Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

PC Gamer reviews Dragon Age

Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,876,065
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
Not to mention the traditional way turns WEAPONS into ladies hygienepads.

"FUCK YEAH BASTARD SWORD OF ASSRAPING, POWER ATTACK IS A GO "

"Hmm, sorry, my armor stopped it completely. I know you could probably take down a building with that attack, but sorry. Splint mail, you know. Good stuff."

"..."
 

Weresloth

Novice
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
94
Livonya said:
I am positive that the scripting will be dumbed down for DA:O as there is no way in hell they are going to be able to allow players access to the internal scripting mechanisms that the designers used for the AI especially considering it isn't PC only. Maybe I will be surprised.

I think you'll be surprised.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Warden said:
B) In the SECOND part (that's the LAST sentence), he's talking about DAMAGE REDUCTION, i.e. ABSOBRING DAMAGE ONLY PARTIALLY, which he finds nonsensical since his point of view is that damage should be absorbed entirely if you're hit on your armor, or not reduced at all -> if it connects to a spot where you're not covered with armor.
Yes, bu clearly, this individual has never worn armor or used it in combat. If I give you a bulletproof vest, then unload a shotgun into your chest, you're still going to take damage. It STINGS and you may crack a rib.
 

draexem

Novice
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
75
Norfleet said:
Yes, bu clearly, this individual has never worn armor or used it in combat. If I give you a bulletproof vest, then unload a shotgun into your chest, you're still going to take damage. It STINGS and you may crack a rib.

Indeed, not to mention in medieval times plate armour was practically impenetrable using swords (which is why most European swords come with a point, to stab at the joints in the armour). One way to get around people wearing plate armour was to take to them with a heavy blunt object, or a pole arm. One of the purposes of this being that the armour absorbs SOME of the damage, but the force is so great that bones are still broken through the armour. Behold, damage reduction at work. The other purpose was to knock them down onto the ground and beat them bloody.

Damage reduction is a good realistic idea. It is not perfectly realistic, but it's a step in the right direction.
 

GarfunkeL

Racism Expert
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
15,463
Location
Insert clever insult here
Clockwork Knight said:
Not to mention the traditional way turns WEAPONS into ladies hygienepads.

"FUCK YEAH BASTARD SWORD OF ASSRAPING, POWER ATTACK IS A GO "

"Hmm, sorry, my armor stopped it completely. I know you could probably take down a building with that attack, but sorry. Splint mail, you know. Good stuff."

"..."

"FUCK YEAH PLATE MAIL OF INVULNERABILITY, STONE MODE IS A GO"

"Hmm, sorry, my bastard sword still cracks your ribs and bruises your tender chest. I know your armor is supposed to stop meteor swarms from archmages, butg sorry. Realism in our fantasy game, you know. Good stuff."
 

GarfunkeL

Racism Expert
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
15,463
Location
Insert clever insult here
draexem said:
Norfleet said:
Yes, bu clearly, this individual has never worn armor or used it in combat. If I give you a bulletproof vest, then unload a shotgun into your chest, you're still going to take damage. It STINGS and you may crack a rib.

Indeed, not to mention in medieval times plate armour was practically impenetrable using swords

Hey, thanks for proving my point!

One way to get around people wearing plate armour was to take to them with a heavy blunt object, or a pole arm. One of the purposes of this being that the armour absorbs SOME of the damage, but the force is so great that bones are still broken through the armour

Yeah true. But if you change your combat mechanic into pure DR system, you have the silliness where combatants will slowly slice little bits of HP off each other. Neither system is anywhere close to perfect.
 
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,876,065
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
GarfunkeL said:
Clockwork Knight said:
Not to mention the traditional way turns WEAPONS into ladies hygienepads.

"FUCK YEAH BASTARD SWORD OF ASSRAPING, POWER ATTACK IS A GO "

"Hmm, sorry, my armor stopped it completely. I know you could probably take down a building with that attack, but sorry. Splint mail, you know. Good stuff."

"..."

"FUCK YEAH PLATE MAIL OF INVULNERABILITY, STONE MODE IS A GO"

"Hmm, sorry, my bastard sword still cracks your ribs and bruises your tender chest. I know your armor is supposed to stop meteor swarms from archmages, butg sorry. Realism in our fantasy game, you know. Good stuff."

It has nothing to do with realism (otherwise, why walk from one town to another? Let's just take a magic pony cab, LOL!). As I said, the guy in the example is capable of taking down a building. Btw, why should the stone mode guy have an advantage? Why did the bastard sword guy even buy a kickass weapon at all, then? To take down unarmored foes?

