262 réponses à ce sujet

[Ariella]

Firefeng wrote...

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

Actually hack and slash is a legitamte sub genre of RPGs. See the new D&D game for Xbox/PC to see what I mean. Hack and Slash though generally refers to an RPG that stresses combat over everything else. Temple of Elemental Evil is H&S, just like the module it's based on.

Whoever said that DA2 is H&S seriously hasn't played an actual H&S game.

[Serpieri Nei]

Ariella wrote...

Firefeng wrote...

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

Actually hack and slash is a legitamte sub genre of RPGs. See the new D&D game for Xbox/PC to see what I mean. Hack and Slash though generally refers to an RPG that stresses combat over everything else. Temple of Elemental Evil is H&S, just like the module it's based on.

Whoever said that DA2 is H&S seriously hasn't played an actual H&S game.

Hack and Slash  was originally used to describe an aspect of pen&paper RPG’s, carrying over from there to MUD’s, MMORPG’s and video games in general. In modern video games the term "hack and slash" is used to describe a game in which the combat is very repetitive, also known as button smashers. You can call games like GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders, and Diablo as hack and slash but that would be a disservice to them since people don’t find the combat to be repetitive.

Witcher 2 is not a Hack and Slash - it's an action rpg. DA2 on the other hand is an RPG which it is not, has more in common with action rpgs and people have pointed out how tedius the combat has felt in DA2 in the criticsm threads which does make that a valid comparision, especially since consoles didn't ship with auto attack.


 

Modifié par Serpieri Nei, 11 juin 2011 - 05:06 .

[Ariella]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Firefeng wrote...

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

Actually hack and slash is a legitamte sub genre of RPGs. See the new D&D game for Xbox/PC to see what I mean. Hack and Slash though generally refers to an RPG that stresses combat over everything else. Temple of Elemental Evil is H&S, just like the module it's based on.

Whoever said that DA2 is H&S seriously hasn't played an actual H&S game.

Hack and Slash  was originally used to describe an aspect of pen&paper RPG’s, carrying over from there to MUD’s, MMORPG’s and video games in general. In modern video games the term "hack and slash" is used to describe a game in which the combat is very repetitive, also known as button smashers. You can call games like GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders, and Diablo as hack and slash but that would be a disservice to them since people don’t find the combat to be repetitive.

Witcher 2 is not a Hack and Slash - it's an action rpg. DA2 on the other hand is an RPG which it is not, has more in common with action rpgs and people have pointed out how tedius the combat has felt in DA2 in the criticsm threads which does make that a valid comparision, especially since consoles didn't ship with auto attack.

Actually, Hack and Slash is STILL used as I pointed out. Some games even revel in the title, like Diablo, or the new D&D game in which combat, not story is the main focus.I wouldn't call Gods of War an RPG at all. Nor would I call Darksiders an RPG, anymore than I'd call the old Castlevaina games RPGs. They're action adventure games. Big difference.

As for DA2, it's an RPG, and I don't see how the combat could be more tedious than TW2's. I've seen a lot of people here complementing the combat system in DA2, which was much better than the old DAO system, and several leagues better than either combat system CDPR has worked out for the Witcher series. 

In DA2 I have access to my skills at the click of a button, be it mouse or game pad. TW2 I had to sit there with a list of what was keymapped where so I could get through the fights. Add to that that TW2's game balance just sucks. Being first level in combat should be difficult but not to the point of frustration, and again I'm not the only one who's said this. Combat isn't intuitive in TW2, it's this steep learning curve, where as if you played DAO, DA2's controls aren't going to surprise you, which makes the transition from game to game easier.

The console auto-attack was fixed, so it is no longer an issue, and no real reason to bring it up.

[Serpieri Nei]

Ariella wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Firefeng wrote...

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

Actually hack and slash is a legitamte sub genre of RPGs. See the new D&D game for Xbox/PC to see what I mean. Hack and Slash though generally refers to an RPG that stresses combat over everything else. Temple of Elemental Evil is H&S, just like the module it's based on.

Whoever said that DA2 is H&S seriously hasn't played an actual H&S game.

