DA:I Tactical View combat feedback > IE spiritual successor PoE combat feedback. Can't have that!

[IndiraLightfoot]

Hi!

 

Having watched some vids from the upcoming party-based CRPG Dragon Age: Inquisition, I have been pleasantly surprised by the high level of nice and clear feedback when you use what's called tactical view (basically a more top-down, BG-like combat system, RTwP). In this game, combat goes on in RT as well, and it's wild and messy to say the least, with all the spell effects, oomphy weapon attacks, etc. Still, they have marker circles on all characters, and they do have good feedback for the tumultuous event that combat is.

 

For example:

-Clear symbols by char portrait is shown for the present action taken by that character (like in BG:EE)

-When you hover over an enemy, you get info about it (even about potential weaknesses and strengths - I don't know if this Is Lore-based or something. If not that's the kind of stuff I'd like Lore to be about), and also, you see which character is targeting it

-Press "A" or some remapped key with that function, then you get to see all characters targeting that enemy

-You can queue up actions

-You can set melee characters in Hold Your Ground modes - and there are other tactical modes like it, for instance, ranged weapon chars will fall back if attacked and try to fire the bow

-You can only have eight active abilities on your combat bar (kind of like D3's six abilities)

-You can even opt to have friendly fire on, but they warn you - it will be difficult

-Health, defensive barriers, if your character is heavily damaged (portrait changes)

-Feedback about enemies changing states - for instance, going berserk or transforming into beasts - are cued via enemy model animations, so you get to perceive when such animations set in via these visible cues (like in COH2, you can see when a unit is about to throw a grenade, e.g.)

 

I urge OE to take a look at those gameplay videos and then vow to surpass that feedback info, since I believe that PoE simply must outdo DA:I in this kind of party-based combat feedback. We can't have DA:I combat feedback > PoE combat feedback. Surely, for OE, the ambition must be to make PoE into a game that owns party-based combat feedback and kills other games in that department. 

 

Who's with me?

 

EDIT: Since it's all in 3D, you obviously can rotate the cam the way you need. Bioware even encourages you to do so when using tactical view in order to get the best possible overview of where enemies are and the terrain and such (which also matters to a degree).

PoE can't have 3D rotation, and terrain will not matter, so it's already at a disadvantage. Therefore, having the right angle and non-occlusion marker circles/char-enemy models is paramount for combat feedback. I think it was Hiro who wrote in the What can PoE learn from WL2-thread that he soon came to appreciate the possibility to rotate the camera in combat, and this is in a turn-based game. I'd like to chime in and agree with him - it actually helps a lot. Knowing that PoE lacks this feature, this calls for some very sleek and sure-shot solution to combat overview feedback. OE needs to nail this aspect of combat somehow.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

I haven't (nor do I intend to) watch any DA:I videos, because I am boycotting all BioWare games after Mass Effect 3 and I did not even enjoy DA:O, but I've noticed you have a tendancy to request that Pillars of Eternity features things from other games

 

You compare PE to DA:2, request for the TToN XP system, request stuff like Wasteland 2 skill check style ... etc

 

Not having a dig, but I think that the combat feedback in Pillars of Eternity needs to focus on reaching the Infinity Engine games level of feedback in all areas, which currently it is better than some, and worse than others - and then figuring out what else is needed through in-game testing.

 

Shift-queue, not an action queue a la the KotOR games, but (hopefully) an RTS-style shift queue is coming in the next patch.

 

Some of the features you listed would be superfluous in Pillars of Eternity, other things are things that the Infinity Engine games also did, but they are lacking in Pillars of Eternity. For instance, stuck characters just appear like they are standing still, whereas in the IE games their avatar was completely frozen, and a subtle shader with a yellow hue was applied as well.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

Heh! You're right that I do offer some bizarre-comparisons at times. However, the reasons for them are varied.

 

The T:ToN xp system was more of an act of desperation - and a will to shake stuff up a bit- because of the locked positions and of my frustration of not having an IE-like xp system in PoE. So, I went the other route instead: heavy RPG-ist, with openings for justifying discovery xp and such.

 

DA2 was something I got a link for over at the Codex, and it immediately dawned on me that the signs of DA2 being rushed listed there actually fit PoE BB - that it had been rushed too. That stuff hadn't been thoroughly tested or thought-through.

