337 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Rojahar wrote...

I don't get the whole "hack and slash" claim. I just played through DAO and DA2 again, and DA2's combat is just DAO sped way up and made responsive. Have you ever played an actual hack and slash game?

It's a common criticism and typically it breaks down to 2 things:

1) The speed of combat is faster in DA2 than DAO
2) The animations are far more stylized

That gives the strong impression  of hack and slash gameplay, but the mechanics are not wildly different from DAO and in the cases they are different, DA2 has - at the very least, I'd go further personally - added as much complexity as they have taken out.

The problem is that the combat encounters are poorly designed and don't showcase much more than "oh, I'm being flanked again" and "look, another prepared ambush" leaving the player little room for preplanning, again giving the impression of a lack of mechanical complexity when the issue is encounter design.  Every encounter plays out the same, so we end up doing the same thing, and that depth the game provides us in terms of options for combat tactics goes unused simply because we just need to mash as many mooks that have dropped from the sky as fast as possible before the next wave before we get overwhelmed by numbers. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:29 .

[Esbatty]

Bioware has never EVER given me diarrhea. Night terrors, yes. The runs, no. Your analogy fails.

[Lenimph]

Taco Bell made me get a stomach illness that included projectile vomit...

[Everwarden]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The animations were hack and slash, the gameplay itself is not wildly different from DAO. 

I'm afraid I'm going to have to politely disagree. We seem to be at an impasse here. You see combat similar to DAO, I see Dynasty Warriors with magic.

It's easy to focus on the issues we personally don't like as being to blame for everything, but its more complicated than that.

Well, it is complicated, but if the poor (relative) sales of Dragon Age 2 say anything they say that this style of game is not one that appeals to a mass market. Sadly, Bioware seems to be in George Lucas style denial here and refuses to admit this.

Maybe I'm jaded and cynical (...minus the 'maybe', if I'm being honest here), but it seems to me that this talk of a 'marriage' between the two games is empty. They don't cite specific examples of what, exactly, they intend to bring back from Origins. 

[jds1bio]

Wow, this thread is still going? This has got to be the topic of the week.

[upsettingshorts]

Everwarden wrote...

I'm afraid I'm going to have to politely disagree. We seem to be at an impasse here. You see combat similar to DAO, I see Dynasty Warriors with magic.

Based on what?  And if you say animations or speed, I'm just going to point out again those are not gameplay mechanics.

Really, what did DA2 remove from mechanics?  What did DA2 add?  How are they different, specifically? 

You can't just chug potions anymore, nor can you spam heal.  You are required to use different tactics to accomplish what was essentially automatic in DAO.  There's a start.  What's Dynasty Warriors about that?  

The only thing I can think of that would absolutely be an example is the lack of a detachable third person camera.  

Everwarden wrote...

They don't cite specific examples of what, exactly, they intend to bring back from Origins. 

Probably because they haven't locked down what those would be yet. 

Dont you worry, they'll start pooping all over DA2 during the run-up to DA3's release, just like they did with DAO.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:34 .

[Everwarden]

Rojahar wrote...

Can you articulate why and howso?

It's mostly aesthetics more than the mechanics of combat, which are largely irrelevant, for reasons Upsettingshorts mentioned. There are very, very few fights during which it is necessary to display any competence with the combat system.

They mostly turn out a bit like this:  

You hack apart wave upon wave of mooks using one or two button presses that turn them into a red mist. 

Dragon Age: Origins had gritty, semi-realistic combat that felt organic. Dragon Age 2 has Dynasty Warrior style to it. This is not a step in the right direction, in my view. Thedas -was- a very, very solid and plausible high fantasy setting. Now it's not. 

Modifié par Everwarden, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:43 .

[upsettingshorts]

Everwarden wrote...

There are very, very few fights during which it is necessary to display any competance with the combat system.

They mostly turn out a bit like this:  

You hack apart wave upon wave of mooks using one or two button presses that turn them into a red mist.

That is an issue with encounter design.  If encounters were better designed, you would have to use a more diverse array of tactics to defeat them.  If you stuck DA2's mechanics onto DAO's encounters, people would be less inclined to get all worked up about some great chasm of difference between the mechanics.

