40 réponses à ce sujet

[swirlwind]

dan107 wrote...

That's a fair point. I would just point out that while there are few strategic RPGs with deep stories, I'm not aware of a single action game that's ever been made that features the truly deep and reactive stories found in Bio RPGs. Also action does not need to be mindless hack-and-slash. You could still have a lot of tactical and strategic considerations involved in a twich based system. The primary difference would be that the action is more fast paced and requires you to think on your feet. I really think that if such a system were properly implemented, it would be a lot more enjoyable than many people think.

The reason why I've never enjoyed twitch based systems much is because I'm not very good at them. Not that I'm a great strategic thinker, either, but I tend to need some time in a combat situation to see what's going on, who is where and what exactly needs to be done in order to succeed. DA:O gives me the ability to pause combat at any moment, and different squad members whose abilities I can use strategically. Both Mass Effects allow me to pause the action with the power/weapon wheel, and even Fallout 3 lets me use the V.A.T.S. mode to take a breather if the situation gets too sticky. These types of games I enjoy and eventually excel in. 

The DA:O system works for me, because it's a step in a direction most RPGs have stepped away from. It's unique, as games are nowadays. I wouldn't want it to turn into the Witcher. Diablo or ME, because we already have the Witcher, Diablo and ME. I'm starting to really dislike the word "streamlining", because it seems to mean doing pretty much what everyone else is doing nowadays. I don't mind them tweaking the combat system for DA2 to make it better (as I'm sure there are aspects that can be improved in the DA:O system), but to change the fundamentals behind the system? That I have a problem with.

Modifié par swirlwind, 25 juillet 2010 - 12:36 .

[Khayness]

Arttis wrote...

Request for elaboration has been rejected.

All you have is my word...deal with it.

You had the honor to enlighten a PC gamer about the superiority of your gaming platform and you just ignored it. I feel let down

[Lord Gremlin]

Melee combat was rubbish indeed. It's not like they need to change basic mechanics, they just need to improve it visually.

[Arttis]

Khayness wrote...

Arttis wrote...

Request for elaboration has been rejected.

All you have is my word...deal with it.

You had the honor to enlighten a PC gamer about the superiority of your gaming platform and you just ignored it. I feel let down

I am soon to be a PC gamer/modder also.

[dan107]

soteria wrote...
FFXIII tried to be that game. The combat looks and initially feels pretty "twitch" because of all the actions that take place in a given round. Battles are actually fairly tactical, requiring the player to shift focus and change fluidly throughout the fight. Thing is, they gave the player the option to choose between manually selecting abilities or allowing the game to choose them automatically (with guidance). The cool thing was the game was actually highly intelligent about choosing the right abilities to use on auto. The bad thing was, it made trying to choose them manually feel like a losing proposition because you were slower and more error-prone than the computer. So, FFXIII could be "twitchy" and tactical at the same time, but only if the player avoided using the auto function.

Aside from the fact that it's a JRPG and is thus full of design elements that make it a thoroughly unenjoyable experience for me, isn't the combat in all the FF games turn based, meaning that it's even further removed from an action game than DA? How is that an example of the type of game I'm talking about?

[dan107]

swirlwind wrote...

dan107 wrote...

That's a fair point. I would just point out that while there are few strategic RPGs with deep stories, I'm not aware of a single action game that's ever been made that features the truly deep and reactive stories found in Bio RPGs. Also action does not need to be mindless hack-and-slash. You could still have a lot of tactical and strategic considerations involved in a twich based system. The primary difference would be that the action is more fast paced and requires you to think on your feet. I really think that if such a system were properly implemented, it would be a lot more enjoyable than many people think.

The reason why I've never enjoyed twitch based systems much is because I'm not very good at them. Not that I'm a great strategic thinker, either, but I tend to need some time in a combat situation to see what's going on, who is where and what exactly needs to be done in order to succeed. DA:O gives me the ability to pause combat at any moment, and different squad members whose abilities I can use strategically. Both Mass Effects allow me to pause the action with the power/weapon wheel, and even Fallout 3 lets me use the V.A.T.S. mode to take a breather if the situation gets too sticky. These types of games I enjoy and eventually excel in. 