 

WL2 is more me waving a reality check: This uses the same kind of budget, the same kind of Unity build (all 3D, though) - and it shows that you don't need to over-complicate stuff to get a really good incline party-based CRPG.

 

Finally, in this case, I find that DA:I actually has an optional feature (tactical view) that's more BG-IE-correct and even updated for 2014 than PoE BB, which is a bit unfortunate, since this is where PoE needs to excel.

 

However, when it comes to comparisons to the real McCoy, I'm safe in the knowledge that you do that stuff thoroughly and excellently.

 

I simply rotate stuff, offer new angles, and other perspectives in order to get a few glittering flakes in the pan - rare ideas that PoE will benefit from in the long run. So, I stir up food for thought and debate, and sometimes it actually works too.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

Heh! You're right that I do offer some bizarre-comparisons at times. However, the reasons for them are varied.

 

The T:ToN xp system was more of an act of desperation - and a will to shake stuff up a bit- because of the locked positions and of my frustration of not having an IE-like xp system in PoE. So, I went the other route instead: heavy RPG-ist, with openings for justifying discovery xp and such.

That's fine but I think that this is too much of a radical change. I haven't really spoken too much about my preferences on XP systems yet and I usually avoid those threads because I find them to be counterproductive. However I might make a video about the XP system at some stage - after this patch maybe.

 

I think my general stance is that Obsidian should stick with the XP system that they designed the game for originally. Quest/Objective-based XP. I do enjoy XP for combat in other games, and this is an "IE style" game, so I can see why people would want XP for combat, but I also understand the reasons for not doing it. Having personally DM'd P&P myself, I always gave XP for dealing with situations non-violently as well.

 

DA2 was something I got a link for over at the Codex, and it immediately dawned on me that the signs of DA2 being rushed listed there actually fit PoE BB - that it had been rushed too. That stuff hadn't been thoroughly tested or thought-through.

I don't think it's quite the same. I don't think the Pillars of Eternity beta has been rushed, but I think that there are definitely systems that could have got some more attention and/or things just did not work out how they thought it was going to. In some areas regarding the Pillars of Eternity systems, Josh is delving into 'new territory' for him as a designer. He also has a lot of systems work to do, as well as manage the project, write a companion and provide some lyrics/singing for the soundtrack.

 

The issue is partially time contraints/budget constraints as well as unforeseen circumstances/lack of foresight.

 

WL2 is more me waving a reality check: This uses the same kind of budget, the same kind of Unity build (all 3D, though) - and it shows that you don't need to over-complicate stuff to get a really good incline party-based CRPG.

Wasteland 2 I think ended up having a larger budget than Pillars of Eternity did, closer to 6M, more along the lines of Divinity Original Sin. inXile made a lot of mistakes with Wasteland 2, although I think a lot of those will be fixed for Torment as it was technically their company's first *big* RPG. Bard's Tale might count, but that was what? 10 years ago? and probably not many of the same staff.

 

Finally, in this case, I find that DA:I actually has an optional feature (tactical view) that's more BG-IE-correct and even updated for 2014 than PoE BB, which is a bit unfortunate, since this is where PoE needs to excel.

 

However, when it comes to comparisons to the real McCoy, I'm safe in the knowledge that you do that stuff thoroughly and excellently.

DA:I is also a lot further along in development, it's being released soon isn't it? Whereas Pillars still has 5-6 months to go. I wouldn't be surprised if BioWare end up beating Obsidian at mechanical transparency, they do have a larger company and a larger team. It is probably easier for them to iterate. In contrast, Obsidian has one 2D Artist (Kaz) who is doing *everything* and two UI Programmers - Brian Macintosh and Roby Atadero. The rate that they can produce new UI features will probably be a bit slower than BioWare's.

 

All in all I think *most* of the core UI problems have been identified, although not necessarily all of the solutions (Engagement, for example ... which is a feature I think should be cut).

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[Doppelschwert]

Apart from the remark concerning engagement, I completely agree with sensuki.

 

I'm also not sure what you want to accomplish with these radical suggestions - it's not like they are going to completely turn the tables and redesign every other system from scratch, just because you are not satisfied with the way it is designed now.

And even then, a lot of your suggestions are so biased that I don't even know what to say as almost every game you've been comparing in these threads is highly polarizing the backers on these forums in terms of quality, direction and overall enjoyment.

