178 réponses à ce sujet

[kane442]

Burdokva wrote...

kane442 wrote...

naaa forums as a vocal minority on just about anything and some of us like the new animations....to each there own i guess

You understand, by your own argument, that you're a vocal minority too, don't you?

yes i do ...its not lost on me

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

Aside from classy "..you could put green sun in your world, but.." for those who think that leaping thirty feet in the air can be simply explained as a matter of artistic vision and style, there is always a problem which comes in all JRPGs: if one could jump as high as Hulk, or call a demonic locomotive to wreak havoc on his enemies, why can't he jump over a broken bridge instead of solving some puzzles to restore it, or break a hole in the wall with his doomtrain instead running around a dungeon-maze to find his way out?

[The Elder King]

Martanek wrote...

boohead wrote...

The combat in DAO1 was so slow and clunky that I honestly do not mind this speed one bit.

Srsly, the worst part about DAO was easily the combat. Anyone who says this is not an improvement is just being silly and biased.

No good sir, you are completely wrong. The biggest weak spots in DA:O lay elsewhere and it was definitely not its combat part. How was it so slow? Should a human be able to jump five meters high and ten meters long to kill an enemy within an eye's blink?  Is a heavy two-handed sword supposed to be wielded as a pocket knife? Man, things and weapons have some weight! Sure, I know, DA2 is a fantasy game but it should still operate within basic rules of physics and a sense of reality.

I think that the "weak spot" is completely subjective. As the appreciation of DAO (and DA2) combat. I think it was a little bit slow, and it had problems in the animations. On DA2 combat, I'll prefer to judge myself when I'll play it, but it seems a bit too fast. Not that I don't like it, but it's different from DAO combat (which I liked too).
The things is that we can't say "DAO combat was definitely its weas spot" or DAO combat wasn't definitely its weak spot". It's personal and subjective.

[Martanek]

hhh89,

you are right about that subjective thing. It is just that DA2 looks to be alienating so much from its predecessor both visually and gameplay-wise. But I think I'll wait for the demo and make conclusions after that. Hopefully, DA2 does not strike me in the face like ME2 did when I played it for the first time.

[Cloaking_Thane]

I agree with laidlaw particularly about the Rogue fighting in DA:O.



While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.



The demo will determine alot, and I cant wait, it looks good to me

[tmp7704]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

It generally took about 3 steps to move from front of the enemy to behind them, which in turn would take maybe two seconds.

Hyperbole, it's what's for dinner.

[Nerevar-as]

Main problem I had with Rogues was the lack of Flanking as a tactic.

[Cloaking_Thane]

tmp7704 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

It generally took about 3 steps to move from front of the enemy to behind them, which in turn would take maybe two seconds.

Hyperbole, it's what's for dinner.

Agreed you do it well yourself,  youre coveniently forgetting that perhaps your Rogue decided to attack a different person (targeting failure) and/or the backstab animation took at least a second to wind up.

Please, it took fairly long, especially when the stunned enemy animation is what 7-10 seconds max?

You could potentially not get a backstab in at all if your tageting failed

[tmp7704]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Agreed you do it well yourself,  youre coveniently forgetting that perhaps your Rogue decided to attack a different person (targeting failure) and/or the backstab animation took at least a second to wind up.

It could be difference in playstyle -- i'd control my rogues manually and use pause deliberately when selecting my targets, so the targeting failure you speak of as well as rogues deciding to attack someone else was simply never the case.

Please, it took fairly long, especially when the stunned enemy animation is what 7-10 seconds max?

The stun duration actually confirms my impression if i recall things right -- the basic rogue stun lasts only 2-3 secs or so, but i didn't really have problem with getting behind the enemy and landing an attack by the time they'd get back in action.

[Cloaking_Thane]

tmp7704 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Agreed you do it well yourself,  youre coveniently forgetting that perhaps your Rogue decided to attack a different person (targeting failure) and/or the backstab animation took at least a second to wind up.

It could be difference in playstyle -- i'd control my rogues manually and use pause deliberately when selecting my targets, so the targeting failure you speak of as well as rogues deciding to attack someone else was simply never the case.