Hack and Slash  was originally used to describe an aspect of pen&paper RPG’s, carrying over from there to MUD’s, MMORPG’s and video games in general. In modern video games the term "hack and slash" is used to describe a game in which the combat is very repetitive, also known as button smashers. You can call games like GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders, and Diablo as hack and slash but that would be a disservice to them since people don’t find the combat to be repetitive.

Witcher 2 is not a Hack and Slash - it's an action rpg. DA2 on the other hand is an RPG which it is not, has more in common with action rpgs and people have pointed out how tedius the combat has felt in DA2 in the criticsm threads which does make that a valid comparision, especially since consoles didn't ship with auto attack.

Actually, Hack and Slash is STILL used as I pointed out. Some games even revel in the title, like Diablo, or the new D&D game in which combat, not story is the main focus.I wouldn't call Gods of War an RPG at all. Nor would I call Darksiders an RPG, anymore than I'd call the old Castlevaina games RPGs. They're action adventure games. Big difference.

As for DA2, it's an RPG, and I don't see how the combat could be more tedious than TW2's. I've seen a lot of people here complementing the combat system in DA2, which was much better than the old DAO system, and several leagues better than either combat system CDPR has worked out for the Witcher series. 

In DA2 I have access to my skills at the click of a button, be it mouse or game pad. TW2 I had to sit there with a list of what was keymapped where so I could get through the fights. Add to that that TW2's game balance just sucks. Being first level in combat should be difficult but not to the point of frustration, and again I'm not the only one who's said this. Combat isn't intuitive in TW2, it's this steep learning curve, where as if you played DAO, DA2's controls aren't going to surprise you, which makes the transition from game to game easier.

The console auto-attack was fixed, so it is no longer an issue, and no real reason to bring it up.

Diablo falls under the genres of action and RPG. D&D Daggerdale falls under the same. I have yet to see any gaming site classify game as hack and slash. If you know one, can you post a link? 

GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders are action games, never said they weren’t just that it’s a disservice to call them hack and slash. 

I never found the combat in TW2 tedious, not only can I attack, block, riposte, dodge, roll away, use spell/traps on the run. And if I stood there just clicking away, Geralt would be dead. Unlike in DA2, where I can just stand there waiting for actives to refresh relying on my auto attack. DA2 combat is quite comical actually. The exploding bodies, 7 foot leaps in the air, teleporting rogues, attack slides, warriors ground pounding, backflips, and the attack speed reminds me of fighting games with hyper mode.  And I’m not the only that has pointed this out in the criticism thread.

Never had any trouble using a mouse/keyboard with Witcher or Dragon age – heck didn’t even need hot keys set up. TW2 is a game that will knock you flat on your ass and that’s one of its best qualities. Dragon Age 2 Nightmare wasn’t even challenging, just tedious dealing with mobs that more hit points and resistance. Guessing, you
never played Demon Souls or plan on playing Dark Souls. These games embrace tension, fear and are far more rewarding as you progress through challenges that are actually difficult.  

Modifié par Serpieri Nei, 11 juin 2011 - 06:17 .

[erynnar]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Firefeng wrote...

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

Actually hack and slash is a legitamte sub genre of RPGs. See the new D&D game for Xbox/PC to see what I mean. Hack and Slash though generally refers to an RPG that stresses combat over everything else. Temple of Elemental Evil is H&S, just like the module it's based on.

Whoever said that DA2 is H&S seriously hasn't played an actual H&S game.

Hack and Slash  was originally used to describe an aspect of pen&paper RPG’s, carrying over from there to MUD’s, MMORPG’s and video games in general. In modern video games the term "hack and slash" is used to describe a game in which the combat is very repetitive, also known as button smashers. You can call games like GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders, and Diablo as hack and slash but that would be a disservice to them since people don’t find the combat to be repetitive.

Witcher 2 is not a Hack and Slash - it's an action rpg. DA2 on the other hand is an RPG which it is not, has more in common with action rpgs and people have pointed out how tedius the combat has felt in DA2 in the criticsm threads which does make that a valid comparision, especially since consoles didn't ship with auto attack.

Actually, Hack and Slash is STILL used as I pointed out. Some games even revel in the title, like Diablo, or the new D&D game in which combat, not story is the main focus.I wouldn't call Gods of War an RPG at all. Nor would I call Darksiders an RPG, anymore than I'd call the old Castlevaina games RPGs. They're action adventure games. Big difference.

