143 réponses à ce sujet

[stoicsentry2]

I am tempted to feel offense at comments that DA2 was "innovative", considering it took place in such a small location compared to the original, re-used maps over and over, dumbed down combat, took away choice and borrowed the set in stone character style of ME.

So other than the 3rd person storytelling (a story with no ending, mind you!), what was "innovative" about DA2?

Modifié par stoicsentry2, 18 juin 2011 - 06:58 .

[Mr.House]

PR talk.

[hoorayforicecream]

Prefacing this with "innovative" doesn't necessarily mean "successful" or "good". It means they tried new things. Some worked, some didn't.

- Friendship/Rivalry system
- Iconic Companion looks
- Crafting system overhaul
- Dialogue Wheel with personality type
- Day/Night areas
- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat

But since you're pretty much offended that DA2 exists at all, you'll probably gloss right over these or dismiss them.

Edit: It wasn't Laidlaw, it was Muzyka in the interview.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 18 juin 2011 - 07:33 .

[erynnar]

Mr.House wrote...

PR talk.

Mr. House! The PR talk wasn't innovative either! Silly billy.  :lol: I admit to being in a cheeky mood, sorry. I hope I made you laugh, even a little.

[erynnar]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Prefacing this with "innovative" doesn't necessarily mean "successful" or "good". It means they tried new things. Some worked, some didn't.

- Friendship/Rivalry system
- Iconic Companion looks
- Crafting system overhaul
- Dialogue Wheel with personality type
- Day/Night areas
- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat

But since you're pretty much offended that DA2 exists at all, you'll probably gloss right over these or dismiss them.

Edit: It wasn't Laidlaw, it was Musyka in the interview.

Not sure waht you mean by "front-loaded combat." Honest curiosity, not bashing (honest).:happy: Sorry, I don't mean to be dense on that.

[Mr.House]

erynnar wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

PR talk.

Mr. House! The PR talk wasn't innovative either! Silly billy.  :lol: I admit to being in a cheeky mood, sorry. I hope I made you laugh, even a little.

Someone being snarky to the snarky AI? Maddam you wound me!

*ahem* but yes, you made this old machine laugh.

[hoorayforicecream]

erynnar wrote...
Not sure waht you mean by "front-loaded combat." Honest curiosity, not bashing (honest).:happy: Sorry, I don't mean to be dense on that.

The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

[lv12medic]

There is the dominant tone thing where it does some of the automatic fill in the conversation stuff based off your previous tone choices in conversation. I thought that was rather innovative and new.

[stoicsentry2]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Prefacing this with "innovative" doesn't necessarily mean "successful" or "good". It means they tried new things. Some worked, some didn't.

- Friendship/Rivalry system
- Iconic Companion looks
- Crafting system overhaul
- Dialogue Wheel with personality type
- Day/Night areas
- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat

But since you're pretty much offended that DA2 exists at all, you'll probably gloss right over these or dismiss them.

Edit: It wasn't Laidlaw, it was Musyka in the interview.

Thanks for the answer on both accounts.

Ah, I get it now. I usually think of innovative as meaning good PLUS new. In this case they meant new and sucks. Now that makes sense.

[erynnar]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Not sure waht you mean by "front-loaded combat." Honest curiosity, not bashing (honest).:happy: Sorry, I don't mean to be dense on that.

The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Ah! I understand now! Thanks hooray! Hey, HOORAY for hooray! I appreciate your explaining it to me. *hugs*

[erynnar]

Mr.House wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

PR talk.

Mr. House! The PR talk wasn't innovative either! Silly billy.  :lol: I admit to being in a cheeky mood, sorry. I hope I made you laugh, even a little.

Someone being snarky to the snarky AI? Maddam you wound me!

*ahem* but yes, you made this old machine laugh.

YAY! *HUGS*

[Maria Caliban]

hoorayforicecream wrote...


The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Then you discover Storm of the Century, cast it in the middle of a group, and watch them all drop dead as you run away. Why they removed this wondrous tactical element from DA 2, I don't know.

[AtreiyaN7]

If you feel that offended, then maybe you should sue them for the obvious mental damage they inflicted on you.

[hoorayforicecream]

Maria Caliban wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...


The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Then you discover Storm of the Century, cast it in the middle of a group, and watch them all drop dead as you run away. Why they removed this wondrous tactical element from DA 2, I don't know.

I would sneak ahead with a rogue to spot the bad guys, then cast Storm of the Century from outside of response range. All of the bad guys would die, then I'd mosey on in and pick up loots. Can't imagine why they took that out.

Or mana clash.

[devSin]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Edit: It wasn't Laidlaw, it was Musyka in the interview.

That's with a Z, not an S.

The way you wrote it, it made me think "Moose-caca." I so So SO dare somebody there to call him that.

Good times!

[Gunderic]

Maria Caliban wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...


The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Then you discover Storm of the Century, cast it in the middle of a group, and watch them all drop dead as you run away. Why they removed this wondrous tactical element from DA 2, I don't know.

It was probably so they could introduce more cookie-cutter builds. 

[Gunderic]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Not sure waht you mean by "front-loaded combat." Honest curiosity, not bashing (honest).:happy: Sorry, I don't mean to be dense on that.

The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Taking out the damage dealers/healers first is pretty typical of RPG's. I don't see how this... gameplay disadvantage is offset by more trash mobs, though.

[MorrigansLove]

It's all bull****.

[Kaiser Shepard]

It most certainly wasn't a bad game, but I fail to see how the changes made automatically equal innovation.

[Dubya75]

- Friendship/Rivalry system
OK I've not seen any other games use this exact feature, but hardly revolutionary.

- Iconic Companion looks
This is NOT innovative. Not even a bit.

- Crafting system overhaul
Simplified. Again, not innovative.

- Dialogue Wheel with personality type
This would have been innovative if it actually worked. If it made the slightest difference to the outcome of the game.

- Day/Night areas
There are games out there with dynamic day/night cycles, so this is not innovative. More like cheap imitation.

- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat
Improved combat does not necessarily mean it is going to be innovative, and in this case definitely not.

Modifié par Dubya75, 18 juin 2011 - 09:10 .

[pc_wizard]

In my opinion, the only innovative thing in DA2 was the story in that it wasn't all about the usual mighty hero saves the world, but a more personal experience; the implementation of the story however was lacking in some parts (hint: Act 3). This, and the fact that they broke away from the traditional Bioware story structure.

[philippe willaume]

Hello
Come on let be fair.
Yes we can argue the difference between improvement and innovation till the cows comes home.
Regardless I would say that there was some really good idea to improve/inovate upon DA:0, the bad thing is that it was not necessarily as well designed or implemented as I could have been

They did try to make the relation between stats and damage a bit simpler. I mean in DA:0 you almost needed to be able to understand non-Euclidian geometry and string theory to fathom what the hell was going on behind the scene that and the fact that the mage were the most powerful class by far, though DA:A helped bringing the class more together.

So we go a directing char per class, which tend to reduce the damage gap between classes and make affect you damage output.
Sadly the side effect is that you are pretty much forced into a role with much less option to diversify.
One thing that was great in DA:0 was that each char could have a secondary role and be good at it.

And you can get the same DA: 0 effect with a DA:2 just link chars to talents group instead of having to select char and talent.
I.e. when you chose a talent some or all the char point are chosen for you/
or you have a mechanism in the talent that use the directing char to replace the directing char you would normally need.

Taking a real life example, precision with a two handed sword does not equate precision with let say a one hand heavy sword and buckler or a light sword with dagger

Ie the placement of the blow does not matter as much.
Typically in German tradition, when fighting without armour, you aim your strike at the lower abdomen, upper tights, hips groin region or head and shoulder it does not really matter where lands in that region.
As well with a two hand weapon you tip control is much finer and it is easy to be precise with your thrust and sword placement for slice.

With a sword that does not cut as well but is capable of slicing, you need to be more precise as to where your blows are located.

What I am trying to get at is the weapon the char are using can make up for lack of directing char and give you the option for each character to have several roles

The cross class combos are another example where DA:2 is better than DA:0 the problem being that each char type is limited in its option and at that here is not that much same class combo the cool down it is likely that one of member of the group will not fire on all cylinders but it is still a good idea.

phil

[Chuvvy]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Prefacing this with "innovative" doesn't necessarily mean "successful" or "good". It means they tried new things. Some worked, some didn't.

- Friendship/Rivalry system Yes
- Iconic Companion looks Hell no
- Crafting system overhaul sort of
- Dialogue Wheel with personality type sort of
- Day/Night areas What the blueberrie **** muffins?
- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat Innovative but not good.

But since you're pretty much offended that DA2 exists at all, you'll probably gloss right over these or dismiss them.

Edit: It wasn't Laidlaw, it was Muzyka in the interview.

- Friendship/Rivalry system. Yes
- Iconic Companion looks. Hell no, plenty of people have done it even bioware.
Crafting system overhaul. Yes, not amazingly innovative but innovative
- Dialogue Wheel with personality type. Sort of, there have been plenty of games that let you choose your personality. Most of them don't have humor in it though.
- Day/Night areas. What the blueberrie **** muffins? 80% of games have day/night.
- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat. It was innovative in that you're always surrounded.

[philippe willaume]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Not sure waht you mean by "front-loaded combat." Honest curiosity, not bashing (honest).:happy: Sorry, I don't mean to be dense on that.

The majority of the battles in DAO had no reinforcements, so the first 25% of the battles were almost invariably far more important than the remaining 75%. You spent the first 25% of the fights paused, identifying key targets like mages, archers, etc., then taking them out. After that, you spent the rest of the time cleaning up the leftovers. It provided a very uneven combat experience, because the last 3/4 of the fight was a lot more boring than the first 1/4.

Hello
I see what you are coming from and you do have a point, thought, I never really felt that time disproportion, the mage and warrior AOE did short works of the left over.
So in my experience once the key targets were eliminated, dealing with the rest that survived the initial onslaught was relatively quick.
What I really like is that i could adapt what each character could do with the strategy I wanted to implement.

Compared to that I find DA: 2 combat repetitive and tedious especially bosses, relying to much on gear and potion and not enough on me being smart (or at least having the impression of there of).
 
Which is again quite a paradox because I found it easier in DA2 to avoid attack of bosses and it makes you feel that you have more tactical option/control over the fight than in DA:O
 
Phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 18 juin 2011 - 11:18 .