205 réponses à ce sujet

[Sepewrath]

Maconbar wrote...
I think that DA:2 combat wouldn't seem so bad if every encounter didn't play out the same way.

It was even worst in DAO, to the point where the game could damn near play itself. At least with the waves, if forced a small meaure of adjustment. In DAO, every battle went exactly the same.

[Tommy6860]

Abispa wrote...

I prefer the way that combat is handled in Fable, but I'll definitely take DA2 combat over DA:O, and I am NOT saying that DA2 was even close to being perfect. The aging NWN/SW:KotOR system of hitting the button once and watch as your character automatically run to any enemy (even if you couldn't see him), start swinging automatically, and stand their trading hits till one of you died had ONE advantage over DA2 in that it allowed you to eat dinner more easily once your character was a high enough level.

I do say that the default difficulty in DA2 is ridiculously easy, though that has become a problem on a LOT of next generation games I've played recently.

You really are misrepresenting what DA:O does and what DA2 does as well. Both have auto attacks. If I click on an enemy to attack in DA2, my PC just keeps auto-attacking away until the foe is finished (or I am finished), no need to keep hiting the button (or KB/mouse key for me). What I don't like about DA2 is that it forces to me to have to click on an enemy to fight again. If I am controlling my PC in DA:O and I take on an enemy while being hit by other, my PC will also attack the other when I am finished with the first foe. Not only that, if I get attacked by an unseen enemy (I mean while not actually engaging in battle at the time), my PC reacts to the attack and then moves to the fight, s/he just doesn't stand there and take hits like in DA2. In DA2, when I finish the first foe, I then have to click on the other to engage again. It looks really dumb that I can stand there, take hits from an enemy while I do nothing. At least in DA:O, my PC reacts to getting hit by any enemy and does something about it whether I choose to initiate the attack or not..

In both games, my companions attack no matter what.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 26 septembre 2011 - 01:27 .

[TEWR]

Foolsfolly wrote...

::sips coffee::

... I can agree to this. Animals, undead, abominations, and the like can still be our easy dumb brute enemies perfect for grinding. While certain elite mooks (Antivan Crows, Templars, City Guard, Orders of Knights, and stuff) would use abilities and tactics like we can. It'd be fun to see how sometimes fighting 5 well trained guys is harder than 20 untrained muggers.

Abominations should actually have a new attack system so as to reflect on the lore that they're these dangerous magical entities. Have some of them use magic uncontrollably.

I'm tired of fighting mindless drunkards.

[Maconbar]

Sepewrath wrote...

Maconbar wrote...
I think that DA:2 combat wouldn't seem so bad if every encounter didn't play out the same way.

It was even worst in DAO, to the point where the game could damn near play itself. At least with the waves, if forced a small meaure of adjustment. In DAO, every battle went exactly the same.

Except that isn't true at all.

Different fights in DA:O: Approaching the Tower of Ishal, in the Brecilian Forest, various fights involving mage enemies, demon fights in Mage Tower. All of these had more variety than the fights in DA:2.

[Tommy6860]

Mr.House wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
I think thats part of the problem with the increased speed- the autoattacks simply recycle over and over and over again and it looks ridiculous when they do it so fast.

Like the mage doing the same precise autoattack  dance/twirl or rogues doing the same fast forward slashing at air when they autoattack.  Coupled with the decreased number of unique abilities and more passive abilities, visually I thought combat got pretty boring looking when everyone is simply doing their autoattack dance in fast forward while you whittle away at an enemy's HP and wait for cooldowns to expire. 

I wish they'd add back in abilities with unique animations- so keeping something like Flame Blast and Fireball separate, as opposed to lumping everything into Fireball and upgraded versions of Fireball. That way, you can have a fire attack that isn't just the same thing over and over again and visually it looks different.

And if they keep going with the cross class abilities, it would be nice if they had some more obvious visual effects so you knew when they were happening. Or maybe even if you had the game paused and were issuing orders, you had a more obvious way to know you were actually going to get a cross class combo.

1: It was no diffrent then the normal attack animation in DAO
2: All ablities had there own animations in DA2
3: If you see a stagger, brittle or disoanrte(sp) symbol over there head you can do a cross-combo so the visual effect is there, if you don't know what talents to use then that's your fault for not reading the talents.

1: they were markedly different.
At least in DA:O, they looked humanly plausible. In DA2, the attacks look robotic and jerky, while moving way too fast.

2: True

3: Maybe, that depends.

