148 réponses à ce sujet

[Hatchetman77]

I went through the game as a sword and board warrior and that experience was actually pretty satisfying.  It was quicker than origins yet had the same general feel (I'm talking game mechanics and not tactics). Only complaint I'd have is that they should take away the waves and balance that out by taking away the splash zone for the sword attacks.  I wasen't doing sommersaults or anything too over the top so that was good.  Well, mabey the enemies flying all over the place after a shield bash was a little too much, but I didn't find it too bad.  I liked the automatic charge into combat.  The sword and board warrior is exactly what I expected a combat upgarde to be.  The other classes and the two handed configuration of the warrior left a lot to be desired for me though.

Modifié par Hatchetman77, 06 juin 2011 - 12:31 .

[Denizen89]

I thought the idea was good but they did a horrible job. What they need is to think Mass Effect type group combat, but throw in squad formations that deal in certain situations kind of like the way combat was done in FFXIII and throw in button combination s that simulate a certain attack.

[Mecher3k]

Facts about I.AM.DUNCAN

1. He disgraces the Duncan name.

2. He thinks Battle and Combat are different things.

3. Thinks speed of combat is dependent on speed of animations and movement speed, not how fast the combat actually ends. It's like saying the path that takes 10 minutes is faster then the path then took 5 minutes to get to the same place when they both started at the same spot.

[Typhoonz]

I do agree that it wasn't that bad, however, for my tastes it  took too many steps backwards in relation to its improvements.

One of the things I enjoyed so much in Origins was that I was on relatively equal terms with my enemies.(Save for a few in instances where we went up against trash mobs, but they were meant to be just that). If I were to say, hit an enemy for 70 points of damage, they would suffer from it about as much as I would. As such, I really enjoyed those smaller skirmishes where it was my group of four against another group of four. Those scenarios where we were on equal terms made the combat for me satisfying and brutal.

Dragon Age II's combat came off to me as "Hawke vs Everyone and their Mother's". This may have been due to the unproportional values of damage and health between our heroes and their enemies. Not to mention the incredibly high number of enemies on such a regualr basis. I quickly lost the feeling of actually battling someone and it reminded me that I was playing a game.

Modifié par Typhoonz, 06 juin 2011 - 03:15 .

[XSevSpreeX]

Hatchetman77 wrote...

I went through the game as a sword and board warrior and that experience was actually pretty satisfying.  It was quicker than origins yet had the same general feel (I'm talking game mechanics and not tactics). Only complaint I'd have is that they should take away the waves and balance that out by taking away the splash zone for the sword attacks.  I wasen't doing sommersaults or anything too over the top so that was good.  Well, mabey the enemies flying all over the place after a shield bash was a little too much, but I didn't find it too bad.  I liked the automatic charge into combat.  The sword and board warrior is exactly what I expected a combat upgarde to be.  The other classes and the two handed configuration of the warrior left a lot to be desired for me though.

Ya my first playthrough was sword and board. It felt pretty good, but the shield bashing was a little weird. Maybe if instead of throwing enemies 15 away it should just knock them down.

[MadDogMurphy]

Mecher3k wrote...

Facts about I.AM.DUNCAN

1. He disgraces the Duncan name.

2. He thinks Battle and Combat are different things.

3. Thinks speed of combat is dependent on speed of animations and movement speed, not how fast the combat actually ends. It's like saying the path that takes 10 minutes is faster then the path then took 5 minutes to get to the same place when they both started at the same spot.

I thought Duncan was correct in what he was saying and still do.  You are talking about start to finish "fight time" vs what he was saying movement & animations in the fight.

There are different definitions of battle btw.  One is fighting and the other is an encounter.

You were both correct in your own way.  Except you are wrong to think that combat and battle are the same in every way (and your snide/childlike attitude).

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

I.AM.DUNCAN wrote...
***and let me clarify that over-the-top is GOOD in video games, it's what makes them fun.

Too much of anything is never a good thing. I love over-the-top badassery as much as the next guy, but teleporting rogues, enemy reinforcements being deployed via atmospheric re-entry and spinning, ballerina jRPG warriors are probably ten miles past where I draw the line for a Dragon Age game. 

