220 réponses à ce sujet

[Akizora]

mindbody wrote...

Question for those who enjoy the story more and just try to get through the fighting: do you just find all rpg combat boring, or would more intelligent enemies or more chances to roleplay in combat or other things increase your interest?

I personally find the combat boring unless I'm really challenged, so I always play on nightmare. But once I learned the inns and outs of the combat mechanics, I found nightmare was often far too easy anyways. I changed my gameplay to make it more interesting, and tended to leave my companions out of the fights.

I think I read somewhere that enemies in DA2 will act more intelligently, use healing/buffing spells more, etc, so the lower level difficulties might be harder than they were in DA:O. At least I hope so. Of course it's all fun and games til the spiders stun-lock you or the werewolves chain overwhelm. Dirty b-stards

I like the flow of the story and progression, if I die too much I feel the immersion cuts off and it becomes more about systematically creating a method of beating the game (a form of meta-gaming, sort of exploiting the structure of a fight to your advantage). If I play on a difficulty setting where I don't need to break immersion and can progressively move forward without having to think about how the fight has been scripted/structured, I get a more rich experience.

[Harid]

Probably gonna start on hard and transition over to nightmare if it's too easy.

Have no idea how people can skip battles for the 'story.' Read a good book, the story will be infinitely better.

Modifié par Harid, 26 janvier 2011 - 08:02 .

[JediHealerCosmin]

mindbody wrote...

Question for those who enjoy the story more and just try to get through the fighting: do you just find all rpg combat boring, or would more intelligent enemies or more chances to roleplay in combat or other things increase your interest?

I personally find the combat boring unless I'm really challenged, so I always play on nightmare. But once I learned the inns and outs of the combat mechanics, I found nightmare was often far too easy anyways. I changed my gameplay to make it more interesting, and tended to leave my companions out of the fights.

I think I read somewhere that enemies in DA2 will act more intelligently, use healing/buffing spells more, etc, so the lower level difficulties might be harder than they were in DA:O. At least I hope so. Of course it's all fun and games til the spiders stun-lock you or the werewolves chain overwhelm. Dirty b-stards

I for one do not find it boring, but the truth of the matter is that I am not a skilled player  
It takes me a great deal of time to beat a game on the hardest difficulty and I want to explore the story first and foremost before I begin learning the basics and finally beating it.

[mindbody]

^

Makes sense. I always try to roleplay combat according to character and class to try to keep consistent immersion, so as a rogue, for example, I'll stealth in, strategically take out the most dangerous enemies (mages, ususally), then let the crowd come to me, then stealth out if I need to. I guess too easy combat can be just as much as an immersion-breaker.... I like to feel the risk. i hope DA2 gives us lots of opportunities to roleplay during combat -- I think pre-determined builds and weapons for the companions will help that. And I hope the difficulty settings will reflect very noticable differences between them. Nightmare should really make you think, IMHO.

[Harid]

mindbody wrote...

^
Makes sense. I always try to roleplay combat according to character and class to try to keep consistent immersion, so as a rogue, for example, I'll stealth in, strategically take out the most dangerous enemies (mages, ususally), then let the crowd come to me, then stealth out if I need to. I guess too easy combat can be just as much as an immersion-breaker.... I like to feel the risk. i hope DA2 gives us lots of opportunities to roleplay during combat -- I think pre-determined builds and weapons for the companions will help that. And I hope the difficulty settings will reflect very noticable differences between them. Nightmare should really make you think, IMHO.

As long as Nightmare remains "increase enemy stats, lower yours", and not "change enemy tactics, and make enemies use more in depth tactics", it won't make you think anymore than Hard and Normal, well, with the exception of Friendly fire.

Modifié par Harid, 26 janvier 2011 - 08:08 .

[Firky]

elearon1 wrote...

(In fact, in BG2 I went through on a "no reloads" game and had a blast; carrying party equipment through the Underdark with only two living party members and everyone else needing to be rezzed).

Wow! I've always been too chicken to attempt the no-reload challenge. Aren't there 2 rods of resurrection you can get before you go on the linear bit? (I can picture why you would still die more than 20 times, though.)

Also, lower difficulties just kill games for me, for some reason. If I play first time on an easy setting, I just never want to play the game again. I think, for games like Dragon Age, story is great and all, but I am more of a combat junkie. So, I like having to play the same battle multiple times before I can beat it. Then the story feels like a reward rather than a chore.

[Archmage Silvery]

mindbody wrote...