 

I'd guess its more constructive if you focus on suggestions that are somehow realistic to implement and don't bend the mechanics we already have too far. The way I perceive most of your threads is just the subtle, indirect message that 'PoE sucks because it's not like many other games I enjoy more'.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Doppelschwert

[IndiraLightfoot]

Nice sum-up, Sensuki!

 

I feel the need to add one thing, though: I reckon you're actually more IE canon than me. I am pretty open to having PoE venturing into new territories, and hence it makes sense for me to compare it to all sorts of games, and not just with how it was done in our beloved IE games. It is, like you said, new territory, a new world, a new system, no longer D&D, so I am all for experimentation and stealing from other game designs, as long as it is good and work well for a party-based RTwP CRPG.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

I absolutely understand that point of view, I just think it's too late in the development cycle to consider many of those changes. These are things that should have been brought up last year / when the KS Update topics were potent. That said I have a feeling that many of those suggestions might have fallen on deaf ears.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

The WL2 camera thing was about how I enjoy the combat in WL2, it's fun, tactical and I use a lot of cover all the time. Cover isn't really something you use in PoE or the IE games but when I use it in WL2, I like to see how things line up or if one of my party members is in the way in case of friendly fire. So I rotate the camera around and check. Not something that's relevant in PoE. I agree PoE needs to go more in the direction of the IE games and it needs a lot of work to get there imo..

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

I'm also not sure what you want to accomplish with these radical suggestions - it's not like they are going to completely turn the tables and redesign every other system from scratch, just because you are not satisfied with the way it is designed now.

And even then, a lot of your suggestions are so biased that I don't even know what to say as almost every game you've been comparing in these threads is highly polarizing the backers on these forums in terms of quality, direction and overall enjoyment.

 

I'd guess its more constructive if you focus on suggestions that are somehow realistic to implement and don't bend the mechanics we already have too far. The way I perceive most of your threads is just the subtle, indirect message that 'PoE sucks because it's not like many other games I enjoy more'.

 

It's just food for thought - I'm not naïve. I do realize, however, that they are still searching for solutions - and clearly, they do indeed go for new and intrepid solutions.

 

I just compare stuff to CRPGs that are out there or will be. If we would care about biases and shy away from stuff that are dividing the community in the forums, then we wouldn't have any discussions here at all almost. I'm simply looking for solutions, and they needn't all be from the IE classics.

 

That last sentence doesn't make sense. I already love PoE, and I am a big fan of OE. Let's say that I'm a concerned fan who isn't afraid of criticising stuff that don't seem to work (IMO, of course). Also, most of the games I cite I haven't enjoyed that much or I haven't even played them yet (they haven't been released). I'm just cherry-picking examples, mechanics and patterns as food for discussion and debate, like in any search for solutions, really.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

Regarding combat feedback, the most important feature I think Pillars of Eternity is lacking behind targeting reticles (which are in for the next patch) is a different animation/stance for recovery time.

 

Players need to know exactly when characters are in recovery and when they are not. Currently this is being displayed by the Combat HUD, however Combat HUDs are transparent, can overlap with eachother and they can be disabled. I think that if recovery time used a similar animation and stance to the Baldur's Gate pulsing style animation as demonstrated here

 

 

 

then it would be much, much easier to tell exactly when characters exited recovery time, particularly if you had not issued them a new command.

 

This would also make it possible to disable the Combat HUDs completely, without being left in the dark feedback wise.

 

In-game feedback > UI feedback, most of the time.

 

It also might be better to implement a slider that controls when Combat HUDs are displayed. All at once creates too much clutter on the screen, so perhaps on mouseover/selection and completely off would be two relevant options.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

The WL2 camera thing was about how I enjoy the combat in WL2, it's fun, tactical and I use a lot of cover all the time. Cover isn't really something you use in PoE or the IE games but when I use it in WL2, I like to see how things line up or if one of my party members is in the way in case of friendly fire. So I rotate the camera around and check. Not something that's relevant in PoE. I agree PoE needs to go more in the direction of the IE games and it needs a lot of work to get there imo..

 

Yeah. Want a short and brutally honest description of the weightiest reason behind my posts?

I would have loved if PoE was already much closer to those IE games, so there would be no need to move in that direction. PoE should already sit on the shoulders of the IE titans, but it doesn't, and that's very frustrating, since I feel OE has such a great chance to reawaken the greatness of that genre. WL2 certainly has been a brilliant step in that re-awakening, but I want PoE to be the CRPG bomb. 