Please, it took fairly long, especially when the stunned enemy animation is what 7-10 seconds max?

The stun duration actually confirms my impression if i recall things right -- the basic rogue stun lasts only 2-3 secs or so, but i didn't really have problem with getting behind the enemy and landing an attack by the time they'd get back in action.

It does sound like a difference in playstyles, but there were potential problems there. Again, if they just ran faster (i.e a quick, lithe rogue) then alot of it was solved.

I think they have done pretty well for the most part improving that

[Nerevar-as]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

It does sound like a difference in playstyles, but there were potential problems there. Again, if they just ran faster (i.e a quick, lithe rogue) then alot of it was solved.

I think they have done pretty well for the most part improving that

The problem is the animation, it feels like normal run speed animation and then hasted, rather than an animation for faster movement. I´ve played a few games with fast and over the top animations, and at least compared to the video the animations were far better.

[lazuli]

tmp7704 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

It generally took about 3 steps to move from front of the enemy to behind them, which in turn would take maybe two seconds.

Hyperbole, it's what's for dinner.

I just hope they've addressed the targeting issues that arise when you command melee characters to attack moving opponents.  Sometimes they'd get close enough for a swing and then just stand there and watch the enemy escape.  What we really need is Bull's Strike for some better linebacking options.

[Xewaka]

The problem with the combat animations (as part of combat speed) is that characters spend too much time in postswing state and not enough in midswing state, which makes the melee look stilted and feel at the same time too slow, because of stillshots, and too fast, because you can't see the combat per se, only the result. The game needs less postswing and more midswing.

[Vegglimer]

I agree with OP, it looks kinda cartoonie, and judging only on what we've seen so far, I'd like it slowed down just a little.



But we'll see in a month!



I was also disgusted by the quality of the graphics at first, especially in the EXILED PRINCE video...

[Scous3]

don't judge till you play the demo its free so make your opinions then

[DJBare]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

The demo will determine alot, and I cant wait, it looks good to me

I enjoy that part of the combat, it especially added tension, no health kits, no injury kits, companion getting hammered, attempt to get into position to fend off attacker before the companion is trashed, will my warden make it in time!?

[Annarl]

I liked how in DAO tactics were important. The attack speed was a little too slow especially for some of the two handed moves. DA2 looks pretty fast, too fast. I can't really judge until I play the game.

[lazuli]

Xewaka wrote...

The problem with the combat animations (as part of combat speed) is that characters spend too much time in postswing state and not enough in midswing state, which makes the melee look stilted and feel at the same time too slow, because of stillshots, and too fast, because you can't see the combat per se, only the result. The game needs less postswing and more midswing.

How would you handle enemies that move out of range during this extended midswing?

[1varangian]

Kileyan wrote...

I know people hate the excuse that it is a fantasy world with magic to defend crazy melee moves and such.

But in a game that does include mages and magic, which can lay waste to enemies with storms of electric, ice and fire, what do you do with their more "realistic" melee counterparts? People want the moves to be toned down, no rains of arrows or flashy melee swings that hit 5 guys at once.

How does a game designer approach this, without just making it The Mage Ages, since mages are free to do anything outlandish, but everyone else must follow real world physics and some sort of realism?

Has it really been that long that people have forgotten? The game developers certainly have forgotten, but they probably like to think they have progressed into making games more fun. (Which is true for the most part, but they also don't challenge a player anymore like a player wants to be challenged.)

The answer: amount of magic available.

Origins and I'm guessing DA2 don't pose any kind of limitations to spellcasting. Mana regenerates as fast as stamina for the 'mundane' classes. That's where it goes wrong. As a side effect, even the most powerful spells eventually become really dull because you use them in every fight. There should be some kind of limitation to how much magic you can use, or it should come at a cost. Magic should be fun, awesome and powerful but there should be far less of it.

When you have mages who are most of the time less useful than warriors but who can sometimes peak to launch that one battle changing spell you gain several benefits. First, class dynamics are better and party composition matters more, you have more choice. A player who chooses to have a mage in his party should be challenged to manage his resources.