You just have to find a balance. Otherwise, you'll have awesome weapons / shitty armor, or shitty weapons / awesome armor. To make the situation not look ridiculous, you need armor that protects the user, but he still needs to understand every attack is fucking dangerous. The armor is there to give him a minimum of help if shit goes south, not to ensure nothing will happen if he gets hit.

The point is, invulnerable armor is just as bad as defense-ignoring weapons.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
3,749
Location
Moo?
Almost every review I've seen mentions the Mage Tower being a good part of the game. I wonder if that's one of the things they actually got right.
 

Mangoose

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
25,053
Location
I'm a Banana
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity
Norfleet said:
Warden said:
B) In the SECOND part (that's the LAST sentence), he's talking about DAMAGE REDUCTION, i.e. ABSOBRING DAMAGE ONLY PARTIALLY, which he finds nonsensical since his point of view is that damage should be absorbed entirely if you're hit on your armor, or not reduced at all -> if it connects to a spot where you're not covered with armor.
Yes, bu clearly, this individual has never worn armor or used it in combat. If I give you a bulletproof vest, then unload a shotgun into your chest, you're still going to take damage. It STINGS and you may crack a rib.
Well. A) A shotgun bullet being shot has so much more kinetic energy than any bladed weapon swing (huge velocity difference). B) Kevlar's purpose is to yield and absorb energy. Metal armor not only absorbs but deflects. The thin edge of a sword blade if impacting at an imperfect angle will be deflected to an even larger angle by the metal plate. And the similar hardness values of the sword and plate armor prevent the sword from cutting into the plate.

Now with a blunt weapon such as a hammer, a larger mass is impacted onto the armor with a similar velocity, resulting in a proportionally larger kinetic energy. When you want to bend a piece of metal, you don't use the thin blade of a (however large) knife, you use a hammer (... or machine in your shop).

And with materials softer than metal, the sword can cut into as it is meant to do. I suppose this would be the same for mail as the gaps in the rings cause all kinds of material weaknesses.

So AC/DR... really depends on the the shapes, masses, and materials of the two objects in play.

Of course if AC = armor deflection, then I don't see how Strength is supposed to add to AB. Meh. Riddle of Steel system, anybody?
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
GarfunkeL said:
Yeah true. But if you change your combat mechanic into pure DR system, you have the silliness where combatants will slowly slice little bits of HP off each other. Neither system is anywhere close to perfect.
But that's how real combat in armor works! You beat your opponents and over and over until they fall down and you can then run them through properly. A side effect of such a system is that character don't need unrealistic levels of hitpoints until a seminaked chick in a bikini can survive being hacked for 30 minutes with an axe, they merely need a few hitpoints and heavy armor, and they can take the levels of pounding needed to fight. And if they don't have any armor, then they die messily. Just like real life.

Mangoose said:
Well. A) A shotgun bullet being shot has so much more kinetic energy than any bladed weapon swing (huge velocity difference). B) Kevlar's purpose is to yield and absorb energy. Metal armor not only absorbs but deflects. The thin edge of a sword blade if impacting at an imperfect angle will be deflected to an even larger angle by the metal plate. And the similar hardness values of the sword and plate armor prevent the sword from cutting into the plate.
Well, see, this is why you need to get away from people and their hard-ons for swords. If you want to beat up someone who has full plate armor that renders them nearly invulnerable to swords, you whail on them with a mace. Once you smash his chestplate in, he's going to have a hard time breathing and his armor will now be more of a hindrance than a help, even if he hasn't been killed. Smash in his arm and leg joints, and he won't be able to move effectively. Once his shiny armor is all bent, he's much less effective of a combatant. Then you knock him over and smash him in the head repeatedly. If he managed to survive that, he sure isn't in a condition to stop you from stabbing him in the face with your facestabbing knife. Yes, in those days they carried thin knives specifically for facestabbing an opponent once you had beaten him senseless, as the thin blades could go through the face slits on their helmets, or through the joints.

Ultimately, I can't picture characters wearing armor like that constantly, though. Stuff's hot, and smelly, and generally unpleasant, and not something you want to be running around through the woods all day in. That's the sort of thing you only trot out for those big set-piece battles. Armor intended for regular-wearing would be lighter and reduced to the key pieces that aren't too unpleasant. Otherwise it wouldn't matter how good his armor is when he has passed out from heat exhaustion. The Crusaders frequently found they had to dump a lot of that heavy armor as otherwise they would pass out in the desert. The Arabs would often just ride around them, waiting for them to get tired from wearing that heavy armor and start to pass out before attacking them. Wearing heavy, nigh-invulnerable armor isn't without its drawbacks and exploitable weaknesses. Just make 'em run after you for an hour or two in the desert, and they'll be ready to drop without any fighting at all.
 

