@Dannystaples14 I agree with everything else but I personally can stand to play more WW2 shooters, maybe not right away. I like the feeling of being a cog in a large battle more than the special forces feel that has taken root.
@bbq_R0ADK1LL I also feel ambivalent about unlocking such an, I think, essential tool. If DA: I had a command system progression, I would be impressed. In the beginning, our companions may not trust us enough to follow strict orders or the player character may not be in a commanding role to even issue orders. As the PC progresses in the game, he is able to issue more high risk-reward or unorthodox orders. Why should character affinity only matter when it comes to sex or whether they die or leave you?
That didn't occur to me until you mentioned it. It's not exactly the same thing as the tactical interface, which I think of as more of a communication tool. I'm not moving my companions like chess pieces but rather sharing what I think is a good course of action. It's why I'd love it if they are able to disagree or offer their own ideas, but I can only ask for so much in a $60 game.
I hope to hear more about the tactics in the game in the near future, not the interface per se, which I believe just makes the game more micro-manageable but not necessarily more tactical. For instance, I heard Kevin say he had to manually control a party member to use potions, and I know Kevin to be fair about tactics in RPG because I watched his video review(?) of Divinity: Original Sin. What? I can understand if I normally set potion use at 30% health and a badass can deal 50% HP damage to my guys, I may need to manually use some items. Ideally, though, I can go into an AI menu to tell my party that we now use potions at 60% health. It'd be better if I can just tell those followers whom I see get hit more to do that. What's the point of micromanaging mundane tasks other than to show AI's incompetence?
Don't get me wrong, until voice control becomes reliable and mainstream, a tactical interface can be great. On rare heat of the moment, I yelled at my screen, "Elf archer, shoot those explosive barrels!" or "Warriors, guard that doorway!" before realizing I needed to issue those more complicated or situational commands in a more realistic way. No, I didn't really do that, and I'd want to shout "Shoot that chandelier!" because barrels are boring. To have to issue obvious commands like "Hey, use AoE on that group of guys, not him!" is like telling John Price to toss a grenade into a building with two machine guns and not that lone enemy standing outside. I'd rather watch a scripted scene to than issue such a ridiculous command.
I seem to remember from a previous video that one character can toss another into battle. How cool is that? I wouldn't mind manually making that happen. It'd be cool if AI did that on their own occasionally, but even I wouldn't want those awesome moments to happen automatically all the time.
@gamingnerd121 I am kinda of curious when people mention that. Can you describe what you mean by "substance"? Or give an example of a game that has a lot of substance?
@Fire_Wa11 @sevuz7 Some people still haven't gotten over ME 3's ending? Wow. I don't think DA: I will be like that though. Even if BioWare didn't care about the backlash, having two back-to-back games with the same kind of ending is just so unimaginative. I'd really think BioWare were trying to push some kind of agenda in that case.
@kujel I think you should delete this comment and post a new one with SJW. I don't care to discuss "SJW," but I was curious if SWJ meant something else, so I read through the replies.
@yeah_28 I don't think it's worse because I don't think a more open world with more tactical control over party members is better than a more linear experience. Obviously if you are into more freedom or tactical control then it is better for you.
@Swaghard I am more curious how the difficulty changes the battles. So many games just buff the enemy's attributes, so boring. Now, if the AI gets better but not stronger (I favor fair strength--a knife wound that kills them kills me too--anyway), I'd play that difficulty by default. My companions must measure up, of course, and most of the combat scenarios should have sufficient freedom and external influences so if my band of 5 is forced to fight a band of 50, my winning actually makes sense.
@eriklee I'll agree with you, though it's more accurate that I don't disagree with any specific point. I love ME, I think, because of what you discussed. I require the freedom to play my character a certain way to really get into a game. I'll provide a counter example first. I loved Ellie to death but I could not get into The Last Us. I just didn't care about the struggle of the world gone to hell or the people in it; I only cared that Ellie cared. I felt more like a moviegoer forced to play various sequences so I could keep watching; I felt no different bashing a survivor's skull open from jamming a shiv into a fungal head. I felt the same way in ME.
You mentioned it too: excellent NPC. ME gave me greater freedom to know them, to both watch and influence their fate. I genuinely cared for Liara and Tali, and I was moved to tears when Mordin died. I was fascinated by Jacob's father and Legion. The way ME let me participate in smaller, personal stories with as much passion or apathy as I want, and letting the broader issues kinda fade into the background is what makes ME a favorite of mine
I am not a relevant critic of action gameplay. ME has powers that feel different from other shooters I've played and they work mostly smoothly, and that's enough for me. If ME had this really "deep" combat system that required considerable effort to master just so I don't die every other battle, which is my experience in Bayonetta that I also love for different reasons, I'd probably hate it.
Unfallen_Satan's comments