Aside from the shuffling and the lack of difficulty, combat in Origins was infinitely better than DA2's combat system - it was far more tactical and didn't try to be something it was not. DA2 in comparison comes across as a third-rate hack-n'-slash.

Modifié par V0luS_R0cKs7aR, 06 juin 2011 - 04:20 .

[Archyyy]

Mecher3k wrote...

Facts about I.AM.DUNCAN

1. He disgraces the Duncan name.

2. He thinks Battle and Combat are different things.

3. Thinks speed of combat is dependent on speed of animations and movement speed, not how fast the combat actually ends. It's like saying the path that takes 10 minutes is faster then the path then took 5 minutes to get to the same place when they both started at the same spot.

Yep, yep and yep.

I agree with Akka Le Vil and Mecher3k in pretty much everything. Combat should be done so that it follows the realism that exists within the game world. Mages are real in dragon age world as opposed to real world but clowny over-the-top animations, teleporting rogues and mages, and paper swords arent. In fact some of the combat was completely contradicting with lore.

Iamduncan said something about how staffs braking when you hit people with them being a bad idea but I would love that. Would make you think twice what to do with them as they arent made for hitting someone with. Also hp bars should be as low as possible without sacrificing playability. Any realism adds to immersion which is the main reason I play RPGs.

Modifié par Archyyy, 06 juin 2011 - 04:22 .

[aduellist]

Guide to mage combat in DA2:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-2rRyXGyhc

[MadDogMurphy]

Archyyy wrote...

Mecher3k wrote...

Facts about I.AM.DUNCAN

1. He disgraces the Duncan name.

2. He thinks Battle and Combat are different things.

3. Thinks speed of combat is dependent on speed of animations and movement speed, not how fast the combat actually ends. It's like saying the path that takes 10 minutes is faster then the path then took 5 minutes to get to the same place when they both started at the same spot.

Yep, yep and yep.

I agree with Akka Le Vil and Mecher3k in pretty much everything. Combat should be done so that it follows the realism that exists within the game world. Mages are real in dragon age world as opposed to real world but clowny over-the-top animations, teleporting rogues and mages, and paper swords arent. In fact some of the combat was completely contradicting with lore.

Iamduncan said something about how staffs braking when you hit people with them being a bad idea but I would love that. Would make you think twice what to do with them as they arent made for hitting someone with. Also hp bars should be as low as possible without sacrificing playability. Any realism adds to immersion which is the main reason I play RPGs.

I agree with most of what Duncan said.  I didn't mind DA2 combat as much as most people....it certainly was different.  There new animations were fun but a little over the top with many.  But certainly DAO was weak in that regard too.  I would have liked an improvement of DAO (in all areas) instead of such a new system for DA2.  I missed the tactical camera view too.  With the regard to combat.....it felt like a very different game.....and much less like an "improvement".

I think you guys are taking the whole staffs breaking too far.  Realism can add to immersion, sure, but it can also add the dulldrums of "real" life too.....crap my staff broke again.  Sigh......I need to carry 4 extra ones now or I need to traverse out of the deep roads to get a new one.......wow that IS fun.  

[marshalleck]

I actually think that the combat in DA2 is one of its strong points, although I do have the standard complaints about waves etc. I haven't played the game since the latest patch that reduced the exploding bodies but I think that definitely could have contributed to the combat appearing more frenetic and "on steroids" than it really is. But maybe I'm wrong.

[Bejos_]

Posted in the wrong thread.

Modifié par Bejos_, 06 juin 2011 - 12:50 .

[atum]

I think you replied to the wrong thread Bejos_

Anyways, am I the only one who thinks the people arguing in this thread actually are in agreement more than they disagree?

It seems like most of the major issues with the combat in either game are shared by most people.

[Mecher3k]

MadDogMurphy wrote...

I thought Duncan was correct in what he was saying and still do.  You are talking about start to finish "fight time" vs what he was saying movement & animations in the fight.

There are different definitions of battle btw.  One is fighting and the other is an encounter.