Mangoose

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
25,053
Location
I'm a Banana
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity
Norfleet said:
Hm, I guess I'll take that as you agreeing with the rest of my post (saying that a blunt weapon is better against plate, etc.). But yeah, "So AC/DR... really depends on the the shapes, masses, and materials of the two objects in play."

As for
Ultimately, I can't picture characters wearing armor like that constantly, though.
Unfortunately it's the norm for D&D and fantasy games to have their normal warriors wearing plate.
 

BLOBERT

FUCKING SLAYINGN IT BROS
Patron
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
4,250
Location
BRO
Codex 2012
BROS DO YOU THINK IT IS MORE REALIZTIC TO HAVE SPELL POINTS OR MEMORIZATION I THINK SPELL POINTS ARE MORE REALISTIC I NEVER FORGET MY SPELLS I JUST GET TIRED AFTER TOO MANMY
 

Elzair

Cipher
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,254
Trithne said:
But you're calling him a cretin. Which is an insult devolved from the Greeks considering people from Crete to be inferior to them.

With that out of the way, back to the important things: level scaling or fixed encounters - which is better and why?

According to Wikipedia, the word Cretin dates back to the 18th century Alpine-French word Chrétien, which means "a Christian."

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the translation of the French term into "human creature" implies that the label "Christian" is a reminder of the humanity of the afflicted, in contrast to brute beasts.[1] Other sources suggest that Christian describes the person's "Christ-like" inability to sin, stemming, in such cases, from an incapacity to distinguish right from wrong.
 

Killzig

Cipher
Patron
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
997
Location
The Wastes
Trithne said:
According to Wikipedia

I'm not even going to debate the point, but really now.

The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology | 1996 | © The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology 1996, originally published by Oxford University Press 1996.

cretin deformed idiot of the Alpine valleys. XVIII. — F. crétin — Swiss F. creitin, crestin :- L. Chrīstiānus CHRISTIAN, the reprs. of which in Rom. langs. also mean ‘human being’ as dist. from the brutes.

Moar reading here -> http://www.word-detective.com/2008/12/18/cretin/
 

WDeranged

Educated
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
72
Ok, I just spent six quid (six fucking quid) on this magazine and typed up the bulk of the review.

This is not a game that can simply be explained, how does it begin? it begins in six completely different ways and each of these can be met with a wildly different approach. an excellent portion of the game to relate would be my adventures in the Dwarven city of Orzammar, except there's little chance that you will experience the same events in the same way when you get there. The relationships you have with your party - they all form an experience unique to you.

What will be common to all is the combination of dialogue and combat. Whether you play as a human, elf or dwarf, a rogue, a warrior or mage, a noble or commoner, Dragon Age requires smart use of your wits and weapons. Combat is a combination of real time fighting and turn based handing out of orders.

This is about politics, moral philosophy and love. And about killing dragons with swords. No matter how you approach Dragon Age, combat will be your constant companion. While there are many encounters with a silver tongue that can end peacefully, you aren't going to be reasoning with the Darkspawn, enraged demons, or bandits and assassins. This is where the balance in your party is essential. The game's unfriendly difficulty settings (more on this later) don't leave much room for a gang that doesn't have at least one healer, a couple of strong melee fighters, and someone capable of combat both at range and close up. Fortunately you've got no shortage of suitable candidates.

You can approach combat a couple of ways depending upon your personal preferences and the difficulty level to which you've set the game. In theory setting it to easy should let you fight in real time, where you select opponents and issue instructions from a row of tiled attacks, spells and special items familiar to any MMO player, as the fight happens. Choose normal and you'll have to make consistent use of the spacebar to pause and jump between characters, lining up their next move. This might be used to heal themselves, change target, use a particular special attack, or aid another. Hit space again, watch how these moves play out, then pause once more. It's a form of self created turn based play that encourages enormous involvement.

Further to this are the combat tactics. Each character has a limited number of these slots (expanded through leveling up and choosing particular skills) to which you can assign specific actions to be performed in specific conditions using cascading menus.


