494 réponses à ce sujet

[Firky]

@IN1 Maybe you haven't noticed it, because you have a different play-style? I dunno. I also haven't seen anyone else criticise this, but it is causing me the occasional eye-roll (in an otherwise great combat system - I'm totally cool with cooldowns, reinforcements etc.)

When I was struggling at lvl 6/7, just before the first spec point and CCCs came into play, I noticed it because I'd often be down to Aveline and a mage. Aveline could, very easily, just dodge a remaining Commander, while the mage whittled the HP away. Aveline didn't have much chance at getting a hit in.

It's a cheesy way to play (by my definition of cheese) but I got used to the idea that Commanders (and some bosses) were kittens, because they couldn't touch you as long as you stayed mobile. Melee, not ranged. I don't find ranged easy to dodge at all. Unless you go around a corner.

PS. I just beat a fight against a zillion abominations on the 3rd try, so I'm happy with myself right now. (And combat.) Yay. Totally tactical. I used a staircase. (In Origins, enemies would just run thru you. I remember being annoyed with that. In BG2, you could block corridors with tanks, or those buffed with negative plane protection.)

[Gotholhorakh]

IN1 wrote...
To be honest, I wanted to spare you the embarrassment, but if you insist... CCC = cross-class combo. I cannot continue to discuss DA2 mechanics seriously with someone unfamiliar with this basic concept. Sorry, I'm done communicating with you in this thread. Nothing personal.

Ahaha oh God, you're so insufferable it's funny. 

You know, just because you can be a douchebag on the internet without anyone punching you in the face, doesn't mean you have to.

IN1 wrote...
I just think your question boils down to "here is a short opinion piece which refers to itself as objective, now dispute it but only with objective facts". 

Well, I did my best to elaborate on every point of comparison. You've just chosen to ignore the arguments presented, for some obscure reason. 

To be honest, I didn't think I needed to break down your list to make the point clearer, it seemed like it would come across as snarky and aggressive. Since you insist, though:

You say "game mechanics ==  cold hard facts", then you go on to list what we have with regard to game mechanics, and your list is almost ALL subjective rhetoric and statistics you appear to have made up on the spot (and please, do feel free to prove me wrong about the statistics with the refreshing introduction of some facts):

1) Extremely Easy
2) Amateurishly designed
3) Ridiculously unbalanced
4) It's a buggy mess because 30-40% of this has problems (BUT I MADE UP THAT STATISTIC ON THE SPOT)
5) cold, hard, fact: 95% of X is implemented properly (BUT I MADE UP THAT STATISTIC ON THE SPOT)

...and so on, in the same vein. There, happy now?

IN1 wrote...
Concerning the percentage, you can consult the wiki and do the elementary math by yourself. I'm not your private DAO instructor

No, it's YOUR figure supporting YOUR assertion of "cold hard fact", YOU support it when people challenge it, or people will think your argument is worth nothing.

That's the way it works.

IN1 wrote...

...DA2 NM is objectively much harder than DAO NM. That's the point of my post, not your virtual penis size.

....CCC = cross-class combo. I cannot continue to discuss DA2 mechanics seriously with someone unfamiliar with this basic concept...

Anyway, don't bother to post here anymore, your comments will be ignored. Fair warning, I guess  

[b]I think it's obvious. If you cannot figure it out, we have nothing to discuss No offense.

Anyway, this thread interested me, and I settled down with a cup of tea ready to discuss this, but I don't want anything to do with it now. You're clearly just out to spout rubbish and behave rudely.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 25 avril 2011 - 12:37 .

[Bostur]

@FedericoV

I very much agree. I've wondered myself why DA2 insists on a full party when the gameplay seems so similar to Diablo.

I also think IN1 is very spot on with many of his descriptions of the mechanics. DAO certainly did have a lot of flaws in this regard. Looking at the mechanics isolated does have some validity considering they could be used in a better context. Thanks for making me realize that with your well thought out posts. :-)

The conclusions of the first post in this thread got me a bit off track.

[Firky]

@IN1

PS. Not that I'm criticising you, fella. ^

I'm really interested to know what you think.