I think I read somewhere that enemies in DA2 will act more intelligently, use healing/buffing spells more, etc, so the lower level difficulties might be harder than they were in DA:O. At least I hope so. Of course it's all fun and games til the spiders stun-lock you or the werewolves chain overwhelm. Dirty b-stards

Heh, yeah, but you can't deny that it's a great feeling when you actually win battles like that.

[ViSeiRa]

I'll probably start on Hard for like 3 playthroughs with the 3 different classes, then I'll take the one I'm most comfortable with (usually a Warrior) and do a playthrough on Nightmare, from then it'll be Nightmare only.

[Ryzaki]

I'll probably start on normal. Maybe casual if normal takes to long.

[mindbody]

Harid wrote...

mindbody wrote...

^
Makes sense. I always try to roleplay combat according to character and class to try to keep consistent immersion, so as a rogue, for example, I'll stealth in, strategically take out the most dangerous enemies (mages, ususally), then let the crowd come to me, then stealth out if I need to. I guess too easy combat can be just as much as an immersion-breaker.... I like to feel the risk. i hope DA2 gives us lots of opportunities to roleplay during combat -- I think pre-determined builds and weapons for the companions will help that. And I hope the difficulty settings will reflect very noticable differences between them. Nightmare should really make you think, IMHO.

As long as Nightmare remains "increase enemy stats, lower yours", and not "change enemy tactics, and make enemies use more in depth tactics", it won't make you think anymore than Hard and Normal, well, with the exception of Friendly fire.

I know.  I'm hoping for the latter, and I can guess you are, too.  But, like I mentioned earlier, going it solo can always make you think.  Solo, Ironman, no reloading, marathon.  

[Great_Horn]

According to what we know so far, I will play on nightmare cause that’s the only possibility to have friendly fire and I don’t want to miss that particular strategic element in combat.

[Maria Caliban]

It depends on whether there are any achievements for beating the game at higher difficulty levels.

mindbody wrote...

Question for those who enjoy the story more and just try to get through the fighting: do you just find all rpg combat boring, or would more intelligent enemies or more chances to roleplay in combat or other things increase your interest?

I prefer click to attack fighting.

[Archmage Silvery]

mindbody wrote...

Harid wrote...

mindbody wrote...

^
Makes sense. I always try to roleplay combat according to character and class to try to keep consistent immersion, so as a rogue, for example, I'll stealth in, strategically take out the most dangerous enemies (mages, ususally), then let the crowd come to me, then stealth out if I need to. I guess too easy combat can be just as much as an immersion-breaker.... I like to feel the risk. i hope DA2 gives us lots of opportunities to roleplay during combat -- I think pre-determined builds and weapons for the companions will help that. And I hope the difficulty settings will reflect very noticable differences between them. Nightmare should really make you think, IMHO.

As long as Nightmare remains "increase enemy stats, lower yours", and not "change enemy tactics, and make enemies use more in depth tactics", it won't make you think anymore than Hard and Normal, well, with the exception of Friendly fire.

I know.  I'm hoping for the latter, and I can guess you are, too.  But, like I mentioned earlier, going it solo can always make you think.  Solo, Ironman, no reloading, marathon.

On the topic of solo runs... the greatest documented BGII: SoA & ToB solo playthrough: The classic Elmonster

[wildannie]

I'll probably start on hard, but am very tempted to start on nightmare if it's the only setting with friendly fire.

[Akizora]

If there is one thing I dislike the most it is when an encounter is predictable when repeated, like boss at 80%, spawn minions - boss at 60%, open crack in floor - boss at 40%, spawn stronger minions - boss at 20%, he goes berserk with AEs. That creates a form of meta-gaming where you just redo it to learn a strategy, but a more dynamic and unpredictable combat would instead provide a challenge rather than pattern-recognition.

[Hongie]

Nightmare. I was hoping they'll add a new mode, like insane or hardcore or something... I found nightmare too easy on DAO and that's my first playthrough =/

Modifié par Hongie, 26 janvier 2011 - 08:23 .

[Andraste_Reborn]

Like quite a few people, apparently, I'll be playing on Nightmare because it's the only difficulty with friendly fire. I find being able to stroll around in an Inferno AOE with no ill effects completely immersion breaking.

[Harid]

Akizora wrote...

If there is one thing I dislike the most it is when an encounter is predictable when repeated, like boss at 80%, spawn minions - boss at 60%, open crack in floor - boss at 40%, spawn stronger minions - boss at 20%, he goes berserk with AEs. That creates a form of meta-gaming where you just redo it to learn a strategy, but a more dynamic and unpredictable combat would instead provide a challenge rather than pattern-recognition.

 
And yet, still better than anything we got in DA:O.