However, in a game with few flaws, theres one flailing giant (multiheaded?) one when it comes to difficulty settings. The pop up text suggesting that switching to easy will remove the need for micromanagement during fights is lying. There are difficulty spikes at certain points where getting through a battle on easy becomes stunningly hard, and requires frenetic fine tuning. Similarly if you chose to play a dwarf rogue, you'll find yourself forced to pick easy during the opening moments of the game because you're simply incapable of surviving battles otherwise.

Later on, any class can hold their own with enough skills, But unless you're a mage with a cluster of healing spells you must be prepared to spam health poultices to get though many tough encounters.

Nothing in the game comes without an involved background or moral ambiguity. For example at any point your party can camp, which allows you to heal up, talk to your companions and trade with a couple of dwarves who appear follow you around. But even these dwarves come with a history. The younger of the two is the only mentally handicapped character i can remember encountering in a game. He's looked after by his father, and has a savant gift for enchanting weapons. Treat them as more than a shop, talk to them and the details of their past emerge, along with a surprising ethical quandary.

Dwarven culture, incidentally, is fascinating. It has a caste system where dwarves are born into the same role in life as their same sex parent. Your family will be nobles, warriors, smiths, artisans, miner, merchants or servants, and this well never change. Should a servant marry a noble woman, his son would remain a servant while his daughter would live in the upper echelons. And then, as we mentioned earlier there are the casteless. Either because of ancestral disgrace, or because they went above ground for too long, these dwarves are stripped of their identities, their ancestry removed from Dwarven history.

It's abhorrent. Exploring the city's slums is distressing. But you're an outsider (unless you're playing a dwarf, of course) so how much is it your place to object? This is question the game asks. At one point you're challenged over whether to help set up a chantry in the city of Orzammar - among a race who believe in a completely different, completely incompatible religion. But what if the chantry might offer help to the casteless? What then? At the same time you're drawn into the dirty politics of which of two deadlocked candidates should be the new king, alongside exploring the Darkspawn infested abandoned mines and townships deeper into the mountain. And that's less than half of what happens here.

Were the difficulty levels not so enormously silly, it would require sheer pickiness to find a major fault with this game. Importantly, overly difficult sequences can be powered through on easy, but this doesn't excuse it being necessary. Despite the time and investment required to cultivate relationships with party members, these still feel a little clumsy, and despite my best efforts to have a gay relationship with one party member, i found myself surprised and somewhat confused to have inadvertently accepted the advances of another. Oh, and if we're listing faults, one appalling gaff is the failure to change family members skin colour if you roleplay a non Caucasian. My main protagonist, a black Man lived as a sort of reverse 'The Jerk', where no one mentioned the fact that his mother, father and brothers were all white. Embarrassing.

But coming out of the end of an epic 80 hours first playthrough, I live with memories that feel like more than simply events in a game. the friendship i formed with fellow grey warden Alistair has an echo of a reality. His penchant for sarcasm, his sniping conversations with Morrigan as we explored, and his struggle to balance emotion and bravado, continue to resonate.

I've not only been to huge cities, but I've learned their past, their present, and been involved in shaping their future. This hasn't felt like passing through a series of checkpoints, but having experienced a world. I know enough about the religion of the chantry to preach their own chants. My connection to the grey wardens is palpable, and the part I played an honourable one.

This is the most enormously detailed game world I've experienced, its history stretching back thousand of years, its cultures vivid, beautiful and flawed, the battles enormous, the humour superb. roleplaying games now have a great deal to live up to.

So there you go, argue away :twisted:
 

aries202

Erudite
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
1,066
Location
Denmark, Europe
dimaniak said:
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/9/index/32009/1 - quite negative preview in russian.

If you look at the comments for this russian preview, you will find that the reviewer maybe? complains about that choices in this game is very difficult to make; aparrantly she had a very hard time choosing to side between the dryads or the elves. This is what is known as c&c; it is good thing, to me, I find.

She also complains about the funny looking underwear - but face it - who wouldn't?
The reason behind this is simply because EA and Bioware can't show total and full nudity in games - at least not games being made in North America - due to ESRB ratings.

edit:

The qouted block review is from exactly what magazine?
 

GarfunkeL

Racism Expert
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
15,463
Location
Insert clever insult here
50817_orig.jpg


Savvy_picturefullsmall.jpg


AoC63.JPG


ageofconan2cutelw5.jpg


bewbs2-1.jpg


Not just the underwear. Those 4 pics are from Age of Conan, a MMORPG. And the female models are way better looking than anything in DA:O.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom