243 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

In dragon age 3 we will have an elf that shoots whit his bow a kamehameha..

[Xewaka]

Monica83 wrote...
In dragon age 3 we will have an elf that shoots whit his bow a kamehameha..

We already have fireballs for that. So no biggie.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

From what I've seen it looks like they've gone a bit to far in the other direction of Origins. Animations have gone from simplistic and slow to over the top and comical. More flipping going on on the battlefield then in a cirque show and every action for whatever reason seems like it needs a light show to accompany it. I understand they wanted to pump it up, just seems like they ran a little to far with that goal.

This ^  and the laugh of it, is the new faster animations aren't even fluid looking, especially the teleport/warp across the screen that somehow is supposed to be "better" than the shuffle that a few people hate so much. Typical Bioware, rather than find a middle ground its always one extreme or the other.

Exactly. 

[MerinTB]

Amioran wrote...
You are missing the point (it's so strange this happening here). The problem was that the "wait time" was not consistent between areas, general behaviour of enemies, number of enemies, type of enemies etc. (in a word, in the context). You are talking about "planning ahead", but how can you do it when the variables aren't static?

Again, never had this problem.  NEVER.  If I keep repeating how much DA:O I've played it'll probably come across as if I'm bragging somehow (or I'll seem pitiful to people who play games once and lots of them as opposed to playing the death out of one game at a time.)  Needless to say, I'd hope, is that I've played the game quite a bit.

And I'm saying the combat worked great for me.  This contextual timing problem you are talking about?  Was it on the console?  I didn't play on the console, so I've only second-hand info on how that works.  For me, on the PC, I didn't notice this "problem" at all.

For the record, I'm a turn-based fan.  So for DA:O I was pausing 99 times for every 1 time I'd let combat actually run real time for any noticeable length of time.

Amioran wrote...
More, the "wait" time you are talking about was not concieved in concept, It was just a "problem" of the mechanics, a result that happened by itself. The impact event was tied on the "fire" event (not on the real impact, as to not have the problem of missing in a wrong context), and the slowness of certain animations created the issue of "shuffling" in many cases (above all for the slowest trees).

Again, I didn't notice.  Didn't see it.  Whatever was happening on the screen felt natural and right to me.  I don't know how else to put this. What you saw, what bothered you - it was "good combat mechanics" to me. *shrug*

Amioran wrote...
And btw, just so you know, the last sentence "I liked the effort it took to knock someone down with a shield requiring the attacker to refind his or her bearings before being able to attack again" is what is happening NOW, not before, because in DAO the wait time was BEFORE the impact, not after. Now in DA2 it is the contrary, i.e. for example an archer fires immediately but then it requires some time before he can do the same again. So, you are contradicting yourself and actually liking what is happening in DA2 thinking (because you probably don't have knowledge on how it really worked behind the line, or didn't want to notice it correctly) it was how it worked in DAO, but in reality it was not so, just the contrary, in fact.

I don't appreciate the attempt to misrepresent what I said.  I suppose it is possible that you just didn't understand me, but there's not contradiction in what I said.

When I speak about the shield bash, and the guy who shield bashed not being able to hit the knocked down opponent while it is on the ground, I'm responding to what I've seen dev's said, other forum posters who've complained about DA:O's combat say, and what Upsettingshorts said -

Upsettingshorts wrote...
A common and easy to look for example that the developers themselves have cited is Shield Bash.

Use
it on an enemy, then instruct the character to follow up on that
strike.  By the time the character has struck a follow up blow, the
enemy is back up again.

I was responding to THAT, EXACTLY.  It has been mentioned by many people.  It's one of the most commonly referred to "problems" with the DA:O combat.  I was responding that I liked that aspect, that the guy who just swung his shield with such force and effort to knock his opponent down now has to take a moment to find his footing and catch his breath before following up with an attack, usually giving the opponent enough time to get to his feet.  THIS would happen in a D&D 4E game (and 3E and previous editions that allowed knockdown) - you knock a character down with Shield Bash, that's your character's turn, and by the time your character gets another turn the enemy has taken it's turn and probably stood up.  This seems RIGHT to me, it seems like how the combat SHOULD work.

Now as for spells and archery shots I mentioned, those are the other examples I often seen brought up.  They are on the other side of the spectrum of complaint - I think Mark Darrah (?sp?) as well as plenty of people on the forums have complained about you active a spell like Firestorm and then "the mage waggles his hands for awhile before the spell is cast" - again, I like this aspect of fantasy RPG's - the big spells that take longer to cast.  I like that, and the same with archers lining up and aiming to make a special kind of shot which takes a few moments before the arrow is released.  I like that.  I don't find it wrong or bad.

The two aspects are NOT mutually exclusive.  You can have wait times on big abilities before they fully activate at the same time as you have cool-down times after pulling off a certain ability in which you cannot do anything immediately.  My liking both are not contradictions.  It's like liking chocolate and vanilla ice cream, or (better) liking chocolate ice cream and liking cheese cake - liking one doesn't mean you can't like the other.

And finally "DA2 does this" spiel you give at the end, for abilities having a cool down.  That's in DA:O as well.  I happen to like that also - so DA2 keeping that from DA:O is not a revelation or new thing for DA2.
The "because in DAO the wait time was BEFORE the impact, not after" you say is direct conflict with the majority of complaints I've seen about shield bash, including from some of the devs.  As I requoted from Upsettingshorts, many people complained about the shield bash - I was directly responding to him and that.  So don't tell me I'm wrong - it's something that doesn't bother me and I didn't notice but others really did notice and it really bothered them.
"So, you are contradicting yourself and actually liking what is happening in DA2" is rather insulting, especially the
"because you probably don't have knowledge on how it really worked behind the line, or didn't want to notice it correctly", since you are pulling my response to the shield bash problem some people have out of context of my greater point - that point being that I like the delays for big abilities before they fire and that I like the delays before you can reuse abilities -

Where some people lamented "I activate an ability but then had to wait"
as in "my mage started casting a powerful spell but, being a powerful
spell, it took longer to cast and therefore it didn't hit the enemy
right where I targeted" and "I activated my powerful archery ability but
my stupid archer had the gall to AIM and line up his shot for a few
moments before releasing" -
I took that as the cost of those
abilities, and tactically I adjusted for how long they took to
activate.  Aim the long to cast spell AHEAD of where the enemies are
running (like leading fire with a gun on a moving target, eh?) - or
activate any longer-to-execute ability with timing so that it hits when
needed.

- I am focusing, myself, on the long-to-activate abilities like some spells and archery abilities.  A lot of the marketing has been on "press a button and something awesome happens" - which partially was about character moving next to their opponent or lining up for an attack, yes, but was also about casting a spell, even a powerful one, and it insta-casts.  Mr. Laidlaw himself states as much in the PC combat gameplay video, if not elsewhere, about firestorm.

---

So, Amioran, I'm sorry if you are pulling what I say out of order, out of context, and extrapolating far too much from what I did say-

but, in brief -

1 - Shield bash is often listed as a "problem" with DA:O.  I was addressing those concerns and my take about shield bash, not describing how the combat mechanics work overall.  Any reference I made to "maybe it wasn't intended to work this was" was about the spells and archery delays on activation, not about shield bash.
2 - Delays between activating a spell or archery ability and the spell being cast or arrow finally hitting the target are also commonly listed as "problems that have been fixed for DA2."  I spoke to how I liked how it worked in DA:O better than how it looks like it works in DA2.
3 - I know that abilties, after use, needed to recharge before being used again.  That was clearly in DA:O, is being carried to DA2, and it's something I am fine with.  It also is not directly connected to, or have really anything to do with, points 1 & 2.

----

Anyone NOT Amioran, my apologies.

[ViSeiRa]

Xewaka wrote...

ViSeirA wrote...

I think combat is a little over the top for my taste as well, just look at the rogue back-flips in the videos, it looks plain ridiculous.

The whole sequence I was half expecting some twohander wielder to bat Hawke while in mid-cartwheel and send him towards the nearest wall. "This ain't Starfox, Hawke! Barrel Rolls won't save you!"

Ah Star Fox, the good days of SNES and Nintendo <3

I just wish that the dodge animation for the rogue was something more uh believable, a roll on the ground for example, not some mid-air jump... ah well I'm gonna play a Warrior on my first playthrough anyway, let's hope the warrior's closing animation isn't as ridiculous.

[Monica83]

Xewaka wrote...

Monica83 wrote...
In dragon age 3 we will have an elf that shoots whit his bow a kamehameha..

We already have fireballs for that. So no biggie.

Whait whait a thing is see someone whit arcane power shot a fireball.. Have arcane power after all

Another is see a hairy dwarf that show an exploding dart and all around is coverend by darts... Lik

After all we already have see a teleporting thief and a teleporting warrior charge...

Mage: WTF! ANYONE IS TELEPORTING BUT I CAN'T!?

[Amioran]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
This ^  and the laugh of it, is the new faster animations aren't even fluid looking, especially the teleport/warp across the screen that somehow is supposed to be "better" than the shuffle that a few people hate so much. Typical Bioware, rather than find a middle ground its always one extreme or the other.

There's nothing wrong with extremes or excesses. "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - William Blake.

Too fast animations are a visual issue (if you don't like it), shuffling a gameplay one. So it is obvious that a visual issue (that anyway is neither constant with all people) is to be much preferred to a gameplay one. The former doesn't remove consistency, the latter does.

Modifié par Amioran, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:16 .

[_Aine_]

Uh, I think i looked at a different combat video than some of you.



The one I saw: Yes, it was stylized, but I am always a rogue ( ok, usually ) and my rogue would love to be that spritely. And I am neither a teenager nor have ADD. It's a *fantasy* game. Everything is at least *kind of* over the top, isn't it?



That said, I can't really judge whether I will like it when I play it. Sometimes things play out differently, especially only from a minute or so of seeing it.



Will wait and see!

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

MerinTB wrote...

Holy crap that's a lot of text.

Amioran wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
This ^  and the laugh of it, is the new faster animations aren't even fluid looking, especially the teleport/warp across the screen that somehow is supposed to be "better" than the shuffle that a few people hate so much. Typical Bioware, rather than find a middle ground its always one extreme or the other. 

There's nothing wrong with extremes or excesses. "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - William Blake.

Too fast animations are a visual issue, shuffling a gameplay one. So it is obvious that a visual issue is much preferred to a gameplay one. The former doesn't remove consistency, the latter does.

Modifié par TonyTheBossDanza123, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:16 .

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

shantisands wrote...

Uh, I think i looked at a different combat video than some of you.

The one I saw: Yes, it was stylized, but I am always a rogue ( ok, usually ) and my rogue would love to be that spritely. And I am neither a teenager nor have ADD. It's a *fantasy* game. Everything is at least *kind of* over the top, isn't it?

That said, I can't really judge whether I will like it when I play it. Sometimes things play out differently, especially only from a minute or so of seeing it.

Will wait and see!

I think you're associating fantasy with Final Fantasy. In no way does a fantasy game have to be over the top. Hell, the best fantasy works are very down to earth. I don't remember Frodo wielding a sword twice his size and doing whirlwinds with it.

[Xewaka]

ViSeirA wrote...
I just wish that the dodge animation for the rogue was something more uh believable, a roll on the ground for example, not some mid-air jump... ah well I'm gonna play a Warrior on my first playthrough anyway, let's hope the warrior's closing animation isn't as ridiculous.