As for DA2, it's an RPG, and I don't see how the combat could be more tedious than TW2's. I've seen a lot of people here complementing the combat system in DA2, which was much better than the old DAO system, and several leagues better than either combat system CDPR has worked out for the Witcher series. 

In DA2 I have access to my skills at the click of a button, be it mouse or game pad. TW2 I had to sit there with a list of what was keymapped where so I could get through the fights. Add to that that TW2's game balance just sucks. Being first level in combat should be difficult but not to the point of frustration, and again I'm not the only one who's said this. Combat isn't intuitive in TW2, it's this steep learning curve, where as if you played DAO, DA2's controls aren't going to surprise you, which makes the transition from game to game easier.

The console auto-attack was fixed, so it is no longer an issue, and no real reason to bring it up.

Diablo falls under the genres of action and RPG. D&D Daggerdale falls under the same. I have yet to see any gaming site classify game as hack and slash. If you know one, can you post a link? 

GoW, Bayonette, Darksiders are action games, never said they weren’t just that it’s a disservice to call them hack and slash. 

I never found the combat in TW2 tedious, not only can I attack, block, riposte, dodge, roll away, use spell/traps on the run. And if I stood there just clicking away, Geralt would be dead. Unlike in DA2, where I can just stand there waiting for actives to refresh relying on my auto attack. DA2 combat is quite comical actually. The exploding bodies, 7 foot leaps in the air, teleporting rogues, attack slides, warriors ground pounding, backflips, and the attack speed reminds me of fighting games with hyper mode.  And I’m not the only that has pointed this out in the criticism thread.

Never had any trouble using a mouse/keyboard with Witcher or Dragon age – heck didn’t even need hot keys set up. TW2 is a game that will knock you flat on your ass and that’s one of its best qualities. Dragon Age 2 Nightmare wasn’t even challenging, just tedious dealing with mobs that more hit points and resistance. Guessing, you
never played Demon Souls or plan on playing Dark Souls. These games embrace tension, fear and are far more rewarding as you progress through challenges that are actually difficult.  

This^ about Witcher 2's combat. It really is far more stategy based than DA2's. You run up and  click in it on anything but easy (and not even then) you will have your ass handed to you on a platter. Not a game that is going to hold your hand or pat your head or coddle you in any way. I have died, reloaded and changed my potions, my traps, my bombs. It can be frustrating, but once you win...you feel epic. DA2's battles can be frustrating too, difference when I beat them? I don't feel epic, I feel relieved that it's over.

[DragonRageGT]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

I never found the combat in TW2 tedious, not only can I attack, block, riposte, dodge, roll away, use spell/traps on the run. And if I stood there just clicking away, Geralt would be dead. Unlike in DA2, where I can just stand there waiting for actives to refresh relying on my auto attack. DA2 combat is quite comical actually. The exploding bodies, 7 foot leaps in the air, teleporting rogues, attack slides, warriors ground pounding, backflips, and the attack speed reminds me of fighting games with hyper mode.  And I’m not the only that has pointed this out in the criticism thread.

Never had any trouble using a mouse/keyboard with Witcher or Dragon age – heck didn’t even need hot keys set up. TW2 is a game that will knock you flat on your ass and that’s one of its best qualities. Dragon Age 2 Nightmare wasn’t even challenging, just tedious dealing with mobs that more hit points and resistance. Guessing, you
never played Demon Souls or plan on playing Dark Souls. These games embrace tension, fear and are far more rewarding as you progress through challenges that are actually difficult.  

Plus, if it were really that impossible, players (and I can name a few of them, myself included) would not be able to play and finish TW2 at Insane difficulty (hardcore - death is final) and we are. Once we get used to the mechanics, it's an awesome combat system. Took me as long as Origins to get really good at it. DA2, well, it's just boring some times and I have some vids to show it too.

[philippe willaume]

Hello
What it is or what it is not is not really of that important in the grand scheme of thing.

I am teaching medieval fencing, and 7-10 years ago, I was trying to categorize strictly what each of the 5 master strikes was and really doing that I was kind of missing the point that fencing is much more about the end result than it is about strict definition.

The 15th century master use very precise example to describe very generic concept. So yes you need to get the example precisely to find out what the concept is but equally you need to expend from that concept to make it apply to the relevant situation

So are they both h&s, action rpg , rpg ? Well DA2 and TW2 are a bit of both.
They don’t go about the same way about thing but they aim at the same end result.

