285 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Grovermancer wrote...

Characters usually did have a reaction to weapons strikes.  Flinching, blood coming out, etc.  Also, this is an area that is an old RPG conceit, though could theoretically be improved.  And supposedly, is being improved for TOR.

I know and have experienced a tad bit of RL combat.  More than I'll bet you'd believe.

I can believe quite a bit.

 

No, they're valid.  I'm just not playing your game.  Convoluted mental gymnastics to try and change the premise, cherry pick extreme examples, ignoring the obvious, etc.

I'm not changing your premise; I'm calling it a distinction with little use.

Your claim: Origins had realistic weapon animations. This made Origins gritty/added to the world.
My claim: Origins had 2-3 animations per weapon. The pace/style of combat made it bland/lifeless.

As far as animations go, Assassin's Creed 2 felt far more gritty, and I couldn't tell you if any of those animations had any semblance of realism, besides sound effects.

Yeah, sorry, wrong again.  Every move had it's own animation.  And no, what you see and experience is the animations.

Yes...the same 2-3 tired animations. Which is where my point that 'realistic' animations didn't do much for Origins.

[Rattleface]

Grovermancer wrote...

Mus3 wrote...

How can you not see the point? Are you braindead?

So which of these facts aren't facts?

-- the characters move/fight absurdly too fast to be realistic
-- the characters move in spastic, twitchy ways during strikes and swings and most attacks
-- the weapons are apparently weightless
-- the combat moves and techniques are not realistic or true to actual combat
-- the physical kinesthetics are wrong
-- people in real weapons combat don't leap to and fro, or lunge a dozen feet in the blink of an eye
-- bodies don't explode, no matter how hard you strike them in melee


Hmmm?   I'll ask you another 5 times, if that will help. 

I agree with all your points.  DA2 is far too unrealistic - which is not something that should be explained with "lol go watch a movie if u want realism"
Realism should have been expected after the quasi realistic combat in DA:O.

The exploding bodies, ninja gaiden rogues, baton swinging twohanders... retarded tbh, and I've been saying that since the first combat vid.

[Maelora]

Absolutely agree with Grovermancer.

I detested the twitchy, power-rangers style anime battles. A 12lb sword handling like a lightsaber. Jumping 30 feet into combat from a standing start. Kicking flasks into combat. Everything just flying past in a blur without being able to respond to it. Button-mashing, weightless manga combat.

I just went back to Origins and was amazed at how good it felt. Just had a battle - and was surprised that I didn't get swarmed by three dozen disposable mooks from all directions.

Modifié par Maelora, 20 mars 2011 - 02:33 .

[Il Divo]

Grovermancer wrote...

Again, wrong.  Every move had a corresponding animation.  And yes, most were accurate, or at least relatively accurate, and hearkened to real, effortful combat.  Not God of War rawr! combat.  And yes, that makes the world more real, more visceral, more gritty.

Maybe for the first ten minutes. Unfortunately, we cannot all be distracted so easily. The execution animations were the only thing which ever felt visceral at any point in Origins.

Do you know what the word "irony" means?

I always find this amusing. I did not feel 'mature' watching combat animations in Origins, or in any other RPG I've played. If others do, perhaps they might want to re-examine how they evaluate the term. As it stands, it seems intended to create false-elitism more than anything else.

What, fighting dragons in a fantasy world?  Using magic?


Go figure. 
Already addressed and dismissed a dozen times.  Keep trying. 

You brought up the point about super-humans and Hawke. A normal human, even a Warden, could not fight a dragon. Period. In Dragon Age, your character fights several. This what I call being 'super human'.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 mars 2011 - 02:35 .

[Mastermadskills]

Ritalin?

Perhaps a sedative would be more appropriate, or even a drug coctail to induce amnesia while still being conscious enough to play the game.

Materials Bioware should package with the game to induce amnesia:

IV compatible Ativan.
IV compatible Fentanyl
IV compatible Sodium Pentathol.