[alex90c]

I don't get why Commanders are so easy to manually dodge. I can take them down fairly quickly now (so I'm not accusing them of being tedious, like some are) but they do this big wind-up to their melee attack and it just takes a sec to pause what I'm doing and move Aveline (or whoever is engaging them) out of the way. You can avoid taking damage altogether.

Do you think that's a flaw? I'm not sure. I tend to think it's better than having the instinct to dodge in DA:O and then running away and being taken down on the other side of the battlefield because the damage was done at the beginning of the animation, but it still doesn't sit right with me somehow.

How would it be improved? Giving Commanders a fast and a slow attack? I dunno. I'm stumped on this one.

Commanders have (aside from their regular attacks) three specific skills they can use. The first one is the grenade AOE move which inflicts slight damage and knockback, but they have another which uses a similar animation but without the grenade which inflicts slight damage and has a 100% chance of stun on any target without stun immunity (i've tested AI talents myself, the stun works on anything). Their final skill would simply be their buff talent. I tested this out myself but I don't think it works for the player. From my experience in the second last boss battle too, while it is a sustainable it seems to disable if the character is knocked down.

To answer the actual thread regarding DA:O vs. DA2 difficulty, first time round playing DA:O I actually found it quite hellish, challenging and intense. It included lots of restarts, and I even had trouble fighting a battle in the Circle Tower when you open that chest which causes the shades t attack you so I had to turn it on to easy for that. In hindsight I had suckish builds, inadequate equipment and playing my very first game with a two-hander wasn't exactly the best choice, but it was challenging. With DA2 however, I started on normal and just threw it on to hard straight away otherwise it was just an absolute cakewalk To be fair it was useful when I screwed up a romance and I needed to backtrack to a previous save and do things properly, because then I just put it on casual and waltzed through everything, but even though my first DA2 playthrough was quite suckish too (who the hell puts dexterity in to a warrior?) I still found it quite easy unlike DA:O.

[Yrkoon]

FedericoV wrote...

I do agree with the OP. If there's one thing where DA2 is clearly superior to DA:O is combat mechanic and the rule system (at least playing on the PC). Really, no comparison and whoever said it's not, have not any experience with RPGs (computer or pen and paper). And I agree with the OP: mechanic are objective and not subjective. The superiority of DA2 system is self evident. And yes, DA2 on hard was more challenging that DA:O on hard (at least, on the PC). Normal do not count since it's intended for people who does not want to be challenged.

The problem is that most critics ignore the differences between mechanic and encounter design, between the rule system and style/animation. So they talk generally about "combat" and point the flaws of DA2 in the encounter design/style department to dismiss everything that's good. Because I admit without problems DA2's flaws in the "combat" department: constant use of the wave mechanich, enemies spawning from nowhere, body exploding, boring boss fights, anime style 2H weapons, and some general sillyness in the animation department. But those flaws have nothing to do with the gameplay mechanics wich are really one of the strongest point of DA2.

The only thing that I do not get: you have such a beautifull party based RPG system. Why hide it with the button/awesome campaing like it's something to be ashamed about? Why develop the consolle version of the game with a "button mashing" style in mind as first option only adding autoattack on the run (to the point of having it out of the game a release...)? Why dodge is not allways skill based, I mean... why force the player to control manually the charachters to avoid blows? That's really a mistery for me.

But that's the thing.  You can't seperate the two.  They're part of the whole  (Combat).   You also can't  seperate animations, camera control, and combat speed from the Mechanics side of the issue because  they ARE part of the combat mechanics.   For example,  Lack of iso-view in DA2 DOES make the combat 'artificially'  more difficult overall because the   field general  (the player) cannot  make an accurate assessment of the entire battlefield in many instances.  (in my first playthrough, I had real trouble placing AOE spells where I wanted them because I couldn't friggin see the whole field.)  It's a real flaw.  One that did not exist in DA:O.   