Making game is not that different of re-discovering and dead martial art.
There is a fair amount of conceptual work but you need practical applications.

When I spar, I am not so much interpreting in what worked because, it may be a correct understanding or just a circumstantial success, however what failed definitely show that I am lacking in understanding; either I did not do the technique as efficiently as I should or I did let the situation develop to my disadvantage. and that is what I need to get better.

There are things I do not especially like in TW2 for example the greater reliance on bomb/symbol the higher difficulty but that being said you can develop the sword so that you are mainly a swordsmen.
And there is not that much differences between running around dropping traps/bombs and running around wait fro the cool down to time up but in TW2 if you chose to develop the sword you do not have to do it that much.

Of course there is going to be difference between the combat system of DA:2 and TW2 In terms of role Geralt is de-facto a DA:2 party, whith the effect of the party ht keyed.
But really in DA:2 you still need to move out the attacks way if you want to survive. So it kind of the same as in the witcher but with more pauses because you have to tell your bunch what to do.) but really we are just bashing different keys.

The grip people have with the combat in DA2 is not how it works. From a design stand point it is better that TW2 and DA:0. The grip is what the combat ends up being the same attrition battle between the enemies hit point and the gamer will to live through the whittling that uses the same method regardless
That is why TW2 and DA:0 feels “better” even if they are conceptally worse

phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 11 juin 2011 - 08:11 .

[Schamino]

[/quote]


This^ about Witcher 2's combat. It really is far more stategy based than DA2's. You run up and  click in it on anything but easy (and not even then) you will have your ass handed to you on a platter. Not a game that is going to hold your hand or pat your head or coddle you in any way. I have died, reloaded and changed my potions, my traps, my bombs. It can be frustrating, but once you win...you feel epic. DA2's battles can be frustrating too, difference when I beat them? I don't feel epic, I feel relieved that it's over.

[/quote]

I agree with you at some point. But I got to say that I enjoyed the combat in DA II more than the Witcher 2, though I am still at the very beginning of the W2. What I miss a lot about the combat system in the Witcher 2 is the opportunity to pause the game in combat by hitting space button. Maybe it is far more strategy based than DA II, in my opinion it's two different ways of strategy.

Modifié par Schamino, 11 juin 2011 - 08:33 .

[Ariella]

Serpieri Nei wrote...



Diablo falls under the genres of action and RPG. D&D Daggerdale falls under the same. I have yet to see any gaming site classify game as hack and slash. If you know one, can you post a link? 

Dungeons & Dragons: Daggerdale offers engaging “hack and slash”
gameplay, bringing an accessible version of Dungeons & Dragons 4th
Edition to life. Travel to the Dalelands of the Forgotten Realms, where
the journey begins in the remote Desertsmouth Mountains. From the
sulfuric catacombs of the mines of Tethyamar, to the dizzying heights of
the Tower of the Void, Dungeons & Dragons: Daggerdale delivers an
action packed challenge that will satisfy the most seasoned of
adventurers.

http://marketplace.x...0aa2?noSplash=1

As I said, there are games that revel in being called hack and slash. And D&D Daggerdale is one of them. Diablo is as well. It's never made any pretense at being anything but a combat focused game.

And using non-rpgs to try and make your point, not exactly good technique for debate. Action/adventure games are a completely different genre with different expectations and different terminology attached.

[Ariella]

erynnar wrote...


This^ about Witcher 2's combat. It really is far more stategy based than DA2's. You run up and  click in it on anything but easy (and not even then) you will have your ass handed to you on a platter. Not a game that is going to hold your hand or pat your head or coddle you in any way. I have died, reloaded and changed my potions, my traps, my bombs. It can be frustrating, but once you win...you feel epic. DA2's battles can be frustrating too, difference when I beat them? I don't feel epic, I feel relieved that it's over.