BAM. All users will forget ever playing DA2 and will (most likely) not be conscious of the same map 7 times over.

[TMZuk]

@OP.

You are absolutely right, only I shy away from the word "realistic" in a game that features dragons, magic, darkspawn etc. etc.

A better word, in my opinion, is "Believable." In DA:O I was able to suspend my disbelief. In DA2, the fifteen hours I played of it, I wished I could skip the combat. It looked and felt absurd. Add to that the removal of every single non-combat skill, the absurdly overspecialised classes, and I just had to bury my head in the desk.

I am no longer able to suspend my disbelief. Or in other words: Everything except characters and story sucks, IMO! The characters are not as good as in DA:O, but at least Varric, Isabela and Bethany I like. The story is disjointed and told akwardly, but still it had it's moments during first act, at least. I haven't played further than that. The rest is, In My Humble Opinion: Utter garbage!

[Aumata]

The difference between the combat of DA:O and DA2.
DA:O
Somewhat realistic body animation.
Overly slow combat speed. This being in the 1 handed department, never saw a 2 hander nor a duel wielding combat, but if experience DA:O might combat will more than likely be slower than what an actual person speed is.
DA2
Over the top animation.
Combat speed is more based on reality. Though the speed seems to range from either slow, real, or fast. Though again this depends on the user of the weapon.
None fits the realm of realism in combat anyway. If I had to say which is better I would say a the body animation from DA:O with everything else being DA2. Though slowing down the two hander speed would be be the best thing. 
EDIT: Someone else posted the animation problems in DA:O, so I would say seek out an expert on the combat and bring him in to do animation or seek out a vid to do an actual animation though the speed is more than likely going to come from the expert in the fighting style.  Or Bioware could just add more animation ot the weapons.

Modifié par Aumata, 21 mars 2011 - 08:21 .

[Einherjar420]

I'll take Dragon Age 2's "wrong" and "unrealistic" combat over Dragon Age Origins boring combat any day.

[Grovermancer]

Il Divo wrote...

I'm not changing your premise; I'm calling it a distinction with little use.

Your claim: Origins had realistic weapon animations. This made Origins gritty/added to the world.
My claim: Origins had 2-3 animations per weapon. The pace/style of combat made it bland/lifeless.

As far as animations go, Assassin's Creed 2 felt far more gritty, and I couldn't tell you if any of those animations had any semblance of realism, besides sound effects.

And again, you say 2-3 animations.  Every power/move had it's own animation.  So basic + powers/techniques = lots more than 2-3 moves.

"The pace/style of combat made it bland/lifeless."  Yes.  Your opinion.  One I obviously don't share.  Nor do many others who have agreed w/ my premise.

Yes...the same 2-3 tired animations. Which is where my point that 'realistic' animations didn't do much for Origins.

Your opinion.

[Grovermancer]

Rattleface wrote...
]I agree with all your points.  DA2 is far too unrealistic - which is not something that should be explained with "lol go watch a movie if u want realism"
Realism should have been expected after the quasi realistic combat in DA:O.

The exploding bodies, ninja gaiden rogues, baton swinging twohanders... retarded tbh, and I've been saying that since the first combat vid.

Pretty ridiculous, isn't it? 

Though ironically, may speak of the mentality of some who like the shiny flashy wiz-bang that is DA2's combat.

[Grovermancer]

Maelora wrote...

Absolutely agree with Grovermancer.

I detested the twitchy, power-rangers style anime battles. A 12lb sword handling like a lightsaber. Jumping 30 feet into combat from a standing start. Kicking flasks into combat. Everything just flying past in a blur without being able to respond to it. Button-mashing, weightless manga combat.

I just went back to Origins and was amazed at how good it felt. Just had a battle - and was surprised that I didn't get swarmed by three dozen disposable mooks from all directions.

LOL, "power rangers." 

Yeah, I'm thinking about doing another DAO play-through now.

