31 réponses à ce sujet

[Meris]

Sabriana wrote...

Meris wrote...

So... you agree with Sylvius?

In a way, Meris. Or from a certain point of view.

Oh, I found it weird because since you didn't explicitly claim agreement with him that you were bashing his opinion (which implied that you misread it).

Anyway, I agree with you - I for one enjoy JRPGs even though I don't consider them roleplaying games at all. But I believe publishers, under a market mentality, don't. Instead of amplifying their sells with solid gameplay and franchise tradition, they seek to massify more mainstream genres and somehow blend less mainstream ones to try and appeal to a 'wider audience'.

This is what happened in Dragon Age II's combat. They wanted to appeal to both fans of RTS and Action combat (old BioWare videos shows how you can play Dragon Age II both as a 'Spartan' - unconcerned for whatever your party does - and as a 'General' - the opposite) and the result was mediocre.

They didn't improve on Origin's many problems (often worsening them); created new ones and made the whole thing bland for both sides. A specific example of such being the difficulty system - it tries to appeal to 'hardcore' RTS players by keeping the single most important tactical aspect of DA:O (positioning conditioned by Friendly Fire) but... kept it all the way high to Nightmare mode - displeasing those who prefer tactical depht but would rather not deal with cheap difficulty enhancers such as arbitrary elemental immunities and one-shots from random targetting assassins that you probably won't take out of stealth.

[DeadPoolX]

One thing I've always disliked about stat-based combat is "homing arrows." I'm sure you've all experienced this.

Basically, what happens is an enemy fires an arrow at you and in response, your character runs to the side or dodges. But it doesn't matter. You could run for a mile and hide behind a rock, but the arrow will not only follow you, it will fly around the rock itself and smack into you.

That's absurd.

I know a lot of people don't like the idea of combat being based on the player's skill, but sometimes stats just make combat ridiculous. If I can physically dodge an incoming arrow, then I've avoided it. It shouldn't act like an sidewinder and track me down.

[sickpixie]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

One thing I've always disliked about stat-based combat is "homing arrows." I'm sure you've all experienced this.

Basically, what happens is an enemy fires an arrow at you and in response, your character runs to the side or dodges. But it doesn't matter. You could run for a mile and hide behind a rock, but the arrow will not only follow you, it will fly around the rock itself and smack into you.

That's absurd.

I know a lot of people don't like the idea of combat being based on the player's skill, but sometimes stats just make combat ridiculous. If I can physically dodge an incoming arrow, then I've avoided it. It shouldn't act like an sidewinder and track me down.

This is an animation issue, not a stat-based issue. People can't dodge arrows in the close-quarters fights Dragon Age puts them in, but they unrealistically slow down the arrows so you can see them better.

[Meris]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

You could run for a mile and hide behind a rock, but the arrow will not only follow you, it will fly around the rock itself and smack into you..

'Homing projectiles' can be better observed with spells because, unlike arrows, fireballs actually take more than half a second to reach its target - but then again, its magic - staves already have lore-based explanations for that. Furthermore, Dragon Age: Origins already accounted for cover, even if the arrow was already flying when the target moved.

One very, very important thing that most people seem to miss about stat-based combat is that its abstract and leaves a lot to imagination. What you see on screen is not necessarily the final judgement to what exactly happened. This misconception is understandable given BioWare's, in my opinion, erroneous (content and roleplaying wise) greater focus on its cinematic direction.

Modifié par Meris, 13 avril 2012 - 01:05 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

One thing I've always disliked about stat-based combat is "homing arrows." I'm sure you've all experienced this.

Basically, what happens is an enemy fires an arrow at you and in response, your character runs to the side or dodges. But it doesn't matter. You could run for a mile and hide behind a rock, but the arrow will not only follow you, it will fly around the rock itself and smack into you.

That's absurd.

I know a lot of people don't like the idea of combat being based on the player's skill, but sometimes stats just make combat ridiculous. If I can physically dodge an incoming arrow, then I've avoided it. It shouldn't act like an sidewinder and track me down.

The point is that you can't physically dodge an incoming arrow.  That you think you can is an animation error.

[DeadPoolX]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

One thing I've always disliked about stat-based combat is "homing arrows." I'm sure you've all experienced this.

Basically, what happens is an enemy fires an arrow at you and in response, your character runs to the side or dodges. But it doesn't matter. You could run for a mile and hide behind a rock, but the arrow will not only follow you, it will fly around the rock itself and smack into you.

That's absurd.

I know a lot of people don't like the idea of combat being based on the player's skill, but sometimes stats just make combat ridiculous. If I can physically dodge an incoming arrow, then I've avoided it. It shouldn't act like an sidewinder and track me down.

The point is that you can't physically dodge an incoming arrow.  That you think you can is an animation error.

Okay, I can accept that. 

Maybe instead of actually showing the arrow zipping along, they simply don't animate it in-flight.  Instead, show an archer pulling back their bowstring and firing.  The arrow would then appear embedded in you (or your shield) if it hits; if it misses, it doesn't matter where the arrow ends up.