And animations....  they can be used to dodge an opponents attack! As you  and others repeatedly point out.    That's a combat mechanic too.    In fact, the ability to Dodge blows is not only a combat mechanic in DA2, but it's a combat mechanic consisting of a    rather complex  system of  numbers and modifiers ... numbers and modifiers that you're supposed to be able  to control by building your Hawke in a specific way.     But you can essentially throw all of this out the window,    Because a  gamer's real-life dexterity can    trump Hawke's if the gamer wishes it  (why waste points on Cunning to raise your defense, when you can simply grab your controller or mouse and move hawke out of the way just in time to avoid the Arishok's swing?)  Oh, btw, that's a     design flaw too.    Of if you prefer, it's  an example of the  DUMBING DOWN of combat in DA2.... regardless of the difficulty setting.. And again,  these ARE some of the very things that critics rightfully criticise in DA2's  combat mechanics.  They did not exist in DA:O.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 avril 2011 - 12:42 .

[Firky]

@yrkroon Well, don't quote me to say that dodge is bad. I think dodge is good, for the most part, commanders notwithstanding. (I hate the Chinese Whispers effect with DAII commentary.)

I am in agreement on the camera, though. (I'd like a higher view - to fit the whole party in.)

But, for goodness sakes, can we stop using the term "dumbing down" now? I have 2 uni degrees. I'm not dumb. And DAII NM is kicking my ass. (Unashamedly.)

[AkiKishi]

Firky wrote...

@yrkroon Well, don't quote me to say that dodge is bad. I think dodge is good, for the most part, commanders notwithstanding. (I hate the Chinese Whispers effect with DAII commentary.)

I am in agreement on the camera, though. (I'd like a higher view - to fit the whole party in.)

But, for goodness sakes, can we stop using the term "dumbing down" now? I have 2 uni degrees. I'm not dumb. And DAII NM is kicking my ass. (Unashamedly.)

It's more than likely either your build , or you are trying to use the same tactics you use in a game that does not spawn things on your head.

Some builds and party makeups are weak, some are strong. The higher up the difficulty you go, the more of a factor this is.

One of the biggest factors I found in the PC version was I was trying to fight the system more than the foes. The design made it more difficult than the enemies.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 avril 2011 - 12:51 .

[Firky]

^ (I'm usually very nice) But what a bunch of crap. The reinforcements are great. I'm as old school as it gets, and I have no probs with repositioning on the fly.

Also, I've been replaying bits of the game on NM with contrasting parties just to try it out. The flexibility within party build is unparalleled in a party based RPG. You can take down a whole bunch of Sharps Highwaymen with Isabella flitting around causing horrendous damage, or with 2mages/2warriors doing CCCs or whatever.

There is no one optimal route.

[AkiKishi]

Firky wrote...

^ (I'm usually very nice) But what a bunch of crap. The reinforcements are great. I'm as old school as it gets, and I have no probs with repositioning on the fly.

Also, I've been replaying bits of the game on NM with contrasting parties just to try it out. The flexibility within party build is unparalleled in a party based RPG. You can take down a whole bunch of Sharps Highwaymen with Isabella flitting around causing horrendous damage, or with 2mages/2warriors doing CCCs or whatever.

There is no one optimal route.

You were the one complaining that you were getting your ass kicked on nightmare.

Unless you are getting your ass kicked equally then this is clearly not 100% accurate.

[Captain Sassy Pants]

Filament wrote...

They set you up, IN1. They threw you to the wolves. They will feast on your tears as you lie defeated by trolls, a shattered husk of a man. Look in their eyes and see the soul of cold-blooded betrayal.

How will he be defeated by trolls, when he is trolling?

[Eternal Phoenix]

How is he a troll if he's giving his opinion?

[Yrkoon]

Elton John is dead wrote...

How is he a troll if he's giving his opinion?

You want an example of IN1's trolling  on this thread?

Alright, you don't need to look too far,  since he begins his frothing on the Very first page:

IN1 wrote...

Leaving your bravado alone, DA2 NM is objectively much harder than DAO NM. That's the point of my post, not your virtual penis size.

^  That's a personal attack, 2 of them, in fact.  That's trolling according to this forum's TOS, which he agreed to follow when he opened an account here.

And page 2 sees him telling people to stop posting,  That's trolling too, since he's not a moderator but pretending to be one anyway.  