I just have very little desire to do another play-through of DA2.


All I have to do is think about re-running those same maps over and over and over... that's enough to stifle that urge.  Or think about some of the "errand-running" quests.  But most of all, think on 3/4th of the spazzy combat.

This is the first RPG I've not re-played immediately after.  Not sure when/if I ever will, TBH.  Almost feel obligated, just to try and get my money's worth.

[Crash_7]

Rockpopple wrote...

Grovermancer wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Yeah, you know what was super realistic? When an archer pulled out one arrow and it split in mid air into 50 arrows and hit every enemy on the field.

Know what else was super realistic? When my rogue disappeared in front of an enemies eyes into some black vortex. He didn't disappear in a puff of smoke, he just got wrapped up in nothingness, and apparently there was no magic involved. That was REALLY realistic.

Know what was fun, messere? Having a 2-handed warrior haul back his mighty blade for a full second and the rogue enemy not taking advantage by slipping a knife between his breastplate. Nah, he just stood there and took it. It was the only polite thing to do.

Another thing that was fun? Shuffling around your companions as they hacked an enemy to pieces because, well, there's so little room when you're in an open field, so you gotta shuffle like you're in a Wal-Mart on Boxing Day.

Your factity facts can not stand up to my quotity quotes, good sir!

Nope, sorry.

All of that was already addressed, in several posts, on page 1, and this page.  And by others as well.

Keep trying.

*slowclaps*

Perhaps, sir, you could be a little.....more super serial? Please?

A bit of a ****** that Rockpopple isn't he/she.

[Grovermancer]

Il Divo wrote...

Maybe for the first ten minutes. Unfortunately, we cannot all be distracted so easily. The execution animations were the only thing which ever felt visceral at any point in Origins.

You mean, you can't maintain your attention for very long?

And most/all of the melee combat held a visceral component.  Because the people moved for the most part like real people move.

I always find this amusing. I did not feel 'mature' watching combat animations in Origins, or in any other RPG I've played. If others do, perhaps they might want to re-examine how they evaluate the term. As it stands, it seems intended to create false-elitism more than anything else.

No, you don't feel mature, the game itself has a quality of maturity.  And respect for it's audience.

You brought up the point about super-humans and Hawke. A normal human, even a Warden, could not fight a dragon. Period. In Dragon Age, your character fights several. This what I call being 'super human'.

Sorry.  The genre is called fantasy.  Things like that are accepted within the universe.  People being God of War is not.

Your argument, as stated countless times, is inapplicable.

[Scottish TaZeR]

Console gamer.

DA:O > DAII

Simples.

[Grovermancer]

Crash_7 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Grovermancer wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Yeah, you know what was super realistic? When an archer pulled out one arrow and it split in mid air into 50 arrows and hit every enemy on the field.

Know what else was super realistic? When my rogue disappeared in front of an enemies eyes into some black vortex. He didn't disappear in a puff of smoke, he just got wrapped up in nothingness, and apparently there was no magic involved. That was REALLY realistic.

Know what was fun, messere? Having a 2-handed warrior haul back his mighty blade for a full second and the rogue enemy not taking advantage by slipping a knife between his breastplate. Nah, he just stood there and took it. It was the only polite thing to do.

Another thing that was fun? Shuffling around your companions as they hacked an enemy to pieces because, well, there's so little room when you're in an open field, so you gotta shuffle like you're in a Wal-Mart on Boxing Day.

Your factity facts can not stand up to my quotity quotes, good sir!

Nope, sorry.

All of that was already addressed, in several posts, on page 1, and this page.  And by others as well.

Keep trying.

*slowclaps*

Perhaps, sir, you could be a little.....more super serial? Please?

A bit of a ****** that Rockpopple isn't he/she.

One of the apologist cheerleader trolls that were (still are?) swarming the cite.

[Crash_7]

Your's was a good post with valid analysis. People can choose to focus on the choice of this word or that, but in my opinion you got to the nub of the problem with the combat.