CCC being touted in DA2 is pretty much nothing more than an acronym only and has become a means to misrepresent what can be also done in DA:O. Calling them actuated CCCs didn't really mean anything more deadly or effective than anything I could do in DA:O, except in DA:O, there were only a few. But, I could take any combo I wanted to make the effects compound into dealing more damage onto an enemy. Just because it was an actual CCC in DA:O, didn't mean that I couldn't have Morrigan freeze an enemy in place while Leliana hit them with fire arrows. While it may not be an actual CCC by mechanics, the effect is nevertheless the same. Either way, with both games (and many similar games as well) I can deal more damage by having multiple attacks performed by my respective companions against a certain enemie(s).

Modifié par Tommy6860, 26 septembre 2011 - 01:05 .

[seraphymon]

Sepewrath wrote...

Maconbar wrote...
I think that DA:2 combat wouldn't seem so bad if every encounter didn't play out the same way.

It was even worst in DAO, to the point where the game could damn near play itself. At least with the waves, if forced a small meaure of adjustment. In DAO, every battle went exactly the same.

yeah i fully disagree as well. Alot of the fights were differently set up and needed different tactics in DAO.

But DA2 with enemies having the same few attacks , I found it playing itself or using the same rotation on about 90% of the fights. Only difference really was the boss fights.

waves were just annoying, and since almost every fight contians them eventually you expect them.

[Tommy6860]

Sepewrath wrote...

Maconbar wrote...
I think that DA:2 combat wouldn't seem so bad if every encounter didn't play out the same way.

It was even worst in DAO, to the point where the game could damn near play itself. At least with the waves, if forced a small meaure of adjustment. In DAO, every battle went exactly the same.

How so? The fact that DA2 all but eliminated the ability to use tactics when fights happen in waves in very close quarters while enemy drops happen behind and in front of you, tends to take away any ability to make things different. I would say that you are totally worng on this, they are not the same.

The encounters you get in DA2 are totally different than the encounters you get in DA:O. In DA2, you simply move into an area, then the fighting starts mostly without warning, in waves while you actually have to move within very close range to be able to engage them. In DA:O, you at leat see the enemy before most engagements and you have time to think tactics before a fight because you can see them bfore the fighting starts. The enemies also didn't kill tactics by dropping from out of thin air right over your head. And this happened while in buildings in DA2, that was very realisitic.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 26 septembre 2011 - 01:18 .

[TEWR]

Maconbar wrote...

Sepewrath wrote...

Maconbar wrote...
I think that DA:2 combat wouldn't seem so bad if every encounter didn't play out the same way.

It was even worst in DAO, to the point where the game could damn near play itself. At least with the waves, if forced a small meaure of adjustment. In DAO, every battle went exactly the same.

Except that isn't true at all.

Different fights in DA:O: Approaching the Tower of Ishal, in the Brecilian Forest, various fights involving mage enemies, demon fights in Mage Tower. All of these had more variety than the fights in DA:2.

Eh I disagree. That the enemies were different didn't mean how the fights played out were different. All of my parties just plow right through the enemies without me doing much of anything.

[Sepewrath]

Actually the waves made you think on your feet or prepare your tactics to work on more than one situation. If enemies are front of your tank, one set of tactics work. If the enemies are approaching from behind your mage, then you have to do something else. That's the point

When every fight comes from right in front you, you can do the exact same thing, every time, which I did in Origins. Here was my battleplan across every playthrough. Cone of Cold-Overpower-Stonefist-Below the Belt-Mana Clash any mage around, rinse and repeat in the next room. And lets not get silly and start talking about realism, there is enough of that nonsense on the ME boards.

The waves didn't do much to rock the boat, but it was better effort than what was in DAO, where I could dominate with a single combo on every playthrough.

[seraphymon]

Not really. They just annoyed me because i wanted the boring battle to end. Honestly aside from certian waves in a boss fight or carried some big elites or sarrebas. it made no difference in tactics. You had no chance to adapt at tiomes if blwoing all CDs on the first part except by moving your mages out of harms way perhaps.

For a DA2 instance it was the same rotation, especially since rogues and warriors had far less attacking abilities than mages. or their counterparts in DAO. At least there i could change it up if i wanted to. Sure some fights went the same in DAO for certain mobs, but i found that more tactiful and planning then anything in DA2. Yet DAO still had much more variety for me.