And this is nothing new from him.   I saw him  going absolutely batty with his trolling  against a bunch of other posters   on another thread of his simply because they dared to say that  Rogues  being able to employ shields  consitutes an engine exploit/bug.

I'm thinking of reporting him, but I'm going to wait and see what happens later on this thread.

[neppakyo]

Captain Sassy Pants wrote...

Filament wrote...

They set you up, IN1. They threw you to the wolves. They will feast on your tears as you lie defeated by trolls, a shattered husk of a man. Look in their eyes and see the soul of cold-blooded betrayal.

How will he be defeated by trolls, when he is trolling?

Don't you know anything about trolls? Trolls will always turn on their own kind.

[FedericoV]

Yrkoon wrote...

And animations....  they can be used to dodge an opponents attack! As you  and others repeatedly point out.    That's a combat mechanic too.    In fact, the ability to Dodge blows is not only a combat mechanic in DA2, but it's a combat mechanic consisting of a    rather complex  system of  numbers and modifiers ... numbers and modifiers that you're supposed to be able  to control by building your Hawke in a specific way.     But you can essentially throw all of this out the window,    Because a  gamer's real-life dexterity can    trump Hawke's if the gamer wishes it  (why waste points on Cunning to raise your defense, when you can simply grab your controller or mouse and move hawke out of the way just in time to avoid the Arishok's swing?)  Oh, btw, that's a     design flaw too.    Of if you prefer, it's  an example of the  DUMBING DOWN of combat in DA2.... regardless of the difficulty setting.. And again,  these ARE some of the very things that critics rightfully criticise in DA2's  combat mechanics.  They did not exist in DA:O.

But in DA:O it was wrong too so I don't get the "dumbing down" argument. I mean, in DA:O a special skill could hit you even if you ran in another room, since the effect started at the beginning of the animation. I mean, even a Troll charge or a 2h sweep could hit you that way, not just magic. It was so wrong to the point of being hilarious. So, DA2 is a step forward but I admit that it's not enough. I think that in that regard they should find the right solution using more defensive skills like Shield Wall (a skill that I abused since it was the best way to avoid to dodge manually) and giving more importance to defense/damage mitigation (I mean, defense and damage mitigation should allways be more convenient than kiting even at low levels).

Modifié par FedericoV, 25 avril 2011 - 02:08 .

[neppakyo]

Dalira Montanti wrote...

long story shot I like DA:O more due to story line and less annoying battles
Da:2 was an okish game if you don't compear it to da:o it's like dr who with the new guy matt smith not alot of ppl liked him at first because they compeard him to David Tennant

Stop compearing the games for a moment and try to see what makes Da:2 good in it's own way yes granted it has a phew flaws but nothing is perfect

You know part of the Dr Who storyline is The Doctor always changes at some point. It just happened that David Tennant made an awesome Doctor.

DA2 was sold as a sequel to DA:O, its illogical not to compare the two.

DA2 had more than a "few" problems. Besides major plot holes, gamebreaking bugs, reference to a  quest that was removed, Shoddy combat, area recycling... I could go on. Its definitly more than a "few"

[Yrkoon]

FedericoV wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

And animations....  they can be used to dodge an opponents attack! As you  and others repeatedly point out.    That's a combat mechanic too.    In fact, the ability to Dodge blows is not only a combat mechanic in DA2, but it's a combat mechanic consisting of a    rather complex  system of  numbers and modifiers ... numbers and modifiers that you're supposed to be able  to control by building your Hawke in a specific way.     But you can essentially throw all of this out the window,    Because a  gamer's real-life dexterity can    trump Hawke's if the gamer wishes it  (why waste points on Cunning to raise your defense, when you can simply grab your controller or mouse and move hawke out of the way just in time to avoid the Arishok's swing?)  Oh, btw, that's a     design flaw too.    Of if you prefer, it's  an example of the  DUMBING DOWN of combat in DA2.... regardless of the difficulty setting.. And again,  these ARE some of the very things that critics rightfully criticise in DA2's  combat mechanics.  They did not exist in DA:O.