You were both correct in your own way.  Except you are wrong to think that combat and battle are the same in every way (and your snide/childlike attitude).

Movement speed does not make for faster combat in the end unless you are spending the vast majority of the combat moving.

Animations in DA2 actually are slower as half the time my mage was still spinning, which has NO USE AT ALL, while I wanted him to cast a spell. Making the already slower combat even more slow.

And one differention of battle is fighting and the other is an encounter. Seriously? WTF do you think fighting is? Oh yea an ENCOUNTER.

I wouldn't have a supposed childlike attitude if you two didn't have the understanding of the English launguage that a child does.

[BroBear Berbil]

I thought the nuts and bolts of the combat were a great improvement in DA2. Nightmare was more of a challenge, CCCs were a necessity, positioning was better, and a lot of the animations felt like there was a lot of force put in them - seriously never had that much fun with a shield warrior.

Didn't care for the over-the-top visuals and speed of movements, exploding enemies, teleporting, and the waves of enemies popping out of thin air (in heavy armor much of the time) from predictable directions. ffs at least make their reinforcements run down corridors or something.

[Mecher3k]

OnionXI wrote...

I thought the nuts and bolts of the combat were a great improvement in DA2. Nightmare was more of a challenge, CCCs were a necessity, positioning was better, and a lot of the animations felt like there was a lot of force put in them - seriously never had that much fun with a shield warrior.

Didn't care for the over-the-top visuals and speed of movements, exploding enemies, teleporting, and the waves of enemies popping out of thin air (in heavy armor much of the time) from predictable directions. ffs at least make their reinforcements run down corridors or something.

I love you praise and then bash the same animations. Good job.

And nightmare more of a challenge? More like a bore. It was no more challenging then DA:O's, just more boring with the seemlying never ending waves and the stupid amounts of health on non-bosses and even some certain bosses.

I've seen challenging raid mobs in EQ2 go down quicker then a certain boss in DA2.

I agree with everything negative you said, and go lol at your so called positives.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

For me, Dragon Age 2's combat mechanics introduced some interesting elements that could be adapted for a good combat system in future games. For me, it's problems lie in the enemy and encounter design. While the asymmetrical attack speeds between you and your enemies was not very good and the animations made it worse, a lot of problems would've been solved had the enemies and encounters been given more thought.

Enemies - Trash Mobs + HP Bloats. Not much variety in the enemies and outside of the bosses, you didn't really need to adjust your strategy or planning. They all went down the same.

Encounters - ... Well, everyone knows the ninja spawning issues.

Harder difficulty does not equal better AI, more variety, more abilities or better encounter design, it just adds enemy HP and spams more of them. On Nightmare, they add random immunities and FF. Which is quite frankly, a bit disappointing. I mean, yes, it makes the game more challenging but far from addressing it's underlying problems, it just makes them worse.

The animations, while still a problem, are secondary to that. I also think that Dragon Age 2 added quite a bit to the combat, most notably, CCCs, increased speed and the Talent Trees. It's unfortunate that the positive aspects of Dragon Age 2's combat does not outshine it's negatives (imo), because it does bring some big improvements to the table.

If they made combat slower, brought back more believable animations, re-synced the attack speed of your party and enemies, then restructured the enemy and encounter design to have less trash mobs, less HP bloats, more variety, more abilities and designed a well scalable difficulty system, then I'd think you could use Dragon Age 2's core combat mechanics to create a pretty good system for Dragon Age 3.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 06 juin 2011 - 07:16 .

[ReiSilver]

I played on normal difficulty for my first run through and 90% of the time I felt like I was playing on easy, but then I was uninterested in the combat because of randomly spawning enemies so I didn't feel the need to extend that by putting things up to hard and giving things more health...
I didn't like the rogue teleporting (was I the only one who liked taking control to run around to the back of people the backstab?), I would have liked some weight to swords for TH fighters and while staff attacks were good a lot of the spinning left me thinking it looked a bit silly.
I think it was more that enemies needed to do more challenging things and for boos fights to be more heart-stopping.
There were only a few times where I had a lot of fun with a fight and that was while tracking down grimoires and getting into a fight with arcane horrors, revenants and rage demons all at the same time. Those fights had me running all over the place, checking up on people all the time, running to avoid blows.
Compared to that a lot of storyline fights that should have been challenging were a bit of a snore-fest, especially some of the ending fights. side quests should not be more challenging then your end game or story line battles that are supposed to make a character cross the despair-even-horizon.