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I have to admit with playing WL2 and an enemy runs up to me. When it's my turn to do something, it does feel 'funny' that I can move away without provoking an AoO. Not a fault of WL2. You can do that with a lot of games including the IE games. More that I think it's all my years of pnp and recently playing over 50 hours of PoE that I expect it from other games now. Have to play other games and get this AoO mindset out of my system.

[Sensuki]

I think it's there in turn based to allow the enemy to 'react' to your movements on your turn - kind of the same as an overwatch feature (which is in Wasteland 2, Shadowrun Returns, Jagged Alliance 2 and Expeditions: Conquistador) albeit at the expense of your current turn.

 

In realtime it's not necessary because enemies can react to your realtime movements, if you move next to them, they can attack you back. In turn based they cannot, so withour AoOs etc, you can move next to them, attack, and move back with no penalty.

[IndiraLightfoot]

PoE is right now between a rock and a hard place.

 

The jist of it all seems to be this:

 

-OE and Josh & Co wanted to do a spiritual successor of the IE games.

-It wouldn't be D&D-based - that was a given.

-Josh & Co wanted to improve on the CRPG IE formula 

 

And somewhere around there, stuff went a bit wrong.

As Sensuki has demonstrated, basic functions, for instance, regarding isometric angle, area sizes, combat feedback and markers and stances, weren't even considered or "ported".

-Instead, OE did some new MMO-ish CRPG from scratch - hence the sense of "rushedness" or DA combat vibes from the BB

-And right now, they are back-tracking, but these footsteps still fall on that new experimental ground.

 

I'd much rather have seen them take everything that worked well in the IE games and then improve them, even embellish them, and make a CRPG of the decade.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Seari]

Didn't read thread, nor am I going to, but don't compare the IE games to the disgusting garbage that is DA:I. You should be ashamed FFS.

 

edit: misread title, just seeing DA:I being praised sent me into rage

Edited October 21, 2014 by Seari

[IndiraLightfoot]

Didn't read thread, nor am I going to, but don't compare the IE games to the disgusting garbage that is DA:I. You should be ashamed FFS.

I have the fullest respect for those deeply disliking EA Bioware, or for those disappointed in their games. However, if you do compare DA:I's party-based tactical view it is actually more IE game-like than PoE right now, and this gives at least me some cause of concern.

[Sensuki]

Man I wish this forum remembered what you were typing. I had like 600 words typed out and then somehow I pressed the close tab key shortcut by mistake :< Will try my best to reconstruct what I was saying.

Here are my theories for why these things are the way they are.

Lower Angle:

If you go back to the very first screenshot of the game with units we had. It was those really tiny units in high isometric view from a combat testing interior. I think most of the combat testing was done in such test levels and interiors rather than in lower angle exteriors. It may be that some time during development the devs noticed that the lower angle was making combat a bit muddled, or it may not. Combat must have been pretty hard to test up until recovery time was added in (which I think was late 2013/early 2014). Remember how previously selection circles were overlapping completely - was that a bug that was always there? Who did the specific combat testing in exteriors with tall enemies and the lower angle? What games had they been playing over the past few years, had they even been playing any Infinity Engine games? etc etc

Who knows, but regardless - it also may have been something they picked up on but deemed less important than having 'cooler looking' structures.

Area Size:

Josh himself has stated in a quote (too lazy to find atm) that he personally prefers smaller areas, and "Black Isle" style areas and said that at one stage in development they had an 8x8 area and the size felt excessive and he would rather split areas like that into more focused single areas.

It is interesting though because in pretty much all RTS games, maps are square. Some maps in Warcraft 2, Starcraft and Starcraft 2 are rectangular (either in height or width) but the majority of, particularly multiplayer maps are square.
Coming from primarily square Infinity Engine maps, the Pillars of Eternity map size is quite jarring, because the travel time from the top to bottom of the map is not very much at all, and in the IE games you did spend a fair amount of time travelling from top to bottom, usually in a snake like pattern from one to the other - that is how area designers made good use of the space.

PE feels like you're travelling either in a straight line from left to right, or in a snake like pattern from top to bottom or bottom to top, except with less 'bumps'. Thus the travel time between locations on the map is a lot smaller and areas have more of a cluttered feel. Once again, it's probably just something nobody noticed.