But in DA:O it was wrong too so I don't get the "dumbing down" argument. mean, defense and damage mitigation should allways be more convenient than kiting even at low levels).

In DA:O  Dodging and Defense were based  purely  on in game statistics, not how fast you could click your mouse/ use your controller.  And that means, your 9 year old little brother cannot become a master of dodging blows simply because he's a whiz at pressing buttons.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 avril 2011 - 02:17 .

[Roxlimn]

IN1:

If you haven't noticed yet, you're wasting your time with many of these guys. My personal impression is that most of the people who didn't like DA2 aren't very good at the combat since they don't really understand most of it.

Not surprisingly, many of the same people thought the world of DAO combat, completely missing all the design issues. I had a fun time with DAO, but the high point was NOT the combat.

[neppakyo]

Dalira Montanti wrote...
it did not feel like a sequal mor elike a stand alone game with camos as far as the eye could see:?

Exactly. 

All the hype and advertising billed it as a sequel. So its hard to judge the game on its own merits. When you do, its just an "ok" Action-RPG game.

[Sabriana]

@ FedericoV

Both of your posts are well thought out and well put. I agree with a lot of your points. Indeed, mechanic-wise DA 2 is quite fine, but even the best mechanics are useless if they don't work in conjunction with the whole combat set-up. That's were DA 2 fails to deliver, and DA:O doesn't, imo.

DA:O is far from perfect, the combat is too slow, afaic, especially in the 2h dept. For the life of me, I couldn't put a good 2h build together, no matter what I tried. And my mage getting totally flattened by an ogre who passed the spot she was standing in before she scattered all the way to the other end of the room had me hissing at my monitor.

However, all the mechanics in the world didn't stop me from getting utterly frustrated and bored in the Arishok one on one. My bow and arrow rogue did nothing but run, summon dog, gulp potions, got off a few shots, ran again, summoned dog again, gulped some more potions, ad infinitum. It was mind-numbing to say the least.

In the same manner, all the best mechanics in all the world of gaming didn't stop me from getting utterly frustrated at the poor companion AI. Either my game is hopelessly bugged, or the AI is simply not well developed. They very often did not obey their tactics, or a hold command. I know hold goes off if the PC is at a certain distance, but they didn't even heed it when the PC was standing next to them.

Varric was especially bad. I can't count how often he simply abandoned all tactics and commands - for no reason, to throw himself into the middle of melee, getting wiped by Fenris or the mages.

So this is essentially pretty useless. Mechanics alone do not make a better combat. Mechanics, AI, enemy spawning and more absolutely have to work in conjunction. It's imperative.

[Embargoed]

Combat in DA:O made me cry because my Rogue was useless compared to the other mages in my party who could decimate entire armies with a single thought.

Even if I didn't use mages, it always came down to having SOMETHING able to kill things in a broken way. Quick cooldown for potions, lots o traps, etc. DA2's combat is more interesting and far more difficult.

[Theagg]

Yrkoon wrote...

In DA:O  Dodging and Defense were based  purely  on in game statistics, not how fast you could click your mouse/ use your controller.  And that means, your 9 year old little brother cannot become a master of dodging blows simply because he's a whiz at pressing buttons.

Spot on. And this change was purely made to please the crowd who, upon running their player away at right angles from a boulder hurling Ogre, still saw themselves being splatted. Given those players couldn't grasp it was the stats that defined dodging capability and not nifty use of the mouse, they complained en masse. Laidlaw and co obliged and pandered to them.

Conversely though we now have, in DA2, locked animation cycles for casting etc, that play fully out before the character can do anything else. This ties that part of the combat mechanic to the clock cycles of the animation and prevents the character from using any other talents ( or movement ) in defence of an incoming attack. It will hit if the animation has yet to finish, irrespective of anything else.

So yep, as you point out earlier, animation is now far more integral to the combat mechanics than it ever was in Origins.

And the locked down camera view just makes things exceptionally more challenging than they could otherwise be in Nightmare. Again, camera view is part of the mechanic.

Modifié par Theagg, 25 avril 2011 - 02:51 .