157 réponses à ce sujet

[Faroth]

Whaaaaat?

How dare you, MrProliferation!? How dare you slap my first two Wardens in the face! They are insulted!

My first was an archer and I really enjoyed it. I didn't have problems with the game play, though I maybe found more "to do" by micro managing the team (didn't dig into tactic settings much first time).

My second was a duelist rogue and I loved it. Occasionally I had the shuffle, though it struck me as finding the right place to strike. Heheh. I liked the rogue a lot as a duelist because I got a LOT of abilities I could use and many of them looked cool. A low sweep to the legs, a dual attack with spinning weapons, a dual thrust, etc. I eventually had to choose which I liked better as more became available and I had less room for hotkeys (PS3 here, my PC was puny when Origins came out).

As I've said before, combat needed to be reworked and tweaked. I didn't think it needed a complete overhaul, though.

[Texhnolyze101]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Siradix wrote...

And what makes it so hard to get past Ostagar?

Mind-numbing boredom.

no more boring than DA:RTP

[Chuvvy]

Maladismal wrote...

Were things really so great in DA:O?

You had your caster enemies, who you cc'd immediatly or they'd cause a party wipe fast.
You had your rank and file melee, who you just controlled with the tank
you had your archers who spamed scattershot at the beginning of the fight and then proceeded to shoot whoever.

That was the vast majority of the content in DA:O.

The vast majority of content in DA2 can be summed up in one bad song. Or by one awesome parody.

[Urazz]

TerraMantis wrote...

@Pausanias

I agree and disagree. DA:O's trash was, yes, not challenging whatsoever once you got your team build the way you wanted it, even on nightmare. BUT, the game had a multitude of different battle situations. I remember going into one of the city ally ways and there were like 6 archers on each side of the opening and melee guys in the front lines. This may sound like exactly what i am saying i hated about DA2, but this almost never happened again in the entire game and was fairly difficult to overcome. Even the "trash" seemed to have situationally unique instances. This is only speaking of "trash" encounters.

The bosses in DA:O had a great difference in mechanics. I seriously can't think of one, besides the broodmother, that the only mechanic was to throw more meat at you to swing at. The electricity dragon was awesome. It would disperse from its main dragon-form to several electric balls that would slowly converge to the middle of the room and you had to try and destroy them all before they reached the middle or there would be a massive energy explosion. Also, the "super" Desire Demon that would grab a random member and hold them up and suck the life force from them and replenish its own HP. The list goes on, fire Golem from awakening, High dragons, Gaxkang, etc. Even adventure games like Zelda have bosses that require you to possibly die a few times because you didn't figure out the correct mechanic by the time your HP had gotten too low. Especially in a game where they're priding themselves on old group-control-style turnbased RPG with BioWare's usual interactive chess-like gameplay it should be of the utmost importance. I beat Castle Crashers the other day and i found my self asking "what exactly do i need to do in this fight?" ten times more often than i ever did in DA2. Demon's Souls...don't even get me started. You have to figure out how to just get to the boss let alone trying to figure out how to kill it when you get there. I want a challenge...throwing more adds at someone is nothing, any rookie gaming company could have come up with that mechanic and if i wanted to button mash and kill many enemies mindlessly i WOULD just play a Dynasty Warriors game.

So, my answer is yes and no. Trash was just as easy and mindless in DA:O (eventually), but the bosses had much greater variety and mechanics to overcome and think through.

DA2 had that as well actually on the boss fights.  It's just DA2's boss fights were drawn out way too long with the massive hp pools given to the major end act bosses.  I found each end act boss fight to be fun but too drawn out with the massive hp pools they had.  One fight I did like though throughout was the high dragon fight.

[TerraMantis]

@Urazz

No. DA2 did not. DA2 Bosses had next-to-no differences through mechanics or strategies to learn. Every single boss in the game had the exact same mechanics. Which was adds spawning during HP percentages. The only two that were slightly different were the Rock Golem in the deep roads and the Arishok, but even the Golem summoned adds when he would lose his rock shelling and the Arishok was surrounded by cronies.

The mature High Dragon would spawn waves of drakes during phases in which it would go on a perch and spew fireballs at you that were basically unavoidable. Orsino had no different mechanics than anything else...adds spawned at HP percentage intervals. Meredith was the exact same, but instead of undead and fire demon creatures they were statues. Rock Golem did the same. Even if you found the bosses that were not mandatory, like Hybris and the boss that many consider to be the hardest encounter in the game Xebenkeck, the mechanics still remain the same. They summon extra adds to fight your group. No variety here. HP pools have nothing to do with the lack of variety in a boss' mechanics, fighting styles, spells cast, and actions executed that the player needs to learn and overcome during an encounter.

[1483749283]

Faroth wrote...

I've been hearing that a lot, so I've conceded I should give the Hard mode a try next go round.  That said, though, just making a boss kill you faster or hit harder doesn't make a fight interesting, it just makes it hard for the sake of hard.  As you said, if they're hard and not creative, does that make them better?

I think upping sheer damage makes boss fights more challenging in a far more interesting way than is generally admitted. Yes it's easy for devs to make the boss kill you faster. But on your end, you have to restrategize. Re-manager resources. Learn to use those skills that you always left by the wayside. Basically, since you're bleeding hit points, you have to think harder on how to stay alive and that challenge is actually quite satisfying.

I do think they overstepped the difficulty in some of the fights, though. Especially with the rock wraith, where your skills are quite limited and you don't have the option of restocking or subbing in better suited party members.

[GodWood]

Brockololly wrote...

bstrothe wrote...
I found this video about DA:O, particularly Greg Zeschuk at 3:28, ironic since the revivial that he speak of seemed so short-lived. As a sequel, I can say I did enjoy DA2, but not nearly as much as the deep, challenging, and multi-layered old-school RPG feel of DA:O.

*sigh* 
Such a contrast to Zeschuk saying how combat is "almost like a chess match"  in that video to Darrah this past year saying how "you don't want combat to feel like you're playing a chess game with a friend." 

[TerraMantis]

Pausanias wrote...

I do think they overstepped the difficulty in some of the fights, though. Especially with the rock wraith, where your skills are quite limited and you don't have the option of restocking or subbing in better suited party members.

Plus, not to mention, the Rock Golem is glitched. If you use a ressurection skill durring the encounter you and the Golem become invincible...until you hit pause of course. Then, only the boss is impervious to any damage and just wastes you. It was the only fight that had promise through the use of some mechanics and it is fatally flawed.