I think most of the Area Designers are primarily experienced in designing for non-isometric 3D projects, such as Fallout New Vegas, Dungeon Siege 3 and 2D Flat sidescrollers like South Park: The Stick of Truth. Jeff Husges (one of the Area Designers) worked on Icewind Dale 1 and 2 as QA/Multiplayer Lead, but not as an Area Designer.

In a way I think designing levels in isometric has been a learning experience for Obsidian, and I would like to point out that in future, I think it would be better to design more square areas, either using the 16:9 format and doing stuff like 5x7 size areas instead of 5x5 areas, so that there is more vertical depth for exploration. Either that or use a different "source resolution" for screen size, such as 1920x1280 or something.

Combat Feedback:

In this area I think the lack of combat feedback in the backer beta is partially because of limited resources. Brian Macintosh is Obsidian's primary UI developer on PE and he was an intern for most of the development I think due to being at University. He's been full time since sometime since end of last year/start of this year or whatever. Obsidian added Roby Atadero once South Park wrapped up. Thus, a lot of the features have probably been on backlog. It is kind of surprising that obvious things such as targeting reticles were not already implemented, but then again, what other game uses them? Not many. So I can easily see how something like this was overlooked.

It's the same with the lack of proper recovery time feedback. Josh worked on Icewind Dale 1 and 2. The BG1 animation was removed from IWD1 because Black Isle did not like the fake attacks. They then made their own animation for Icewind Dale 2 without the pulses, perhaps they didn't like them. Obsidian then added a recovery time bar due to internal feedback because it probably wasn't clear when characters went into or came out of recovery time. I don't think anyone considered having a separate animation for recovery because they seem to be taking more cues from the Icewind Dale games as that's what some of the developers worked on, and they probably overlooked the fact that the pulsing animation used in the Baldur's Gate games was to indicate that the character was 'doing something'. In the IE games when characters are idle in combat, their idle animation is used. When they're in between two actions, the pulsing animation is used - smart thinking BioWare.

New systems:

I am all for trying out new systems, however I think that the ramifications of changing a system in conjunction with others that are the same have not been fully accounted for. A lot of this is probably fixable.

The DT system promotes the use of unfamiliar number ranges - The DT system is the sole reason for the hugely inflated damage and health numbers required for the game. Once upon a time, a Longsword might have done 5-8 damage instead of 1-8, but because of DT, that number has to be raised.

The attack resolution system combined with balancing accuracy and defense numbers for ~at level content ends up being primarily hits, crits and grazes. However in the IE games, it was more absolute. More damage is being dealt more often in PE, with weapon attacks specifically, and thus, the game feels rushed because if you do not micro your characters, they will be dead very quickly.

In Icewind Dale I can stand my fully geared Fighter next to a bunch of Yuan-Ti and they will miss 80% of the time due to how the AC system works. When they do hit they deal maybe ~5-8% of his total health per hit.

A Verbeeg might take 6-7 hits to bring a character down.

In the PE beta, an Adra beetle can kill a unit wearing medium armor in two hits.

It's a combination of many factors, and yep sure - one of those is because it's a bunch of new systems thrown together and they haven't accounted for the differences yet, but *hopefully* this is something that can be brought more in line with the *feel* of IE game combat speed and lethality.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[archangel979]

I agree with Indira, PoE should beat DAI in combat feedback and overall quality of tactical combat (as that is only kind of combat PoE has). When people turn on tactical cam in DAI they should say "Oh, I wish this worked like in PoE". 

This is because DAI will be beating PoE in graphics, voice overs, size of game, freedom of movement, action combat and it seems ever stronghold design/options. 

 

PoE can only really compete with story quality and tactical combat. Tactical combat in DAI is a secondary feature, made for a minority of their player base, it should not win over PoE in any way possible.  

[IndiraLightfoot]

I agree with Indira, PoE should beat DAI in combat feedback and overall quality of tactical combat (as that is only kind of combat PoE has). When people turn on tactical cam in DAI they should say "Oh, I wish this worked like in PoE". 

This is because DAI will be beating PoE in graphics, voice overs, size of game, freedom of movement, action combat and it seems ever stronghold design/options. 

 

PoE can only really compete with story quality and tactical combat. Tactical combat in DAI is a secondary feature, made for a minority of their player base, it should not win over PoE in any way possible.  

*Hug*

This is indeed the basic premise behind my title. This should be the area where PoE shines (apart from the obvious: story and companions).