[rolanthas]

*quits dragon age 2
*gets popcorn

yes, battle for my amusement.

[Squire]

Grovermancer wrote...

So far, I can't stand it, almost entirely because of the combat. (I find the interface and status screens inferior as well, but that's another issue)

DAO had visceral, gritty, real combat moves and animations and skills and abilities.  Fit perfectly with the atmosphere and world, and gave the game such gravity, and validity.  (except for 2-H, where swing speed was too slow and lumbering and should have slowly increase scaled as STR increased)  Basically, the combat was perfect and made every other aspect of the game that much better.

But DA2's unrealistically twitchy, fast, shallow crap looks, feels, and sounds like a damn console 3rd person action knockoff.  WTF.  It's literally hard to even see what the hell I'm doing.   It looks like every garbage console action game I've ever seen; leaping, swooshing, blah blah blah.  Where's that Lars Kracken goober from God of War?  (whatever his name is)

Don't forget the stupid moves like Tremour, Scythe, Backstab etc...

But yeah, this is exactly my problem with this game, and exactly the reason I won't buy it after playing the demo. Literally, word for word. (I wonder if the solution for DA3 will be to not release a demo...)

-- the characters move/fight absurdly too fast to be realistic
-- the characters move in spastic, twitchy ways during strikes and swings
-- the weapons are apparently weightless
-- the combat moves and techniques (that I've seen) are not realistic or true to actual combat
-- the physical kinesthetics are wrong, and imply ignorance of combat technique on the part of the creators
-- people in real weapons combat don't leap to and fro, or lunge a dozen feet in the blink of an eye
-- bodies don't explode, no matter how hard you strike them

EDIT:  the facts listed above are true to both RL and the DA universe (since the DA universe melee combat was made to look believable in a RL type setting)

All the crap listed above, is what happens in 3rd-person action console games.  Twitch-based, button-mashing, hack n' slash crap.  Shiny, flashy garbage.  The stuff a monkey can play.

None of the stuff listed above was the norm for DAO's combat.

DAO's world and atmosphere was gritty, dire, and real.  So was the combat.  The combat fit the world.  Backed up the atmosphere.  It looked and felt effortful.  It had gravity.  Even stylized moves still hearkened to an actual, real combat.

DA2's combat hearkens to console games.

OMG! Get out of my head!!

[Crash_7]

DA_Joran wrote...

Not everyone in that age group is like you were or I was.  When you get older, you will mellow out more and realize half the stuff you're upset about isn't that important.  I'm not gonna state my age for you.  I will tell you I'm older than you are.


REGARDING CONSOLES

I use to play all of my games on PC -- Baldur's Gate, Diablo, Command and Conquer, Neverwinter Nights, Sims 2 .. etc.  I now play games on Playstation 3 and I am much happier.  With PCs, you always have to meet system requirements and that gets to be expensive.  Every other year, you have to update your graphics card or audio card.  With consoles, you don't have that problem.  You have a nice stable platform that developers can program for.  There is no need to go out upgrade components and games tend to work out of the box.  The graphics are comparable to and sometimes better than what is on the PC.  It just depends what platform a game was originally developed for.  Ever since I gave up the chase of having the latest and greatest, I've been happier too.  So, I can't play mods.  I'll live -- trust me.

Well, thanks to one particular consoles poor design and subsequent billion plus recall costs, this has resulted in the slow down of technological advances in gaming.  The frequency of required PC upgrades has dramatically slowed.  However, it was always the case that if one had sufficient technical knowhow it was possible to build a gaming PC that would last at least 5 years -- my current gaming rig is 4 years old and going strong. 

This doesn't stop the game producers spinning the notion that one absolutely must have the latest DX card with the latest bells and whistles to play this or that game -- even when this or that game runs on the above mentioned console.  A fine example would be Crysis to Crysis 2.  DA 2's spin on DX 11 also demonstrates the industries penchant for fuelling the platform war to drive hardware sales.  DA 2's DX 11 features are practically worthless and each of the so called DX 11 exclusive techniques applied to DA 2 can be implemented in DX 9.c: SSAO, Motion Blur and Depth of field. 