Well, no problem there. It seems warrior Hawke doesn't have one. He just... appears.
At least that was what people gathered from the demos. I don't know if they managed to put something there. But considering the nonexistance of swing animations, I don't hold my hopes too high.

Modifié par Xewaka, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:19 .

[Amioran]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Game was fine as it was. This whole "Awesome" stuff is just pandering to the ADD of teens.

So I guess mature people are those that clearly cannot understand a thing logically not propose a thoughtful argument apart repeating the same (false, or highly debatable) things over and over, nor have enough IQ to make some more profound connection between things, while teenagers are so for the age and for convenience. I guess when I was 14 I was like a 50 years old compared to some people here.

Then, go to say teenager to someone as Rimbaud that changed literature at 17 years. Age has nothing to do with the discussion, as it is obvious from many posts of some "adults" here.

Modifié par Amioran, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:31 .

[Amioran]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

No opinon, a FACT, had you enough intelligence to understand the difference between the two (shuffling vs. visual issue). If you want I can explain it to you, but please say no because I'm too lazy for these idiocies.

Modifié par Amioran, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:32 .

[ViSeiRa]

Amioran wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
This ^  and the laugh of it, is the new faster animations aren't even fluid looking, especially the teleport/warp across the screen that somehow is supposed to be "better" than the shuffle that a few people hate so much. Typical Bioware, rather than find a middle ground its always one extreme or the other.

There's nothing wrong with extremes or excesses. "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - William Blake.

Too fast animations are a visual issue (if you don't like it), shuffling a gameplay one. So it is obvious that a visual issue (that anyway is neither constant with all people) is to be much preferred to a gameplay one. The former doesn't remove consistency, the latter does.

Yup, that's why people usually end up dead with an overdose of some medicines, just saying, what kind of person says nothing is wrong with excesses? you eat too much? you get fat, you don't eat at all? you die, you take three pills of your medicine instead of one as in the prescription you have serious side effect or worse die.

The same applies to any "excesses" in the world, animations in games included, and a visual issue doesn't remove consistency? obviuosly you're living in a world of black and white.

You know what? I'm stupid, why don't you use your all high intelligence to explain this to me?

Modifié par ViSeirA, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:39 .

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Amioran wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Game was fine as it was. This whole "Awesome" stuff is just pandering to the ADD of teens.

So I guess mature people are those that clearly cannot understand a thing logically not propose a thoughtful argument apart repeating the same (false, or highly debatable) things over and over, nor have enough IQ to make some more profound connection between things, while teenagers are so for the age and for convenience. I guess when I was 14 I was like a 50 years old compared to some people here.

Then, go to say teenager to someone as Rimbaud that changed literature at 17 years. Age has nothing to do with the discussion, as it is obvious from many posts of some "adults" here.

Yea I'm not gonna argue with you, talk to me when you grow up. I have a policy against getting too deep in conversation with obnoxious teens.

Modifié par TonyTheBossDanza123, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:48 .

[Amioran]

ViSeirA wrote...

Yup, that's why people usually end up dead with an overdose of some medicines, just saying, what kind of person says nothing is wrong with excesses? you eat too much? you get fat, you don't eat at all? you die, you take three pills of your medicine instead of one as in the prescription you have serious side effect or worse die.

As indians says: "it is not what you do that causes you harm, but what you don't do". Reflect on this, and you will have the why Blake said so. The concept is too much profound to make you understand it in a forum, but there are illumination paths that are based on excess (example vama marg). All things can be used in a purposeful way if you know how and know more what to do instead of what don't do.

ViSeirA wrote...
The same applies to any "excesses" in the world, animations in games included, and a visual issue doesn't remove consistency? obviuosly you're living in a world of black and white.

A visual issue doesn't remove consistency of gameplay, shuffling does. Example: an orc is grabbing the mage, you want to use Shield bash to removed the grab but a shuffling issue doesn't make you able to do fire the ability in time to save the mage. Consistency removed in gameplay. In another context without the shuffling the mage was saved.