Everwarden wrote...

Dragon Age:Origins had gritty, semi-realistic combat that felt organic.

On what planet is DAO "gritty" and "semi-realistic"?  Especially gritty.  When I read people describe Origins with that word I have to scratch my head and wonder what game they played.  DAO had a different style, but it was still stylized and that style was "deliberately and explicitly bland."  Of course, it offended no-one, because it took no risks.  There is merit in this kind of design, but let's be honest about what it was.  

I've used this many times, and it applies again here:

Too Slow/Stupid <----------(DAO)----| The illusive middle ground |-----(DA2)---------> Too Fast/Silly

In short, they over-corrected.

Everwarden wrote...

Dragon Age 2 has Dynasty Warrior style to it. This is not a step in the right direction, in my view. Thedas -was- a very, very solid and plausible high fantasy setting. Now it's not.

High fantasy is supposed to be plausible?  Isn't that contradictory? 

But you've basically admitted that the primary difference between the gameplay of DAO and DA2 was more style than substance, and that's all I was ever trying to prove with that tangent anyway.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:45 .

[Esbatty]

Lenimph wrote...

Taco Bell made me get a stomach illness that included projectile vomit...

I told you you can't just lick every taco in the bag. They're for everyone. Not just you, greedy!

[Joy Divison]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That gives the strong impression  of hack and slash gameplay, but the mechanics are not wildly different from DAO and in the cases they are different, DA2 has - at the very least, I'd go further personally - added as much complexity as they have taken out.

I don't know if I'd describe DA:2 as hack and slash and your previous description of DA:2 combat is on the money, but there were mechanical changes which make DA:2 fundamentally different from DA:O.

In DA:2, you pretty much always have 150 HPs or so which means once you get to level 10 or so, non-fighters will get one-shotted constantly.

In DA:2, there is usually only one dangerous enemy (i.e., the one who will one-shot your characters) and mob trash which pose zero threat.  Even trash mobs is DA:O had potentially dangerous abilities like overwhelm and stun.

In DA:2, most noteworthy or named bad guys are bags of HPs which require repetative grinding to kill.

It's more than just speed, waves, etc. that makes the two combat system different

Modifié par Joy Divison, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:48 .

[upsettingshorts]

There are differences, but to describe them generally as dumbed down or hack and slash is misleading. That is my point.

DAO lacked cross-class combos, the knockback mechanic on white hits for characters with low STR, and the Fortitude mechanic itself.  Just to name a few in addition to the health potions and heal spell I mentioned earlier.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:48 .

[Joy Divison]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

There are differences, but to describe them generally as dumbed down or hack and slash is misleading. That is my point.

I'd agree with that.  But it is just as misleading to describe them as being the same except for the aesthetics like speed, reinforcement mechanism, etc.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 14 octobre 2011 - 04:50 .

[Everwarden]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
High fantasy is supposed to be plausible?  Isn't that contradictory? 

I don't believe so, no. A Song of Ice and Fire is very firmly set as fantasy, but it's also realistic. People are mortal, and act like people. 

On a side note, if you go back and read previews for Origins, A Song of Ice and Fire was a major influence. Sad to see that they decided to toss that philosophy out the window. 

But you've basically admitted that the primary difference between the gameplay of DAO and DA2 was more style than substance, and that's all I was ever trying to prove with that tangent anyway.

To a degree. I don't think combat is as narrow as simply the buttons you press. Encounter design is an aspect of combat, because the encounters contain the enemies you face. Though if you're asking me if I am calling the actual character building of Dragon Age 2 shallow... well, yes and no.

The abilities and combos had a lot of potential with no payoff. A bit like the ability to rack up millions and millions of florins in Assassin's Creed and -nothing- to spend them on. So I will agree that if they had put the Dragon Age 2 mechanics into Origins they would have been fine. Even a little better, because they actually branch.

On the other hand, the stat distribution and level scaling is ass backwards. You are forced to pick two stats, determined by your class, which defeats the entire point of having stats at all to begin with. Worse yet, they had level scaling similar to Oblivion. Levelling up in a game should make you feel -stronger-. The mooks should start out as a challenge and end up being nuts that you dice like a Slap Chop.