The short version is that all-too-often the industry dupes consumers into upgrading when there is little to no value in doing so.  Again, Crysis 1 made a huge thing of DX 10 and how one would need Vista and a DX 10 card to get the best out of the game.  A few hours after release however it was noted that all of the locked out functionality of the graphics engine could be put back in with a few minor modifications to ini/config files, and that there were only two DX 10 unique functions that offered very little to the overall visual quality.

Sadly the industry cottoned on to the fact that they can be caught out that way and now we see encrypted config files making their way onto the scene. 

Obviously I have no intention in engaging in a platform war -that only benefits the platform designers and not its users.  There are clear differences between platforms with each having its strong and week points, and each of their user bases have preferences to how they game.

[heathxxx]

Suffice it to say that in my own experience, there really is no difference in the long term costs between console gaming and PC gaming.

The relatively low cost of the "latest" console, is usually negated by the excessive (in my opinion...) cost of the games themselves. If I were to take my library of games that are available on both platforms, having worked out the new release prices for both, I can tell you that the PC games were one-third of the overall price of their console counterparts.

The core issue isn't a battle between PC's and Consoles, but realising that generally speaking, they're two different markets with two different target audiences. I can completely understand trying to combine development costs to serve both facets, but I've yet to see any product/game that does this well.

When developers and publishers released a defined product for the consoles and a defined product for the PC, things were much better for both. When you try to port a PC game to console, or vice-versa, the end result is never as good.

I think it's safe enough to say that those in either camp (console or PC) would rather wait for a product that serves their platform properly, even if it's released a number of months after the other. As a PC gamer, it wouldn't have worried me in the slightest, if DA2 had been released now on the consoles, but I would have to wait three months or so for a PC version, more akin to the expectations of that particular market of gamers. Indeed, I would much rather that scenario, than the dismay I feel towards what DA2 has ended up like.

Seriously... if I wanted to play something like DA2 has become, I would be playing joypad button mashing console games... on a console.

Make PC games. Make console games. Not some bastardised mash-up of the two. They always end up being bloody awful! 

Modifié par heathxxx, 24 mars 2011 - 01:38 .

[mr_nameless]

Agreed. Skyrim for instance is getting its own PC interface/functionality. WOW what a thought.
Is Bioware from now on merging systems for future games?

[terrordactyl1]

Realistic combat?

So, you want a couple of drunks fist fighting over a fat girl outside of a bar?

How can chucking fireballs and cones of ice at undead darkspawn ever look "realistic"?

[heathxxx]

terrordactyl1 wrote...

Realistic combat?

So, you want a couple of drunks fist fighting over a fat girl outside of a bar?

How can chucking fireballs and cones of ice at undead darkspawn ever look "realistic"?

It really depends if the drunks pause to light their farts during said melee 

[Cobrawar]

the original idea of dragon age origins from the beginning was always to have realistic combat, anyone tells you different is bsing you. why they decided to move away from this when DAO was a successful game I have no idea. Tweak and fix the combat , make it better then DAo but don't drastically change it.

Modifié par Cobrawar, 24 mars 2011 - 02:57 .

[Squire]

terrordactyl1 wrote...

Realistic combat?

So, you want a couple of drunks fist fighting over a fat girl outside of a bar?

How can chucking fireballs and cones of ice at undead darkspawn ever look "realistic"?

...yes, because representing combat is a choice between a typical street brawl and silly anime-style ninja moves. There is no balance between realism and entertainment, it can only be completely one or the other. Films like Lord of the Rings and Gladiator in no way managed to capture this balance.

I think the OP put it best; there's a difference between authenticity and believability. We don't want authenticity, but we want believability. Origins' combat was believable. This one isn't even remotely so.