Ery, I've seen a lot of people mention hand holding et al. I'm not expecting the game to hold my hand, I do however expect the game to provide decent tutorials. And it's not just what's on the screen, it's the physical setup of TW2's combat. It makes very poor use of the mouse, in favor of forcing the player to have to use mapped keys, whereas in both DAO and DA2 you have the option to use either on PC. When I'm gaming, I really prefer to use the mouse as my main control, and use WASD for direction and that's it. The Red Engine doesn't allow for that freedom. For TW2 you've got one hand on the mouse to keep hitting the darn thing while trying to keep the keys straight that are mapped to spells and items, plus the fact potions are verbotten in combat, which is silly, since that's been a RPG staple since the Gold Box games.

Honestly, I don't care about feeling epic after a battle. No matter what game it is, I'm always just relieved it's over, because I'm not a big fan of combat period. I play for the interaction, and the faster I can get through a combat, the happier I am, which is why I find myself liking DA2's system, which is funny because DA seems to constantly make me rethink my opinion on genre standbys, like dungeons. I loved the Deep Roads in DAO, which is weird because I usually hate dungeons because I tend to get lost. But the DR just had so much behind them storywise, I didn't really mind them all that much. Same with combat in DA2. The faster animations, the more reactive abilities made my day.

Oh there were times when I got frustrated, but never to the level that I did with TW2. I felt like a contortionist, and I'm playing this on a laptop.

I'd rather just a nice clean system of hotbars and being able to use my mouse. Less contortions, more fun, less annoyed Ariella.

[Chromie]

Ariella wrote...

Ery, I've seen a lot of people mention hand holding et al. I'm not expecting the game to hold my hand, I do however expect the game to provide decent tutorials. And it's not just what's on the screen.

You do. You get the popup AND THEN you open the journal and, oh my god guess what, read for a more indepth explanation. You can see how damange is calculated, armor calucated, you magic is calculated, resistances, your critical effects.  It just takes some reading on your part. Hell the game even tells you a creatures habitat, fighting habits and how to approach them in combat.

http://cloud.steampo...BCC9EB63BA48C7/
http://cloud.steampo...56DCD96C33C3C7/
http://cloud.steampo...9BFE7A40AC0886/
http://cloud.steampo...7841F761EE4C97/
http://cloud.steampo...3D010FE3AB98A5/

Modifié par Ringo12, 11 juin 2011 - 08:19 .

[Sutekh]

Ringo12 wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Ery, I've seen a lot of people mention hand holding et al. I'm not expecting the game to hold my hand, I do however expect the game to provide decent tutorials. And it's not just what's on the screen.

You do. You get the popup AND THEN you open the journal and, oh my god guess what, read for a more indepth explanation. You can see how damange is calculated, armor calucated, you magic is calculated, resistances, your critical effects.  It just takes some reading on your part. Hell the game even tells you a creatures habitat, fighting habits and how to approach them in combat.

I'm sorry, but I'm playing TW2 now, and I never felt as confused as I did when going through the prologue. Not on details such as those explained in the screens you posted, but more like "Ok, it says 'follow this guy', and then this guy stays pacing in the same room. Oh, it means, go back whence you came and have this guy follow you, then! Got it." Clear as mud.

As for the rest, I shouldn't have to break my immersion and pause to read long descriptions in order to play a game. What you're talking about aren't tutorials, they are parts of a manual. Not the same at all. Tutorial means learning while practicing, not reading. When RPGs weren't given "intuitive interfaces", we knew it, were used to it, and had manuals we read before starting the game. Even then, there were decent tutorials. A little bit of training before getting into the core.

What I find unforgivable, though, is the fact that despite importing a save from TW1, all the choices I did then seem to be for nothing. Triss is one (I don't like her, he didn't romance her, what the hell is he doing in bed with her?). Scoia'tael is another. He made it very clear in TW1 that he sided with them, as soon as the question arose. Then in the course of 1 month  he does a 180 for no apparent reason? If the only point of importing was an armor and two swords, okay. But just say it then. I already have a hard time caring for a fixed character, especially this one. If the little influence I had on him is erased, then what? This coming from a game that puts the emphasis on choices.

And what's with the timed dialogs? Seriously. First time it happened, I didn't even have the time to read all the possible answers or to even notice it was timed (Okay, I might have been a little bit mesmerized by Iorveth then, but still.) Given the fact that (apparently) choices we make are important, this isn't a small thing.