[upsettingshorts]

Joy Divison wrote...

I'd agree with that.  But it is just as misleading to describe them as being the same except for the speed, reinforcement mechanism, etc.

But I didn't say that.  I said the those were some of the reasons why the game gives a hack and slash vibe.

[Joy Divison]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

But I didn't say that.  I said the those were some of the reasons why the game gives a hack and slash vibe.

the mechanics are not wildly different from DAO

In general I'm not a fan of adjectives and adverbs because they allow people too much wiggle room when making a statement.  I suppose you didn't describe them as being similiar, but that wasn;t the vibe I picked up from your post.

If you're talking about the overall level of complexity of combat being similar between the two games, I might agree.  I think some of the things that were added/changed made for a less satisfying combat experience, but I will admit some of these changes made combat more complex and some things made combat less complex.

[Anyroad2]

Posting this, its appropriate for the recent discussion on combat styles:


IMO, DA:O had really slow and clunky combat. Like molasses. I didn't think it was fun to watch, with the exception of the rare execution animation (which mages had none of) DA:O also had tons and tons of trash enemies (enemies that go down in one hit even) that only posed a threat if you let them build up.

DA2 had faster combat, that looked more exciting (some things were over the top), and it felt visceral more often to me than DA:O combat. Using Mighty Blow to crush a nearby enemy then targeting one further way and using Scythe to cut through him and anyone between us. It was fun.

Dynasty Warriors (trust me, I've played them all extensively) combat focuses mostly on killing peons in droves then dealing with an officer whos tougher than most enemies, but who rarely posses a challenge unless they can team up on you with other officers. The only tactics involved are killing possible reinforcements (so they dont gang up on you) and gaining/using your Musou attack at the right time, because it grants you invincibility for its duration.


Saying all that... I don't want people to think that I thought DA2s combat was flawless. It wasnt. I really hate the waves of foes coming off of rooftops, and I really dislike how powerful enemy casters were in comparison to our own. I also really missed having cross class combat skills like Warrior Archery and Rogues with Swords. At least the waves issue has been adressed by Bioware in Legacy and in some extent in MotA (that dlc has waves, but they make sense like creatures that come out of a nest).

Modifié par Anyroad2, 14 octobre 2011 - 05:18 .

[Shadowlit_Rogue]

I know the comparison isn't completely accurate, but I clearly remember the combat in DA2 being reminiscent of Dynasty Warriors when I first played through it, but it was mostly on account of how the console versions shipped without auto attack. I'm pretty sure that sullied my overall opinion of the combat, since I beat the game before it was patched. All I remember is smashing the A button furiously, tactics be damned, and not caring for it.

Modifié par Shadowlit_Rogue, 14 octobre 2011 - 05:22 .

[Zanallen]

I'm saddened that in this whole thread dealing with Taco Bell, mine was the only Demolition Man reference. You people disappoint me.

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Zanallen, 14 octobre 2011 - 05:41 .

[Everwarden]

Zanallen wrote...

I'm saddened that in this whole thread dealing with Taco Bell, mine was the only Demolition Man reference. You people disappoint me.

www.youtube.com/watch

...huh. Y'know, I've never seen that. Amusing.

[Reno_Tarshil]

Never seen Demolition Man?

NEVER SEEN DEMOLITION MAN!?!?!?!?!

KKKKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!

[Joy Divison]

Zanallen wrote...

I'm saddened that in this whole thread dealing with Taco Bell, mine was the only Demolition Man reference. You people disappoint me.

www.youtube.com/watch

LOL.  It's not like Demolition Man was classic.
Besides, everyone knows Steven Seagal movies had much better dialogue

[Reno_Tarshil]

Joy Divison wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

I'm saddened that in this whole thread dealing with Taco Bell, mine was the only Demolition Man reference. You people disappoint me.

www.youtube.com/watch

LOL.  It's not like Demolition Man was classic.
Besides, everyone knows Steven Seagal movies had much better dialogue

It's cause everyone knows Steven Segal only needs to talk low with beady eyes and do the average karate chop every scene to succeed.

[thats1evildude]

I still can't figure out how they use the three seashells.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 14 octobre 2011 - 06:00 .