79 réponses à ce sujet

[Lithuasil]

One of the points I'm trying to raise time and time again is - in real life, combat is relatively scarce, because it's a risky affair for all involved. I would *like* to have mechanics in place, that allow me to solve the majority of conflicts with a mix of dialogue, planning, choice of allies, choice of companions, etc. Combat, especially in a game like DA2, where you're not supposed to be some kind of savior, should feel like a risk, a last resort. The more combat is based around stats, the more balanced combat is, the harder such a feel becomes to pull off.

[Radwar]

Lithuasil wrote...

Since you're certain they'll make a few steps backwards gameplay wise, surely there's no need to get anywhere near as defensive as you are?
And out of curiosity, when did 'it's not going to happen' become a valid argument for why something is right or wrong?

What you consider a step backwards, I consider a step forward. Not everybody is one dimensional like you where only the first person type of games = immersion. Unlike you, I can easily immerse myself in first person types of games and tactical/rpgs type of games. But you seem to think that since you can only immerse yourself in one type of game, than everybody else has to be that way aswell. I'm sorry to tell you this, but the world doesn't revolve around you. Have a nice day.

[88mphSlayer]

Lithuasil wrote...

One of the points I'm trying to raise time and time again is - in real life, combat is relatively scarce, because it's a risky affair for all involved. I would *like* to have mechanics in place, that allow me to solve the majority of conflicts with a mix of dialogue, planning, choice of allies, choice of companions, etc. Combat, especially in a game like DA2, where you're not supposed to be some kind of savior, should feel like a risk, a last resort. The more combat is based around stats, the more balanced combat is, the harder such a feel becomes to pull off.

i think you're talking about a game like Planescape Torment where you could avoid most of the game's combat, notably the final boss is a conversation that i really really enjoyed

i'd like to see some of that in more rpg's but i think it's expected even from old school rpg fans that there should be lots of combat and levelling and so-on which is something i enjoy as well, a nice mix of possible choices and variety would be nice tho

[Aloradus]

Radwar wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

Since you're certain they'll make a few steps backwards gameplay wise, surely there's no need to get anywhere near as defensive as you are?
And out of curiosity, when did 'it's not going to happen' become a valid argument for why something is right or wrong?

What you consider a step backwards, I consider a step forward. Not everybody is one dimensional like you where only the first person type of games = immersion. Unlike you, I can easily immerse myself in first person types of games and tactical/rpgs type of games. But you seem to think that since you can only immerse yourself in one type of game, than everybody else has to be that way aswell. I'm sorry to tell you this, but the world doesn't revolve around you. Have a nice day.

Agreed, many different gameplay styles can immerse someone in a story.   I enjoyed DA:O’s & DA:2’s combat. In fact I would welcome more tactics.

Just because one enjoys playing fast paced first person doesn’t mean it’s the best medium.  It just means someone has a personal preference.  I actually still like old school top down.  Per example for me in MMORPGs I enjoyed playing UO more than EQ, mainly due to the interface.

This is as silly as saying the surrealist movement cannot impact as well as realism…  Or gouache is superior to acrylic.

Modifié par Aloradus, 31 mars 2011 - 03:36 .

[Lithuasil]

Aloradus wrote...
Agreed, many different gameplay styles can immerse someone in a story. I enjoyed DA:O’s & DA:2’s combat. In fact I would welcome more tactics.

Just because one enjoys playing fast paced first person doesn’t mean it’s the best medium. It just means someone has a personal preference. I actually still like old school top down. Per example for me in MMORPGs I enjoyed playing UO more than EQ, mainly due to the interface.

This is as silly as saying the surrealist movement cannot impact as well as realism… Or gouache is superior to acrylic.

Different styles for different purposes. In the S.w.a.t Series, I much prefer the slower pace, and the gameplay aimed at planning and preperation, to what the faster, gung ho gameplay the newer rainbow six titles sport. Because the gameplay *fits the theme*.
We can argue all day, that you find top down gameplay more immersive. If you like strategy games with dialogue, more power to you. Play what you like.
My primary contribution to this thread, the one I was unnecessarily attacked for, was merely pointing out something. All the mayor gripes that lots of people have with combat in DA2 (The waves, immersion breaking amounts of magic within city boundaries, and the ridiculous boss fights - remember, the very topic of this thread?) are an immediate result of choosing a tactical approach to gameplay, rather then one based on playerskill. And at least two of these things have been done a lot better already, by the very game I referred to.
(Again, if you find waves of enemies zoning in from the aether, and bosses with healthbars the size of jupiter immersive - more power to you. I don't, and I'm merely pointing out *why* those things are in the game, and what possible alternatives look like)