[Sensuki]

I think PE should try to aspire to feel like an Infinity Engine game, not try to 'compete' on grounds of over-the-top tactical UI feedback, which in many cases can be implemented in smarter and less obtuse ways than a UI overlay.

 

Also more importantly. PE has to cater to the hardcore crowd, as that was a kickstarter backed feature - expert mode and being able to disable UI help features. The game also has to give feedback in ways not related to the UI to make it clear what's going on without these features.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[archangel979]

Infinity Engine combat feedback was not perfect, BGEE adding current action on portrait is a proof of that. Everything can be improved upon. 

 

PoE needs to have best possible tactical combat and UI, no matter if it improved IE one or something a bit different. As long as it feels like an upgraded IE, backers will be happy. 

[Sensuki]

Infinity Engine combat feedback was not perfect, BGEE adding current action on portrait is a proof of that. Everything can be improved upon. 

 

The current action on the portrait is superfluous. I'm not against the addition of such a feature, but I would disable it at all times.

 

PE already has current action on the Combat HUD as well.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki

[Karkarov]

PoE is right now between a rock and a hard place.

 

The jist of it all seems to be this:

 

-OE and Josh & Co wanted to do a spiritual successor of the IE games.

-It wouldn't be D&D-based - that was a given.

-Josh & Co wanted to improve on the CRPG IE formula 

 

And somewhere around there, stuff went a bit wrong.

As Sensuki has demonstrated, basic functions, for instance, regarding isometric angle, area sizes, combat feedback and markers and stances, weren't even considered or "ported".

-Instead, OE did some new MMO-ish CRPG from scratch - hence the sense of "rushedness" or DA combat vibes from the BB

-And right now, they are back-tracking, but these footsteps still fall on that new experimental ground.

 

I'd much rather have seen them take everything that worked well in the IE games and then improve them, even embellish them, and make a CRPG of the decade.

See I agree with "most" of what you and Sensuki post.  Unless it is UI related in which case lets get the swords, axes, and torches now. 

 

That being said I think the situation is blown out of proportion and the reason is it comes from always comparing finished products (or near finished in DA:I's case, specifically it releases in 24 days or so) and products with larger teams to Eternity as it stands now.  Yes I concur we need better idle animations for example... but animations are typically not a high priority in a beta test or build, you can add them in at any time, polish them without adding them, and tell if they are going to work well without investing much play testing time.  Which is why animation polish is always one of the last things to get "done" for most games.

 

I feel like most of the things people are complaining about were already considered by Obsidian, most of them already have plans to be adjusted.  But most of them are also small niggling little details that can be added in very close to release and are "polish" changes not mechanics or gameplay changes.  Combat feedback is a big deal and it needs polish before release.... but do you actually need "great" combat feedback to test the combat?  No, you don't.

 

I think the focus at this point should be perfecting the EXP curve and getting it to be more about objectives (and adding more objectives) and tightening up many of the issues in combat.  Like engagement being a little spotty, spell balance, maybe adjusting some classes abilities to be more interesting.  Of course the biggest deal though in my opinion is still fixing the stat system, I don't like it as it currently stands and I feel like it went in the right direction but took a wrong turn in the last patch.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Karkarov: You and I will most likely agree on the UI as well. However, I've been pretty flexible about it. For instance, in T:ToN, I like that text-centered behemoth that InXile has shown us.

 

And I am well aware of it all being an early beta build. However, there's something about combat that needs to beaded in order to make it exciting and fun and also clear, if you know what I mean, perhaps even with a better flow to it. If OE can get this right, most other things will fall into place. Hopefully.

Edited October 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Karkarov]

Karkarov: You and I will most likely agree on the UI as well. However, I've been pretty flexible about it. For instance, in T:ToN, I like that text-centered behemoth that InXile has shown us.

 

And I am well aware of it all being an early beta build. However, there are something about combat that needs to be make it exciting and fun and also clear, if you know what I mean, perhaps even with a better flow to it. If OE can get this right, most other things will fall into place. Hopefully.

Oh don't get me wrong I aimed the UI comment mostly at Sensuki harharharharharhar.

 

I am very much so looking forward to DA:I and already have it preordered on everyone's favorite game service to hate, Origin.  I agree with most of your points in the OP too.  Just don't play DA:I with a controller.... they seriously screwed the pooch on the UI in controller mode for some reason.  Instead of just reskinning specific things to show a button instead of key keyblind they actually change the entire hud dramatically and for the worse in almost all cases.