I guess in short:
Swooping/spawning mook rush = boring
Tough collections of mini-bosses = fun

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

You're correct, combat wasn't bad, it was terrible...at least for me.

DA 2 combat failed to capture my interest.

Sure it was faster, but it looked comicly so like an afterthought wher animations were just sped up a week before the demo launch. Rapidly lurching Hurlocks made them just look funny like monkeys, their curved blades look like bananas.

Button smashing doesn't make me feel involved or tactical. Balloon Fight, a game on the NES made you button smash to keep your character aloft. I sure didn't feel like I was flying and was only glad when I got a rapid fire capable controler.

Ditching the tactical camera option was a huge mistake in my opinion, though every battle was a wave combat experience so it seemed like the game creators just stopped trying to be creative or make tactical fights.

Limiting basic fighting style concepts to classes to make them more "unique" just comes across as a lazy way to make fighters, rogues and mages special. I wish they had come up with real class skills to define the classes, or even better, gotten rid of the antiquated class concept and just let the player build characters based on which skills were picked during leveling up. Warriors can't dual wield, or use bows? Rogues can't use anything but "daggers?" Mages just use staves now?

The combat animations were terrible for the most part. Rogues were the worst offenders for me. I love playing agility based fighters in games with light armor/light weapons. I had to see my dentist after playing DA 2 because I ground my teeth together the whole time, the annimations looked horrible, like bad anime ninja moves. Rogues spin kicking flasks instead of tossing them? ...uh yeah, that's a more efficient way to do things...or end up with broken glass in your foot and whatever was in the flask exploding all over you, probably breaking a few bones in Hawke's foot in the process of kicking it. Dumb...just dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb. Rogues vanish and toss smoke bombs? What's with all the flipping? Why do mages spaz out in a loop of crazy staff twirls and swings that likely burns 1,000 calories in three seconds shortly before repeating the same thing all over again? I mean wow, all that effort just to get a magic bolt out of their staff, it's easier to cast a fireball, or so it seems. Warriors look like bad LARPers, clumsily swinging around Cloud Strife sized weapons made of styrofoam.

I'm hoping animations for any future Dragon Age game actually look at real combat. Not that I think combat should be utterly realistic...but at least base it upon systems which work and not the latest episode of some godaweful anime like Naruto.

I have no idea why they got rid of the death animations either in favor of exploding corpses. The blood splatter pattern on characters looks worse too, largely because it is very specific and so repeats the exact pattern on characters and is very noticible to me.

Everyone mentions the spawning waves and the parachuting so I can't go on and on about that.

[Incantrix]

Well, the battles felt a bit repetitive. I do love how they changed the rogue, with my duelist rogue I was able to tank the high dragon using evade, stealth, backstab and a few other abilities

The mages were fun, but I felt like there were still some "trash" spells like from DAO just this time you had to take them to get the bonus

[Sidney]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Sure it was faster, but it looked comicly so like an afterthought wher animations were just sped up a week before the demo launch. Rapidly lurching Hurlocks made them just look funny like monkeys, their curved blades look like bananas.

Button smashing doesn't make me feel involved or tactical.

Ditching the tactical camera option was a huge mistake in my opinion,

Limiting basic fighting style concepts to classes to make them more "unique" just comes across as a lazy way to make fighters, rogues and mages special.

I'm shocked people spend so much time on about the animations, as if the DAO animations were good either. Neither game is gonna win any prizes about the way they make combat look but DAO's playing in molasses animations certainly didn't communication any sense of threat, chaos or violence in the game. It was like constantly watching a slow-mo instant replay of my last fight. Still, in the end who cares really?

Button smashing isn't required of you and since you also talk about tactical camera you either play on PC where button mashing was NEVER an issue or you play on the console where the camera was NEVER an issue.