Waves doesnt have to be a bad thing and in Legacy it shows when done properly or better it can be a good thing, but still with the lack of DA2 attack abilities for warriors and rogues, its just a bunch of auto attack and awesome button.

[Maconbar]

Sepewrath wrote...

Actually the waves made you think on your feet or prepare your tactics to work on more than one situation. If enemies are front of your tank, one set of tactics work. If the enemies are approaching from behind your mage, then you have to do something else. That's the point

When every fight comes from right in front you, you can do the exact same thing, every time, which I did in Origins. Here was my battleplan across every playthrough. Cone of Cold-Overpower-Stonefist-Below the Belt-Mana Clash any mage around, rinse and repeat in the next room. And lets not get silly and start talking about realism, there is enough of that nonsense on the ME boards.

The waves didn't do much to rock the boat, but it was better effort than what was in DAO, where I could dominate with a single combo on every playthrough.

I am not saying that the fights in DA:O were hard, I am just saying that there was a greater variety of encounters compared to DA:2. How hard is it to plan for the waves, when every encounter in DA:2 uses them?

[TEWR]

I think waves can definitely add to the level of tactics needed for a battle, even more than what Legacy did.

[Sepewrath]

Maconbar wrote...
I am not saying that the fights in DA:O were hard, I am just saying that there was a greater variety of encounters compared to DA:2. How hard is it to plan for the waves, when every encounter in DA:2 uses them?

No more difficult than planning for every fight in DAO, that all played the same. So obviously neither one of them got it right, but if I had to take one, I would rather the one that at least has a shot to knock me off balance, which was the waves. They could probably take a cue from mechanics used in games outside of the RPG genre.

[DarkDragon777]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I think waves can definitely add to the level of tactics needed for a battle, even more than what Legacy did.

There isn't much tactic involved in chopping up hordes of mindless pixels. Not to mention it makes the game look horribly cheap and fake.

[tmp7704]

Sepewrath wrote...

Actually the waves made you think on your feet or prepare your tactics to work on more than one situation. If enemies are front of your tank, one set of tactics work. If the enemies are approaching from behind your mage, then you have to do something else. That's the point

What the waves made me do was simply pulling back far enough at the start so all enemies would be coming from the same direction. Because fighting on enemy's terms instead of yours is plain dumb thing to do.

And that "tactic" worked for pretty much all fights, save maybe couple exceptions which box you in (but still in areas large enough you could put your backs against a corner and hack away)

When every fight comes from right in front you, you can do the exact same thing, every time, which I did in Origins.

I find it rather dubious considering number of set pieces in which enemies would either come from multiple directions or start positioned spread around the area. Unless of course you were employing the "leg back a bit" tactics which works well in both games.

[TEWR]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I think waves can definitely add to the level of tactics needed for a battle, even more than what Legacy did.

There isn't much tactic involved in chopping up hordes of mindless pixels. Not to mention it makes the game look horribly cheap and fake.

If waves are used in the way of DAII's base game, then yes there isn't much tactics involved. If waves are used in ways that make no sense, then yes there isn't much to them.

But, imagine this:

• A commander type enemy
  
• 30 sword and shield type enemies
  
• 10 Archer type enemies
  
• 3 mage type enemies

You begin to attack the commander, but he then orders all of his sword and shield cohorts to form a phalanx. The archers and mages then get behind the S&S people. The enemies are now immune to damage, and the archers and mages are using various attacks/spells (Hail of Arrows, Bursting Arrow, Firestorm, Heal, Aid Allies, etc.). The Warriors are using Warrior specific attacks (Taunt, Assault, Shield Bash, etc.)

originally, I pitched that you would have to use an attack that dealt sufficient knockback, but that would eventually make this enemy tactic really predictable.

If the waves use the same animations and talents we use -- along with their own unique tactics -- it adds a unique element to the battles.

However, I am by no means saying that waves should always be used. Only when they make sense (Bloodragers, Followers of She, Templars, Mages, Qunari, and Darkspawn.)

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 septembre 2011 - 02:45 .

[RagingCyclone]

Sepewrath wrote...

Maconbar wrote...
I am not saying that the fights in DA:O were hard, I am just saying that there was a greater variety of encounters compared to DA:2. How hard is it to plan for the waves, when every encounter in DA:2 uses them?

No more difficult than planning for every fight in DAO, that all played the same. So obviously neither one of them got it right, but if I had to take one, I would rather the one that at least has a shot to knock me off balance, which was the waves. They could probably take a cue from mechanics used in games outside of the RPG genre.