The DA:O system works for me, because it's a step in a direction most RPGs have stepped away from. It's unique, as games are nowadays. I wouldn't want it to turn into the Witcher. Diablo or ME, because we already have the Witcher, Diablo and ME. I'm starting to really dislike the word "streamlining", because it seems to mean doing pretty much what everyone else is doing nowadays. I don't mind them tweaking the combat system for DA2 to make it better (as I'm sure there are aspects that can be improved in the DA:O system), but to change the fundamentals behind the system? That I have a problem with.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

[soteria]

dan107 wrote...

soteria wrote...
FFXIII tried to be that game. The combat looks and initially feels pretty "twitch" because of all the actions that take place in a given round. Battles are actually fairly tactical, requiring the player to shift focus and change fluidly throughout the fight. Thing is, they gave the player the option to choose between manually selecting abilities or allowing the game to choose them automatically (with guidance). The cool thing was the game was actually highly intelligent about choosing the right abilities to use on auto. The bad thing was, it made trying to choose them manually feel like a losing proposition because you were slower and more error-prone than the computer. So, FFXIII could be "twitchy" and tactical at the same time, but only if the player avoided using the auto function.

Aside from the fact that it's a JRPG and is thus full of design elements that make it a thoroughly unenjoyable experience for me, isn't the combat in all the FF games turn based, meaning that it's even further removed from an action game than DA? How is that an example of the type of game I'm talking about?

Not really.  They have an action gauge that continuously fills up, and enemies certainly don't wait for you to plan your moves.  The combat is actually fairly fast-paced.  For what it's worth, I believe the game is regarded as fairly difficult.

[swirlwind]

dan107 wrote...
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

Fine by me. My goal wasn't to try to sway you (or the OP) to see it my way, but to present a differing point of view. In any case, I'm pretty sure the devs know what they want to do with the game by now, so this discussion would be more relevant to future Dragon Age games.

[adi4444]

evry1 in her is want to play action crap games go play diablo 3 or some action sh-it game

[dan107]

adi4444 wrote...

evry1 in her is want to play action crap games go play diablo 3 or some action sh-it game

Case in point for how a preference for strategic combat does not necessarily require higher intelligence.

[Passivehate]

dan107 wrote...Where exactly does this notion that action=console=bad come from?

Well, action=console came from the controller, as I understand it. The controller is expected to be in your hands and, to some extent, moving at all times. I typically don't hold my keyboard in my hand and throw it at my computer when I get upset. My brother, however, does this with his controller.

The console=bad is a less accurate notion. Console=console and people don't want to hear that pc=console because they don't want console, they want pc or vice versa. It's a matter of preference. The negative connotation arrives alongside the fear that people will no longer have their hobby be their hobby. It'd be like if you played basketball all your life and soccer people joined the basketball world only to bring about a revolution where basketballs loose their use to soccer balls. I'm not sure if that is a proper analogy, but the key point is that fear is the primary motivation and is, thus, understandable.

[Captain Iglo]

Hahah jesus...reading through the Dragon Age 2 section of the forum is like reading through youtube or IGN comments!

[Deviija]

I thought the combat in DAO was mighty fine. Being able to use tactical strategy, control every party member, various camera views (especially isometric view), etc. The only thing I would encourage tweaking/fixing are the classes. Make them more equal to one another in terms of usefulness and power. Like, with sword and board, it does feel rather boring to simply be a tank without any ability to continually draw aggro and attack multiple targets to keep hostility.

But yes, I enjoyed the combat system itself and see no reason to change it into something super action oriented or God of Dante's Inferno War hack-and-slashy.

Modifié par Deviija, 25 juillet 2010 - 03:49 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

No.

[In Exile]

dan107 wrote...
Case in point for how a preference for strategic combat does not necessarily require higher intelligence.

Strategic combat certainly requires more conscious thinking... but I would hesitate to say it requires more intelligence if we take that to mean brainpower. The kind of tasks that you have to do simulatenously in an action game are very intense: you have to distribute attention, you have to react rapidly, you have to predict a changing environment, etc.

It's like programming a computer to solve logical problems versus programming a robot to catch a ball. The robot is an insane task that we still can't do well, whereas the computer is a trivial problem.

[javierabegazo]

Petitions are not accepted on these boards. If you want to open a thread discussing how you think combat should be changed in DA2 from DAO, feel free