Tactical camera? I love that people continue to latch onto a few degrees of angle as a "major" problem. There are no tactics in this game, there weren't in DAO either, that involve positioning other than staying out of AOE. When basic concepts like chokepoints don't work because bad guys can run right by your roadblocks - and DA2 doesn't change that much-  you've pretty much missed the boat. You have a circle that shows AOE and a camera that spins. I'm sorry you need to be spoon fed your combat but never play KoTOR or FO3, NV, Oblivion, Morrowind or anything else because they also don't have "tactical camera".

classes are bad and should go away and have things be skill and stat driven like SPECIAL.

The basic answer is that combat in DA2 changed in style not in substance of any variety. It is still the same. There's no ME1 to Me2 type transformation, or FO2 to FO3 type change.

[Wozearly]

mrcrusty wrote...

For me, Dragon Age 2's combat mechanics introduced some interesting elements that could be adapted for a good combat system in future games. For me, it's problems lie in the enemy and encounter design. While the asymmetrical attack speeds between you and your enemies was not very good and the animations made it worse, a lot of problems would've been solved had the enemies and encounters been given more thought.

If they made combat slower, brought back more believable animations, re-synced the attack speed of your party and enemies, then restructured the enemy and encounter design to have less trash mobs, less HP bloats, more variety, more abilities and designed a well scalable difficulty system, then I'd think you could use Dragon Age 2's core combat mechanics to create a pretty good system for Dragon Age 3.

This.

Typhoonz wrote...

One
of the things I enjoyed so much in Origins was that I was on relatively
equal terms with my enemies.(Save for a few in instances where we went
up against trash mobs, but they were meant to be just that). If I were
to say, hit an enemy for 70 points of damage, they would suffer from it
about as much as I would. As such, I really enjoyed those smaller
skirmishes where it was my group of four against another group of four.
Those scenarios where we were on equal terms made the combat for me
satisfying and brutal.

Dragon Age II's combat came off to me as
"Hawke vs Everyone and their Mother's". This may have been due to the
unproportional values of damage and health between our heroes and their
enemies. Not to mention the incredibly high number of enemies on such a
regualr basis. I quickly lost the feeling of actually battling someone
and it reminded me that I was playing a game.

This.

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...

Too much of anything is never a
good thing. I love over-the-top badassery as much as the next guy, but
teleporting rogues, enemy reinforcements being deployed via atmospheric
re-entry and spinning, ballerina jRPG warriors are probably ten miles
past where I draw the line for a Dragon Age game. 

Aside from the
shuffling and the lack of difficulty, combat in Origins was infinitely
better than DA2's combat system - it was far more tactical and didn't
try to be something it was not. DA2 in comparison comes across as
a third-rate hack-n'-slash.

...and this.

Adding my own 2 cents would just repeat the points above.

Modifié par Wozearly, 06 juin 2011 - 12:49 .

[Bejos_]

atum wrote...

I think you replied to the wrong thread Bejos_

Anyways, am I the only one who thinks the people arguing in this thread actually are in agreement more than they disagree?

It seems like most of the major issues with the combat in either game are shared by most people.

Erm, you're correct, atum.

For the record, a friend of my gf's and mine had bought the game and played it for 8 hours before giving up on it specifically because of its combat. If he had bothered to push through it, I'm convinced he would have given it up because of its story eventually, too.

Neither aspect is well done. I can push through bad combat for good story, and bad story for good combat, but if you don't give me any reason to enjoy the game ...

I think we're all in agreement that all areas need "tinkering" to one degree or another.

Modifié par Bejos_, 06 juin 2011 - 12:59 .

[LeBurns]

Well the combat was the number one reason I never bought this game after playing the demo.  It was like I had no  control at all over what was happening, and what was happening looked like some over the top final fantasy romp.

Near the end I just closed my eyes and pressed R repeatedly until the yelling stopped.  Honestly I could never play a game with combat like this.

I take my RPG's seriously and enjoy getting into the story and world.  This was just impossible with DA2, which is really sad to me as DAO is one of my favorite RPG's.