rescue the Turian diplomat dude). So, if good RPG means standing in long conversations, interspersed with a few minutes of combat and non-explorable tunnels with bright shiny things to activate for random XP that is never explained, then I can buy that

Does it get better? :D

Well now you're talking about level design. Outside hub areas (of which there are only really two in ME3, the Citadel and the Normandy), its level design is really what you would expect from a shooter game. No real exploration or backtracking.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,536
146
In ME1, what did spending an ability point get you? Increase assault rifle damage by 2%, increase duration of biotic abilities by 3%, etc. Whoop-dee-flippin'-doo. Ability points in ME3 (and ME2) are more meaningful. They give you larger increases at once rather than dozens of tiny increases. There are also more varied abilities, with more noticeable differences in behavior when progressed. Weapon upgrades have more tangible differences to your weapons (plus, weapons are much more varied than ME1 as well). Classes are more differentiated through unique abilities.

That's fair, but this is also what is going on with ability points and skills in DA:I--less skills, but each one is packed with a huge boost. One point means a lot.

I see a lot of criticism for that here regarding DA:I, without the critics really addressing those differences. It seems total number of skills is what makes "good design," not whether or not a certain percentage of those skills are useful. :\

Well now you're talking about level design. Outside hub areas (of which there are only really two in ME3, the Citadel and the Normandy), its level design is really what you would expect from a shooter game. No real exploration or backtracking.

That's a big part of RPGs for a lot of people, though: traditionally, RPGs are built around open exploration of the world, as it is more or less essential to the idea that you are creating your own person in this world. Even in "trapped maps," like you have with KoToR, there is a lot of space that you can explore. I can't think of an RPG that doesn't have maps with areas that you can explore, but never really need to. Or, at the very least, offer some false sense of openness. There is still some value in that.

ME3, to me, looks like Call of Duty with skill points and a story. :\
 
Last edited: