hoorayforicecream wrote...
billy the squid wrote...
CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Atakuma wrote...
Maconbar wrote...
What in your mind made TW/TW2 so complex or for the matter, DA:O? None of the games that you are mentioning seem to have the characteristic of complexity.
To Her Complexity=Not made by Bioware.
I dunno the alchemy system alone is pretty deep imo. But YMMV obviously, and that combat isn't just frantic, that I can time attacks and have to use appopriate weapons for what I'm facing. TW2 gives the player options. Options that DA2 couldn't even begin to.
The story is actually compelling and complex, the characters have more depth, the decisions have actual consequences, it retains enough realism to make players think before they act regarding combat. There is no
A vs B among other things.
But the original quote was about things like THAC0 and whether Stinking Cloud affects your Acrobatics skill roll. The Witcher 2 essentially streamlines all of this stuff out in favor of a much more action-RPG oriented combat system. These were given as examples of needless complexity that were removed, and Jinstar was responding to this using the Witcher 2 as an example of a complex game. The funny thing is that I find many gameplay aspects of the Witcher 2 to be much simpler than DAO or DA2 (heck, even accuracy isn't taken into account by the Witcher 2, Geralt just hits whatever he swings at if it's in range), but Jinstar decided to use it as a counterexample.
If anything, the Witcher 2's combat is exceedingly simple. 99% of the battles in the game on any difficulty can be won with this very simple 5-step algorithm:
1. Light attack
2. Light attack
3. Roll away
4. Reapply shield if need be
5. Go to 1.
I don't always have the inclination to skip back several pages to find the entire quote.
Yet, I don't often try to compare the mechanics of TW2 and DA2, different games styles, which is why I brought up those aspects which can be compared somewhat more effectively.
My criticism of DA2's combat mechanics has never been from a stand point of TW2, as TW2 is entirely focused on timing and distance judging. DA2 just doesn't focus on it. Yet, light attacks on heavy armour don't tend to work so well, generally better to mix. There is also the option of multiple other powers which are easily as effective when used correctly, parry, bombs, throwing knives, potions, oils which only affect certain creatures.
Certainly the shield at lower difficulty I found overpowered, but on other difficulties it is very useful, even if it has been significantly toned down in the patches. TW2 although one of my favorite games has room for improvement in the combat area.
DA2, suffice to say I got bored quickly with the repeated random encounters, particularly as I really didn't care what was going on. It felt more like going through the motions, much of the combat revolved around me repeatedly pressing a button or watching Hawke wade into the middle of another group of enemies and hack away, I found little need for timing, whilst the abilities and cross class combos seemed to be way to cause damage, rather than tactical benefit. Where as strategic placement went out the window with parachuting enemies.
And yet the combat itself simply became frustrating due to the ungodly HP inflation on hard and nightmare rather than because one was daft and got surrounded, which happens in TW2.
But, as I said I prefer not to compare TW2 and DA2 on terms of combat mechanics because at least some of those points are due to design, something the developers wanted, rather than it being a mistake.
Edit:
And as KoP stated DA2 could be summed up in exactly the same way as you did with TW2, which is why I prefer not to oversimplify and compare 2 divergent combat mechanic designs.
Modifié par billy the squid, 08 septembre 2011 - 10:50 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