All this being said, this isn't a bad game. Far from it. It has shining aspects that are enough for me to keep playing despite the aforementioned problems. But it isn't a perfect game either. It has flaws, and those aren't small ones. If I have to compare it to DA2 (which, IMHO, is pointless), I'll say that I was immersed in DA2 a lot more, and much quicker than I am in TW2.

[Dariuszp]

Well lack of tutorial is serous problem. They did put that areas with explanation but it's too little. Some people cannot read. I did created 2 videos that show some aspects of combat and alchemy. Also you can hear original voices. Still sound is out of sync a little.

Part 1:

Part 2:


I didn't show traps there. You use them like firecrackers. When I will lvl up and I will goot loot of skills then I will explain more.

About choices. You are right that they dont shape world as I want. Triss is one thing. But then again if you play and are carefull you have some mentioning about things that happen back then (first thing is message from Talar from messanger in Flotsam).

[CloudOfShadows]

Schamino wrote...

This^ about Witcher 2's combat. It really is far more stategy based than DA2's. You run up and  click in it on anything but easy (and not even then) you will have your ass handed to you on a platter. Not a game that is going to hold your hand or pat your head or coddle you in any way. I have died, reloaded and changed my potions, my traps, my bombs. It can be frustrating, but once you win...you feel epic. DA2's battles can be frustrating too, difference when I beat them? I don't feel epic, I feel relieved that it's over.

Eurgh. You must have played different games than me. In TW2 I never really felt the need to change my tactics, I just felt frustated because after running away for three rounds one fight, my dodge away didn't work because the controls didn't work. And I died shortly after. That wasn't fun. So, I didn't change my tactics, I just had to try to hit the same damn buttons in a tedious order again and again.

While in DA2, I often felt that if I changed the tactics with which I approached a fight made all the difference, picking the right placement, timing the abilities between the various members of my party, it all made a difference, one that I understood, one that I was able to learn to use more effectively.

Any such understanding failed to occur to me in TW2. I just always thought that I just wasn't quick enough with the buttons.

[DragonRageGT]

CloudOfShadows wrote...

Schamino wrote...

This^ about Witcher 2's combat. It really is far more stategy based than DA2's. You run up and  click in it on anything but easy (and not even then) you will have your ass handed to you on a platter. Not a game that is going to hold your hand or pat your head or coddle you in any way. I have died, reloaded and changed my potions, my traps, my bombs. It can be frustrating, but once you win...you feel epic. DA2's battles can be frustrating too, difference when I beat them? I don't feel epic, I feel relieved that it's over.

Eurgh. You must have played different games than me. In TW2 I never really felt the need to change my tactics, I just felt frustated because after running away for three rounds one fight, my dodge away didn't work because the controls didn't work. And I died shortly after. That wasn't fun. So, I didn't change my tactics, I just had to try to hit the same damn buttons in a tedious order again and again.

While in DA2, I often felt that if I changed the tactics with which I approached a fight made all the difference, picking the right placement, timing the abilities between the various members of my party, it all made a difference, one that I understood, one that I was able to learn to use more effectively.

Any such understanding failed to occur to me in TW2. I just always thought that I just wasn't quick enough with the buttons.

Weird. You must have played a different TW2 than me as well. In TW2, I only play Insane diff and I don't die because I adjust my tactics to the enemy, after reading books about them, using the most suitable type of attack, trap, bomb, sign, learning skills to survive, my block works fine because I know when to use it and I don't try to use it when my Vigor is depleted... it would be like trying to start a car when you know it has no fuel... insanity.... repeating the same mistakes hpoing for a different result... it is not the same as Insane difficulty.

Now, since when reading a Journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion by the way, which is garanteed to entertain and  put a smile in our faces, is immersion breaking? He's a bard and the game journal is so in character that I can easily say there has never been a journal like that in any other game!

DA2 is boring to no end... particularly vs some Bosses with 1,000,000 HP that makes fights go on for 30 minutes with nothing special about them except it is boring! (I only play NM... I'm sure that Easy can be done in some 5 minutes)

[Chromie]

Sutekh wrote...

As for the rest, I shouldn't have to break my immersion and pause to read long descriptions in order to play a game. What you're talking about aren't tutorials, they are parts of a manual. Not the same at all. 

Hmm from someone at Bioware 

GeorgZoelle wrote....

While I hate the 'it's killing immersion' line as much as the next designer, because it's really just a translation of 'I don't like it',

Modifié par Ringo12, 14 juin 2011 - 06:35 .

[Cyberarmy]

Firefeng wrote...

I've played The Witcher 2 for the first 15 minutes. After those 15 minutes, I'm holding off on continuing until I get a graphics card that can play the game at decent settings, but those first 15 minutes is an annoyance of clunky combat that will probably color my perception of the game throughout my eventual playthrough.

If you all really want to see an RPG trying and failing to mimic an action-combat game, The Witcher 2 qualifies far more than Dragon Age 2. Now, if TW2 had DA2's combat system (note to the selectively illiterate: I emphasized "system", and did not say "encounters" or "animations" or anything else), I might be more inclined to jump back into it whenever my computer can run it decently at 1920x1080 resolution. It's not nearly as fun a battle system as even PS:T...

Cue the eventual responses involving steep learning curves and whatnot attempting to rebut my opinion.

And Dragon Age 2 is a medicore [sic] Hack&slash.

Diablo 2=Hack&slash.  Baldur's Gate 2: Dark Alliance = Hack&slash.  Heroes of Might & Magic (on the consoles, at least) = Hack&slash.  The Witcher 2 = Hack&slash.  Hunter: The Reckoning = Hack&slash (of sorts).  Hack&slash ≠ PC DA2 (although console DA2 would certainly apply, given its lack of autoattacking).  


Really.  Hack&slash refers to a battle system, not a particular genre of game...

İ was not trying to compare their battle system. Both games have pros and cons when it came to battle. Both can be count as H&S.Both can be tactical.Thats not the core of problem.

İ was trying to say that DA2 is nearly all about combat, talking your way out of trouble is near non existant. Most of the time you tell the same thing with your dialog choices only your tone and phrase changes.
And in W2 even a little thing like  giving a sword to someone or not  has large effect. And most of the time you dont have to salve problems with force.(Jedi mind trick )

The witcher 2 is a game from gamers to gamers. Unfortunately Dragon age 2 is just a product make to prodit over its name.

Edit: curse laptops mouse.. how did i clicked submit i wonder...

Modifié par Cyberarmy, 14 juin 2011 - 08:21 .

[Corto81]

I was sceptical towards TW2 as I thought TW1 was just an ordinary game.
An honest attempt at a good RPG, but executed rather poorly, and resulted in a flawed product (for my tastes).
It was decent, but no better than decent (again, IMO).

However, I've been completely blown away by TW2.
It is the RPG I've played since BG2 (Origins is close, though very different), and the world, characters, quests, story... Everything is so meaningful and deep it's just amazing.
Not to mention playing it for the 2nd time and a different path resulted in soo many changed it felt like a different game.

I loved the CDPR weren't afraid of the different paths people will carry over to the sequel, I loved the complexity of the combat system, I loved that spamming buttons gets you killed while learning and improving rewards you greatly - not just action-wise, but strategy/tactics wise.

I've said this before, I'll say it again.

TW2 and Origins were successful attemps at great RPGs. Honest, genuine attemps where the devs obviously put their hearts and souls in it.
TW1 was a genuine attempt at a great RPG but executed in  a "meh" way.
DA2? A failed attempt at streamlined, dumbed-down, mish-mash of H'n'S, action-adventure, highly stripped of choices and other RPG elements compared to it's predecessor, re-used maps, FedEx/MMO quests, no exploration, "fake" world, etc etc.

DA:Origins, Witcher series feel like they were attempts at great games and then make money as a bonus.
DA2 feels like it was made money and gameplay, story, etc... were afterthoughts.

...


As for comparing combat in DA2 vs TW2?
I don't see how it's a contest.
TW2 is so much more punishing, so much more tactical, so much better paced.... That it's miles ahead.
(for my tastes anyway)

[GregoriusMaximus]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

TW2 > DAO > TW1 > DA2. ~Just saying~

Yep. Pretty much.

[Sutekh]

RageGT wrote...

Now, since when reading a Journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion by the way, which is garanteed to entertain and  put a smile in our faces, is immersion breaking? He's a bard and the game journal is so in character that I can easily say there has never been a journal like that in any other game!

That is not the point. As well written as it is, when I'm supposed to be at the core of the action, I don't stop to read. Imagine Geralt trying to seize that ballista, fighting his way to it, attacked by small waves of enemy soldiers, raising a hand and saying, "Stop, guys. Let's suspend hostilities because I have to read explanations on how to swipe the ground with your faces. They are wonderfully written by my dear friend Dandelion, by the way."

Besides, they aren't. Look at the tutorial screens (which are what I was talking about, not the monsters description or the quest phases). If Dandelion wrote them, he should quickly quit being a bard and become an IT support or something. Or maybe it sounds more poetic when sung with a lute?

Ringo12 wrote...
Hmm from someone at Bioware [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png[/smilie]

GeorgZoelle wrote....

While I hate the 'it's killing immersion' line as much as the next designer, because it's really just a translation of 'I don't like it',

And? Because he's "someone at Bioware" I should immediately see the errors of my way and repent? I don't give a rat's tail what this guy thinks that means. Defensive generalization ain't gonna convince me, anyway. My liking DA2 doesn't mean Bioware is my god or something. 

Immersion for me is the most important thing in an RPG, but since my suspension of disbelief is incredibly high, it takes a lot to break it. But when it's broken, it's broken, I stop caring for the game, and find myself having a real effort to make to "get into the story".

I already said that what really broke my immersion wasn't the combat thing (I, personally, had no real problem grasping it, but I understand that it annoyed some people), but the sometimes misleading way quests are handled and the inconsistencies when importing from TW1. Given the amount of rage I've seen in this forum about "I killed Leliana/Zevran/The Architect and they're in my game" I'm surprised most TW2 aficionados ignore them. And we're not even talking about two different chars as in DA2, but about the very same Geralt of Rivia. And major plot elements that should have big repercussions in TW2. Bad, bad writing. No cookie.

It took me the whole Chapter I, the fight with the kayran and the involvement of Iorveth (and consequences) to get beyond that, be really interested and finally have a good time. That's way beyond "I don't like it.". I kept playing only because (as I said), some aspects of TW2 are so good I thought it was worth the effort. Some people won't have the same patience.

Really, guys, there are a lot of arguments in favor of this game, if you feel like defending it that much. Admitting that some aspects can be considered as flaws by some isn't sinning. TW2 is a very good game, but not a perfect game. And yes, since we must compare, I find some DA2 aspects to be better. Oh, the horror, the blasphemy!

[CloudOfShadows]

Well, what killed my fun in TW2? It was the forced down my throat story, it was the attempts at out of the box humor (srsly, poking fun at Assassins Creed can be nice, but it sets a different mood), and the combat system that reminded me more of a shooter which was way too twitchy for me. Or maybe I prefer to be able to play with one hand.

Oh. And the inability to leave the game at any time w/ Alt+F4. (love you DA games!) or the inability to easily switch of intro movies (love you DA)

Modifié par CloudOfShadows, 14 juin 2011 - 04:20 .

[ToJKa1]

Ringo12 wrote...

...

GeorgZoelle wrote....

While I hate the 'it's killing immersion' line as much as the next designer, because it's really just a translation of 'I don't like it',

I couldn't agree more, and beleive me, i've tried. The TES community has made me hate the i-word so much i'd like to kill it with fire while nuking it from orbit where i am eating it's children.

[Balander79]

TW2 all the way. 2 playthrough's on 1st week i got it and will soon do a 3rd one. Havent touched DA2 after the 1st playthrough and doubt i will.

Cooler hero, game for mature and older gamers, proper talent trees and gearing options. Magnificent graphics and enviroment.

Its better on every single level cant even compared the games.. However its not a perfect game and does have it flaws as well and some pretty serious ones but it does everything better then DA2 in any case.

[Rokky94]

I must say, I enjoy DA:O more than TW2, but TW2 is SO much better than DA2.

[philippe willaume]

Sutekh wrote...

 TW2 is a very good game, but not a perfect game. And yes, since we must compare, I find some DA2 aspects to be better. Oh, the horror, the blasphemy!

Well don't worry you can get out the arena, the lions are not coming.

A fair amount of people do actually agree with that statement. Most of us recognise that DA2 is very good conceptually and that has been stated several times. However the end result is not as good as the TW2 or DA:0 or DA:A.

Most of the people are fairly vocal because they actually do care about the franchise and want to enjoy DA:3 as much as or more than DA:0.
 
Phil