Now you can have a Rush ability visualized as a "force line", or as "magically teleporting", but the time to activate the ability and the gameplay will remain exactly the same no matter the visual change. No consistency removed in gameplay. No consistency removed with a different context.

No difficult to understand, wasn't it?

Modifié par Amioran, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:49 .

[Amioran]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
Yea I'm not gonna argue with you, talk to me when you grow up.

I'm sure I'm older than you, as I'm sure I was so even when I was 17.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Amioran wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
Yea I'm not gonna argue with you, talk to me when you grow up.

I'm sure I'm older than you, as I'm sure I was so even when I was 17.

Well if you are older, you clearly don't act it. Didn't you just say age doesn't determine maturity? Well that goes both ways bro.

[Amioran]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
Well if you are older, you clearly don't act it. Didn't you just say age doesn't determine maturity? Well that goes both ways bro.

In fact it goes both ways. Have you said anything purposefoul or intelligent till now?. I didn't see it, but what do I know, I'm immature...

[ViSeiRa]

Amioran wrote...

As indians says: "it is not what you do that causes you harm, but what you don't do". Reflect on this, and you will have the why Blake said so. The concept is too much profound to make you understand it in a forum, but there are illumination paths that are based on excess (example vama marg). All things can be used in a purposeful way if you know how and know more what to do instead of what don't do.

Wow, nice... and as Titus Maccius Plautus said: "In everything the middle course is best: all things in excess bring trouble to men", I don't know about you, but I wouldn't search for my "illumination" in a gaming forum, also genius accroding to your quote isn't it more important to know what not to do because what we do can't cause us harm anyway? great logic!!

Amioran wrote...

A visual issue doesn't remove consistency of gameplay, shuffling does. Example: an orc is grabbing the mage, you want to use Shield bash to removed the grab but a shuffling issue doesn't make you able to do fire the ability in time to save the mage. Consistency removed in gameplay. In another context without the shuffling the mage was saved.

Now you can have a Rush ability visualized as a "force line", or as "magically teleporting", but the time to activate the ability and the gameplay will remain exactly the same no matter the visual change. No consistency removed in gameplay. No consistency removed with a different context.

No difficult to understand, wasn't it?

How was it not consistent that I was not fast enough to save someone? you think that by adding stupid animations to a dash or the back-flip that you'll always be able to save your mage from said orc? nothing about gameplay is ever consistent except the parts which the player has no control over.....

The time to activate the ability is not the issue here, I don't think you even understand what you're talking about, it's the time between activating the ability and executing it that's the problem, and it has been reduced by the new animations but you can never fully get rid of it.

Modifié par ViSeirA, 05 janvier 2011 - 08:08 .

[MerinTB]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Holy crap that's a lot of text.

Hence the apologies.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Amioran wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
This ^  and the laugh of it, is the new faster animations aren't even fluid looking, especially the teleport/warp across the screen that somehow is supposed to be "better" than the shuffle that a few people hate so much. Typical Bioware, rather than find a middle ground its always one extreme or the other.

There's nothing wrong with extremes or excesses. "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - William Blake.

Too fast animations are a visual issue (if you don't like it), shuffling a gameplay one. So it is obvious that a visual issue (that anyway is neither constant with all people) is to be much preferred to a gameplay one. The former doesn't remove consistency, the latter does.

There is when it looks ridiculous and breaks what wasn't broken in the first place. There's often plenty wrong with extremes especially when a middle ground would most likely please more people on the whole, rather than catering to just one demographic.

[Dave of Canada]

Shuffle wasn't broken? Since when?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 05 janvier 2011 - 08:14 .

[John Epler]

Folks, if you're going to argue back and forth over who's more mature/intelligent, then you're not really contributing to the thread. Take it to PM, or better yet, don't do it at all.