And I'd argue Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 as well.

As long as the boss doesn't get a damage immunity at the percentage, I don't have a problem with this type of encounter.

Modifié par Harid, 26 janvier 2011 - 08:26 .

[Akizora]

Harid wrote...

Akizora wrote...

If there is one thing I dislike the most it is when an encounter is predictable when repeated, like boss at 80%, spawn minions - boss at 60%, open crack in floor - boss at 40%, spawn stronger minions - boss at 20%, he goes berserk with AEs. That creates a form of meta-gaming where you just redo it to learn a strategy, but a more dynamic and unpredictable combat would instead provide a challenge rather than pattern-recognition.

 
And yet, still better than anything we got in DA1.

And I'd argue Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 as well.

No actually quite a few fights appeared to have scripted actions either on a timer or percentage of health, like the broodmother fight or the arch demon fight.

[Icinix]

Saibh wrote...

First playthrough is Easy, since I really only care about story and characters. If it's childishly simple, I might turn it up to Normal. After that, it depends on how much I like combat.

Yeah pretty much this.

[Harid]

Akizora wrote...

Harid wrote...

Akizora wrote...

If there is one thing I dislike the most it is when an encounter is predictable when repeated, like boss at 80%, spawn minions - boss at 60%, open crack in floor - boss at 40%, spawn stronger minions - boss at 20%, he goes berserk with AEs. That creates a form of meta-gaming where you just redo it to learn a strategy, but a more dynamic and unpredictable combat would instead provide a challenge rather than pattern-recognition.

 
And yet, still better than anything we got in DA1.

And I'd argue Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 as well.

No actually quite a few fights appeared to have scripted actions either on a timer or percentage of health, like the broodmother fight or the arch demon fight.

Don't think there was anything past critter level in either of those fights (unless you skipped the alienage and market districts), and the archdemon had a melee weapon paling, arguably, when it jumps past the other side of that crack.  I don't count either as ramping up the encounter difficulty through the fight.

The whole point of the type of fight you describe is to teach you pacing. This is hard to do any other way legitimately (i.e without damage palings).

Modifié par Harid, 26 janvier 2011 - 08:35 .

[imkaoo]

Even though I'll be choosing nightmare I'm afraid it won't really be a nightmare. In DAO it wasn't :/

[Emyer]

Normal, I always start games on the default difficulty.

mindbody wrote...

Question for those who enjoy the story more and just try to get through the fighting: do you just find all rpg combat boring, or would more intelligent enemies or more chances to roleplay in combat or other things increase your interest?

I personally find the combat boring unless I'm really challenged, so I always play on nightmare. But once I learned the inns and outs of the combat mechanics, I found nightmare was often far too easy anyways. I changed my gameplay to make it more interesting, and tended to leave my companions out of the fights.

I think I read somewhere that enemies in DA2 will act more intelligently, use healing/buffing spells more, etc, so the lower level difficulties might be harder than they were in DA:O. At least I hope so. Of course it's all fun and games til the spiders stun-lock you or the werewolves chain overwhelm. Dirty b-stards

Depends on the RPG, point and click RPGs like DA tend to bore me a bit with combat, since dungeons are usually really long and you have to fight the same enemies over and over, reching the Anvil and watching the story unfold was the interesting part for me, not the hours I spent travelling the Deep Roads' tunnels killing Darkspawn, RPGs that have a more involved combat are a different story completely.

[mindbody]

Harid wrote...

Akizora wrote...

Harid wrote...

Akizora wrote...

If there is one thing I dislike the most it is when an encounter is predictable when repeated, like boss at 80%, spawn minions - boss at 60%, open crack in floor - boss at 40%, spawn stronger minions - boss at 20%, he goes berserk with AEs. That creates a form of meta-gaming where you just redo it to learn a strategy, but a more dynamic and unpredictable combat would instead provide a challenge rather than pattern-recognition.

 
And yet, still better than anything we got in DA1.

And I'd argue Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 as well.

No actually quite a few fights appeared to have scripted actions either on a timer or percentage of health, like the broodmother fight or the arch demon fight.

Don't think there was anything past critter level in either of those fights, and the archdemon had a melee weapon paling, arguably, when it jumps past the other side of that crack.  I don't count either as ramping up the encounter difficulty through the fight.

The spider-queen fight in the deep roads might only have  had critters, but the overwhelm ability at least forced you to plan a response to them if you had mages or rogues.  Same with the Mother in Awakening.  If more enemies would use the abilities they have, like stealth and crowd control, or could get different abilities according to party makeup, that would improve difficulty without needing a more complex ai.