Ce sujet est fermé
bsbcaer wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
"Hack and slash or hack and slay refers to a type of gameplay that emphasizes close combat with short-range weapons. "Hack and slash" was originally used to describe an aspect of pen-and-paper role-playing games (RPGs)."
-http://dictionary.se...nd slash/en-en/
Obviously the only short-range weapons boudnary was removed with the introduction of Diablo but the fact remains it's a style of gamepaly which greatly focuses on close combat (waves of enemies, surrounding enemies, quick killing, massive killing, etc.)
Does DA:O qualify as HnS? No, because it was a much slower and tactical combat-game.
Does The Witcher qualify as HnS? No, because the combat was basic and not emphasized that much, not to mention repetetive.
Does StarCraft 2 qualify as HnS? No, because combat is emphasized on a much larger scale rather than focused battles.
Does Halo 3 qualify as HnS? Yes, because combat is heavily emphasized and focused on how one is to kill an opponent be it fast, 'cool', magnitude, etc.
See where I'm going here?
Bolded part is my personal standard defintion, I quoted the definition above from dictionary.com to state how it doesn't apply to every aspect on determining hack-n-slash games.
Alright, combined your two posts and, once again, yanking out your definition so we can focus on it: ""Hack and slash or hack and slay refers to a type of gameplay that emphasizes close combat with short-range weapons. "Hack and slash" was originally used to describe an aspect of pen-and-paper role-playing games (RPGs)." Obviously the only short-range weapons boudnary was removed with the introduction of Diablo but the fact remains it's a style of gamepaly which greatly focuses on close combat (waves of enemies, surrounding enemies, quick killing, massive killing, etc.)"
Once again, based on your definition (a style of gameplay which focuses on close combat), the orignal Dragon Age: Origins IS a Hack and Slash game. Your definition says NOTHING about speed or tactics used (which you think takes DA:O out of the realm of Hack and Slash games). If you believe that the game is not a Hack and Slash game, you're going to have to rethink your definition of what that genre of game is. So, if your argument is that, based on presentation, DA2 is a Hack and Slash game, you're going to have to admit that DA:O (and likely the Witcher) are both Hack and Slash games as well. What Shorts and others have been trying to say is that you should focus on style (how the game plays) more than substance (how the game looks). If you say that DA:O is NOT a Hack and Slash game because of tactics in combat and story out of combat, well we've been shown that DA2 uses the same (or similar) approach to tactics (on Console: you set up your buttons and use the radial menu; on PC: you use hotkeys to use abilities) and a similar focus on story.
Sure determining genres heavily relies on the style of how it plays, but the fact of the matter is we do not have access to the game. So what's the closest we can get to, the in-game presentations (btw i just stated the exact same thing earlier).
So 'looks' is heavily factored into this argument, vague as it may be, but it's all we have at the moment.
"If we are not talking about whether or not the consideration of this
topic is legitimate, what are we talking about? No one has played it,
and so no one knows. It is the only sensible argument there is...unless
someone here is a fortune teller."
Retour en haut