Have to disagree about waves being challenging.  There was a cadence to them, and after the first Act was very predictable like playing Doom3. It was quite easy to jump in swords flailing and come out faster than to actually think about the fights. Both games have that problem, but at least Origins felt more realistic in the setting. Plus Origins didn't have that cadence. Perhaps it's because I used to play drums, but the fighitng in DA2 definitely had a beat.

[Stoomkal]

Waves almost kill the battle system for me - it is a one trick pony that got old by the time I had made it to Lowtown.

I do not think it is *tactical* at all - after the first three battles where *everything* spawned behind me and killed my archer/mage...

I simply remembered *never* to let anything stand behind me...

And... yep... every single battle for the rest of the game - enemies spawn behind me...

Possibly the lamest battle system I have ever played in rpg. I found the quirky senselessness of FFXIII to be more logical and interesting...

Though I loved DA:O... if it hadn't have been so slow, it would have been fine.

[Sepewrath]

tmp7704 wrote...

When every fight comes from right in front you, you can do the exact same thing, every time, which I did in Origins.

I find it rather dubious considering number of set pieces in which enemies would either come from multiple directions or start positioned spread around the area. Unless of course you were employing the "leg back a bit" tactics which works well in both games.

The point is, it was rare occassion when you were attacked from behind, where your back ranks would get hit with close quarter combat, without enemies passing and getting sucked into your tank first. It made for very predicatable battles, yeah DA2 got predicatable very quick too. But it was nice to mix it up if even just a little.

[oblivionenss]

Stoomkal wrote...

Waves almost kill the battle system for me - it is a one trick pony that got old by the time I had made it to Lowtown.

I do not think it is *tactical* at all - after the first three battles where *everything* spawned behind me and killed my archer/mage...

I simply remembered *never* to let anything stand behind me...

And... yep... every single battle for the rest of the game - enemies spawn behind me...

Possibly the lamest battle system I have ever played in rpg. I found the quirky senselessness of FFXIII to be more logical and interesting...

Though I loved DA:O... if it hadn't have been so slow, it would have been fine.

I agree on everything except that I think that combat in DA: O were a perfect speed.

@Sepewrath Are you really certain you are talking about DA 2 here because it wasnt on a rare occasions were your back ranks would be attacked, it was in  every damn battle, wich made me put it on easy to just be done with it. Every damn battle I had my tactic set up for the enemies i met not accounting random appearing trashmobs that appeared out of thin air.

[Tatinger]

oblivionenss wrote...

@Sepewrath Are you really certain you are talking about DA 2 here because it wasnt on a rare occasions were your back ranks would be attacked, it was in  every damn battle, wich made me put it on easy to just be done with it. Every damn battle I had my tactic set up for the enemies i met not accounting random appearing trashmobs that appeared out of thin air.

Agreed.  But I don't get why you weren't prepared for it as it seemed to happen almost every battle.  You could almost count the beats until they'd make their appearance (or, at least, I always kept an eye on my area map knowing they'd show up sooner or later -- usually as part of the second wave, if I'm remembering my battles accurately).

Modifié par Tatinger, 26 septembre 2011 - 06:35 .

[SkittlesKat96]

I agree...DAO's combat was slow, sluggish and could have been better but DA 2 was way too fast and flashy and odd looking.

[Dubya75]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

I agree...DAO's combat was slow, sluggish and could have been better but DA 2 was way too fast and flashy and odd looking.

I disagree. DA2 combat is awesome!

[JerHopp]

As always there is a middleground. Dragon Age O was way too slow, and DA2 was sometimes way too fast (especially when Anders casting 'haste'!!!)

So how about some tuning in the combat department, no?

[FedericoV]

DA2 combat is not perfect but it's fun and on many levels I feel that it's an improvement over DA:O (responsivity, rule system, interaction between classes and pacing). Having said that, I think that the main flaw of DA2 combat is the design of its gameplay and under that point of view DA:O is a better gaming experience because it felt more polished and refined.

I mean, the idea that you can play DA2 as an hack and slash or a party based game because of the difficulty level is wrong and it's never going to work. The result is that the game has not the fluidity and the seamless nature of hack and slash RPGs or pure action games, while its party based components have not enough depth to feel interesting and enganging during a whole playthrough. DA2 feel mediocre in both gameplay modes.

I mean, do you want us to think like a general or to fight like a spartan? Because it's not possible to do both things well with the same game. Bioware should choose to do one thing and try to do it well.