All classes in DA2 are steady performers who spam talents and spells all day which creates the following problem: for balance reasons, magic must be boringly weak or mundane classes must have crazy abilities to compete. DA2 has gone the "everything is crazy powerful" route, which can be really boring - it doesn't challenge the players as much and it gets old really fast seeing the flashy stuff all the time. It can be argued that dragging along a mage who just avoids getting killed for 75% of the time is boring but I strongly disagree. Sheltering a mage to unleash something awesome at some point is fun. And the classes actually play differently. A mage who has a ranged magic auto attack plays like an archer which is boring. If there are 4 people in the group, not everyone needs to spam stuff all the time. And there can be a hybrid warrior/mage class for those who don't like their PCs doing nothing.

I guess there is some truth in here since the silly talents like Tremor and Hail of Arrows could be a result of the design choice of not limiting mages' powers and wanting to keep the other classes competitive. Which contributes to the cartoony combat with superpowers.

Modifié par 1varangian, 10 février 2011 - 04:40 .

[Burdokva]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

I agree with laidlaw particularly about the Rogue fighting in DA:O.

While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

The demo will determine alot, and I cant wait, it looks good to me

Burdokva wrote...

And sorry, but everyone who whined that it took them "too much time" to position their rogues for a back-stab should have just shut up and learned how to play. It's supposed to be hard, experienced soldiers or even common men fighting for their lives just don't stand like blocks of rock.

Notice the italic part.

[Nerevar-as]

Xewaka wrote...

The problem with the combat animations (as part of combat speed) is that characters spend too much time in postswing state and not enough in midswing state, which makes the melee look stilted and feel at the same time too slow, because of stillshots, and too fast, because you can't see the combat per se, only the result. The game needs less postswing and more midswing.

The midswing was the right speed for me. The problem was that a normal attack would be preparing to swing, which took so long that we were lucky enemies followed the same rules, swing - OK - stop and back to one. With 2H weapons this was especially bad, as we were standing almost for a second open to attacks.
In the DA2 Deep Road videos I saw the same sequence again, but this time faster. That´s what gives the cartoon feeling to me, it almost looks as if rather than make a new faster attack animation they pressed FF to the old style.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Again, I want to see a frame-by-frame of the combat animations. I'd much rather a smooth animation than a choppy thing where the sword magically jumps from place to place.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Burdokva wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

I agree with laidlaw particularly about the Rogue fighting in DA:O.

While I dont think the new "teleport" backstab was quite necessary (although I'm not complaining about it), making the movement faster was a must, it took ages to shuffle around an opponent in DA:O, stunned or not.

The demo will determine alot, and I cant wait, it looks good to me

Burdokva wrote...

And sorry, but everyone who whined that it took them "too much time" to position their rogues for a back-stab should have just shut up and learned how to play. It's supposed to be hard, experienced soldiers or even common men fighting for their lives just don't stand like blocks of rock.

Notice the italic part.

Cool, but it takes just as long when they are "stunned", and really trying to bring real life into a fantasy setting is just asking to be ripped to shreds.

I have completed the game with two rogues and know very well how to play with them, but it still doesnt deny the fact that the animations and manuvering took too long for most people......

There is a reason they made it faster and more immediate......

Modifié par Cloaking_Thane, 10 février 2011 - 05:39 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

I have completed the game with two rogues and know very well how to play with them, but it still doesnt deny the fact that the animations and manuvering took too long for most people......

I didn't think DAO's positioning took too long at all.  The positioning required planning rather than patience.  Sure, you could just try to move into position, but it was more efficient to draw your enemy into a position where his back was exposed to your Rogue.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

I have completed the game with two rogues and know very well how to play with them, but it still doesnt deny the fact that the animations and manuvering took too long for most people......

I didn't think DAO's positioning took too long at all.  The positioning required planning rather than patience.  Sure, you could just try to move into position, but it was more efficient to draw your enemy into a position where his back was exposed to your Rogue.

Getting your team mates to draw the aggro is definitely a strong tactic, but for the enemy right in front of you youre still left in the same predicament.

It does largely depend on your level of pause and play tactics........I generally prefer minimal pause and play only to set up a combo, etc.